Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.lang.python > #68711 > unrolled thread
| Started by | vasudevram <vasudevram@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2014-03-21 13:42 -0700 |
| Last post | 2014-03-28 17:05 -0500 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 401 — 30 participants |
Back to article view | Back to comp.lang.python
Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) vasudevram <vasudevram@gmail.com> - 2014-03-21 13:42 -0700
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Rustom Mody <rustompmody@gmail.com> - 2014-03-21 13:54 -0700
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) vasudevram <vasudevram@gmail.com> - 2014-03-21 13:56 -0700
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Rustom Mody <rustompmody@gmail.com> - 2014-03-21 14:09 -0700
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Ian Kelly <ian.g.kelly@gmail.com> - 2014-03-21 15:30 -0600
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Rustom Mody <rustompmody@gmail.com> - 2014-03-21 19:06 -0700
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-03-22 13:41 +1100
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Rustom Mody <rustompmody@gmail.com> - 2014-03-21 21:39 -0700
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-03-22 15:51 +1100
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Rustom Mody <rustompmody@gmail.com> - 2014-03-21 22:26 -0700
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) "Rhodri James" <rhodri@wildebst.org.uk> - 2014-03-23 00:32 +0000
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Ian Kelly <ian.g.kelly@gmail.com> - 2014-03-22 20:46 -0600
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Rustom Mody <rustompmody@gmail.com> - 2014-03-22 20:16 -0700
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Ian Kelly <ian.g.kelly@gmail.com> - 2014-03-22 21:47 -0600
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) "Rhodri James" <rhodri@wildebst.org.uk> - 2014-03-24 02:35 +0000
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-03-24 14:27 +1100
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Rustom Mody <rustompmody@gmail.com> - 2014-03-23 21:14 -0700
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-03-24 16:04 +1100
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-03-24 14:32 +1100
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Rustom Mody <rustompmody@gmail.com> - 2014-03-21 22:48 -0700
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Mark H Harris <harrismh777@gmail.com> - 2014-03-21 23:51 -0500
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2014-03-22 09:46 +0000
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Mark H Harris <harrismh777@gmail.com> - 2014-03-24 00:52 -0500
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Ian Kelly <ian.g.kelly@gmail.com> - 2014-03-24 03:03 -0600
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Marko Rauhamaa <marko@pacujo.net> - 2014-03-24 11:55 +0200
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-03-24 22:49 +1100
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Marko Rauhamaa <marko@pacujo.net> - 2014-03-24 14:36 +0200
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-03-24 23:53 +1100
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2014-03-24 14:39 +0000
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Mark Lawrence <breamoreboy@yahoo.co.uk> - 2014-03-24 15:22 +0000
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Mark Lawrence <breamoreboy@yahoo.co.uk> - 2014-03-24 14:21 +0000
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2014-03-24 14:04 +0000
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Rustom Mody <rustompmody@gmail.com> - 2014-03-24 09:00 -0700
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-03-25 06:12 +1100
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Ian Kelly <ian.g.kelly@gmail.com> - 2014-03-24 13:42 -0600
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-03-25 06:57 +1100
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Steven D'Aprano <steve@pearwood.info> - 2014-03-25 05:28 +0000
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-03-25 16:43 +1100
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Ian Kelly <ian.g.kelly@gmail.com> - 2014-03-24 11:24 -0600
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Mark H Harris <harrismh777@gmail.com> - 2014-03-24 16:43 -0500
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Marko Rauhamaa <marko@pacujo.net> - 2014-03-25 00:43 +0200
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Mark H Harris <harrismh777@gmail.com> - 2014-03-24 18:56 -0500
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-03-25 11:11 +1100
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Mark H Harris <harrismh777@gmail.com> - 2014-03-24 19:16 -0500
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-03-25 11:28 +1100
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Mark Lawrence <breamoreboy@yahoo.co.uk> - 2014-03-25 00:32 +0000
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Mark H Harris <harrismh777@gmail.com> - 2014-03-24 19:50 -0500
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Terry Reedy <tjreedy@udel.edu> - 2014-03-24 21:31 -0400
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-03-25 12:41 +1100
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Steven D'Aprano <steve@pearwood.info> - 2014-03-25 06:28 +0000
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Terry Reedy <tjreedy@udel.edu> - 2014-03-24 21:20 -0400
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Mark H Harris <harrismh777@gmail.com> - 2014-03-24 21:39 -0500
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Steven D'Aprano <steve@pearwood.info> - 2014-03-25 06:52 +0000
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) alex23 <wuwei23@gmail.com> - 2014-03-26 16:35 +1000
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Mark H Harris <harrismh777@gmail.com> - 2014-03-27 10:44 -0500
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-03-28 03:10 +1100
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Mark H Harris <harrismh777@gmail.com> - 2014-03-27 11:37 -0500
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-03-28 03:48 +1100
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Mark H Harris <harrismh777@gmail.com> - 2014-03-27 15:54 -0500
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-03-28 08:42 +1100
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Mark H Harris <harrismh777@gmail.com> - 2014-03-27 17:14 -0500
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-03-28 13:24 +1100
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Rustom Mody <rustompmody@gmail.com> - 2014-03-27 19:46 -0700
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-03-28 14:06 +1100
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Rustom Mody <rustompmody@gmail.com> - 2014-03-27 20:20 -0700
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Mark H Harris <harrismh777@gmail.com> - 2014-03-27 17:14 -0500
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2014-03-28 04:45 +0000
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2014-03-28 00:34 +0000
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Mark H Harris <harrismh777@gmail.com> - 2014-03-28 16:18 -0500
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-03-29 13:45 +1100
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2014-03-29 03:08 +0000
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Mark H Harris <harrismh777@gmail.com> - 2014-03-28 22:18 -0500
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-03-29 14:45 +1100
Keyboard standards (was: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list)) Ben Finney <ben+python@benfinney.id.au> - 2014-03-29 15:18 +1100
Re: Keyboard standards Mark H Harris <harrismh777@gmail.com> - 2014-03-28 23:26 -0500
Re: Keyboard standards Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-03-29 16:13 +1100
Re: Keyboard standards Mark H Harris <harrismh777@gmail.com> - 2014-03-29 00:40 -0500
Re: Keyboard standards Ian Kelly <ian.g.kelly@gmail.com> - 2014-03-29 04:02 -0600
Re: Keyboard standards Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2014-03-29 16:03 +0000
Re: Keyboard standards Larry Hudson <orgnut@yahoo.com> - 2014-03-29 12:27 -0700
Re: Keyboard standards Michael Torrie <torriem@gmail.com> - 2014-03-29 13:41 -0600
Re: Keyboard standards Larry Hudson <orgnut@yahoo.com> - 2014-03-29 23:53 -0700
Re: Keyboard standards Dave Angel <davea@davea.name> - 2014-03-29 17:26 -0400
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2014-03-29 03:51 +0000
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Mark H Harris <harrismh777@gmail.com> - 2014-03-28 23:07 -0500
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Mark H Harris <harrismh777@gmail.com> - 2014-03-28 23:16 -0500
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Mark H Harris <harrismh777@gmail.com> - 2014-03-28 23:21 -0500
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-03-29 15:48 +1100
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Mark H Harris <harrismh777@gmail.com> - 2014-03-28 23:40 -0500
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-03-29 16:08 +1100
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Rustom Mody <rustompmody@gmail.com> - 2014-03-28 22:21 -0700
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Mark H Harris <harrismh777@gmail.com> - 2014-03-29 00:51 -0500
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-03-29 17:03 +1100
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Mark H Harris <harrismh777@gmail.com> - 2014-03-29 03:21 -0500
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Mark Lawrence <breamoreboy@yahoo.co.uk> - 2014-03-29 15:45 +0000
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Mark H Harris <harrismh777@gmail.com> - 2014-03-30 00:52 -0500
OFF TOPIC Spanish in the USA [was Re: Explanation of this Python language feature?] Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2014-03-30 06:31 +0000
Re: OFF TOPIC Spanish in the USA [was Re: Explanation of this Python language feature?] Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-03-30 17:43 +1100
Re: OFF TOPIC Spanish in the USA [was Re: Explanation of this Python language feature?] Mark H Harris <harrismh777@gmail.com> - 2014-03-30 01:48 -0500
Re: OFF TOPIC Spanish in the USA [was Re: Explanation of this Python language feature?] Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2014-03-30 10:35 +0000
Re: OFF TOPIC Spanish in the USA [was Re: Explanation of this Python language feature?] Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-03-30 23:03 +1100
Re: OFF TOPIC Spanish in the USA [was Re: Explanation of this Python language feature?] Mark H Harris <harrismh777@gmail.com> - 2014-03-30 23:29 -0500
Re: OFF TOPIC Spanish in the USA [was Re: Explanation of this Python language feature?] Mark H Harris <harrismh777@gmail.com> - 2014-03-30 23:57 -0500
Re: OFF TOPIC Spanish in the USA [was Re: Explanation of this Python language feature?] Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-03-31 16:05 +1100
Re: OFF TOPIC Spanish in the USA [was Re: Explanation of this Python language feature?] Mark H Harris <harrismh777@gmail.com> - 2014-03-31 00:33 -0500
Re: OFF TOPIC Spanish in the USA [was Re: Explanation of this Python language feature?] Mark Lawrence <breamoreboy@yahoo.co.uk> - 2014-03-31 09:31 +0100
Re: OFF TOPIC Spanish in the USA [was Re: Explanation of this Python language feature?] Mark H Harris <harrismh777@gmail.com> - 2014-03-31 00:23 -0500
Re: OFF TOPIC Spanish in the USA [was Re: Explanation of this Python language feature?] Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-03-31 16:44 +1100
Re: OFF TOPIC Spanish in the USA Marko Rauhamaa <marko@pacujo.net> - 2014-03-31 11:39 +0300
Re: OFF TOPIC Spanish in the USA Ned Batchelder <ned@nedbatchelder.com> - 2014-03-31 07:33 -0400
Re: OFF TOPIC Spanish in the USA [was Re: Explanation of this Python language feature?] Dennis Lee Bieber <wlfraed@ix.netcom.com> - 2014-03-31 08:41 -0400
Re: OFF TOPIC Spanish in the USA [was Re: Explanation of this Python language feature?] Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-04-01 00:04 +1100
Re: OFF TOPIC Spanish in the USA [was Re: Explanation of this Python language feature?] "Rhodri James" <rhodri@wildebst.org.uk> - 2014-03-31 21:47 +0100
Re: OFF TOPIC Spanish in the USA [was Re: Explanation of this Python language feature?] Terry Reedy <tjreedy@udel.edu> - 2014-03-31 18:06 -0400
Re: OFF TOPIC Spanish in the USA [was Re: Explanation of this Python language feature?] Dennis Lee Bieber <wlfraed@ix.netcom.com> - 2014-03-31 20:03 -0400
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Larry Hudson <orgnut@yahoo.com> - 2014-03-30 00:32 -0700
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2014-03-30 10:44 +0000
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) "Rhodri James" <rhodri@wildebst.org.uk> - 2014-03-30 23:57 +0100
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) MRAB <python@mrabarnett.plus.com> - 2014-03-31 00:20 +0100
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Grant Edwards <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2014-03-31 14:14 +0000
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Walter Hurry <walterhurry@gmail.com> - 2014-03-31 00:39 +0000
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Roy Smith <roy@panix.com> - 2014-03-30 08:08 -0400
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2014-03-30 15:22 +0000
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Ian Kelly <ian.g.kelly@gmail.com> - 2014-03-30 10:03 -0600
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Mark H Harris <harrismh777@gmail.com> - 2014-03-31 01:08 -0500
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-03-31 17:47 +1100
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Ben Finney <ben+python@benfinney.id.au> - 2014-03-31 17:53 +1100
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Rustom Mody <rustompmody@gmail.com> - 2014-03-31 00:36 -0700
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) wxjmfauth@gmail.com - 2014-03-31 01:32 -0700
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Roy Smith <roy@panix.com> - 2014-03-31 08:16 -0400
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) "Rhodri James" <rhodri@wildebst.org.uk> - 2014-03-31 21:46 +0100
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Mark H Harris <harrismh777@gmail.com> - 2014-04-01 16:26 -0500
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-04-02 08:49 +1100
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Mark H Harris <harrismh777@gmail.com> - 2014-04-01 18:18 -0500
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Terry Reedy <tjreedy@udel.edu> - 2014-04-01 18:33 -0400
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Mark H Harris <harrismh777@gmail.com> - 2014-04-03 11:38 -0500
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Marko Rauhamaa <marko@pacujo.net> - 2014-04-03 20:14 +0300
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Rustom Mody <rustompmody@gmail.com> - 2014-04-03 11:40 -0700
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Mark H Harris <harrismh777@gmail.com> - 2014-04-03 13:55 -0500
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Marko Rauhamaa <marko@pacujo.net> - 2014-04-03 22:43 +0300
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Mark H Harris <harrismh777@gmail.com> - 2014-04-03 22:12 -0500
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-04-04 09:43 +1100
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Mark H Harris <harrismh777@gmail.com> - 2014-04-03 21:09 -0500
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2014-04-04 07:52 +0000
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-04-04 19:11 +1100
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Ian Kelly <ian.g.kelly@gmail.com> - 2014-04-04 02:13 -0600
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2014-04-04 10:08 +0000
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Ian Kelly <ian.g.kelly@gmail.com> - 2014-04-04 11:01 -0600
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2014-04-05 00:20 +0000
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) alex23 <wuwei23@gmail.com> - 2014-04-04 12:07 +1000
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Mark H Harris <harrismh777@gmail.com> - 2014-04-03 21:29 -0500
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Mark Lawrence <breamoreboy@yahoo.co.uk> - 2014-04-04 09:20 +0100
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Mark H Harris <harrismh777@gmail.com> - 2014-04-04 15:58 -0500
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Ian Kelly <ian.g.kelly@gmail.com> - 2014-04-04 15:40 -0600
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Mark Lawrence <breamoreboy@yahoo.co.uk> - 2014-04-04 22:50 +0100
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Mark H Harris <harrismh777@gmail.com> - 2014-04-04 17:07 -0500
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-04-05 09:39 +1100
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Mark H Harris <harrismh777@gmail.com> - 2014-04-04 17:52 -0500
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-04-05 09:57 +1100
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Mark Lawrence <breamoreboy@yahoo.co.uk> - 2014-04-05 00:16 +0100
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Mark H Harris <harrismh777@gmail.com> - 2014-04-04 23:10 -0500
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-04-05 15:40 +1100
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Mark H Harris <harrismh777@gmail.com> - 2014-04-05 00:11 -0500
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Ian Kelly <ian.g.kelly@gmail.com> - 2014-04-04 23:02 -0600
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Mark H Harris <harrismh777@gmail.com> - 2014-04-05 00:37 -0500
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Ben Finney <ben+python@benfinney.id.au> - 2014-04-05 17:01 +1100
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Mark H Harris <harrismh777@gmail.com> - 2014-04-05 01:48 -0500
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-04-05 18:08 +1100
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Mark H Harris <harrismh777@gmail.com> - 2014-04-05 01:48 -0500
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Ian Kelly <ian.g.kelly@gmail.com> - 2014-04-04 23:07 -0600
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Mark H Harris <harrismh777@gmail.com> - 2014-04-04 17:52 -0500
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Terry Reedy <tjreedy@udel.edu> - 2014-04-04 23:04 -0400
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Mark H Harris <harrismh777@gmail.com> - 2014-04-04 23:18 -0500
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-04-05 14:22 +1100
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Terry Reedy <tjreedy@udel.edu> - 2014-04-05 00:10 -0400
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Mark H Harris <harrismh777@gmail.com> - 2014-04-04 17:07 -0500
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2014-04-05 00:00 +0000
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-04-05 12:51 +1100
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Mark H Harris <harrismh777@gmail.com> - 2014-04-04 23:31 -0500
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-04-05 15:49 +1100
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Mark H Harris <harrismh777@gmail.com> - 2014-04-05 00:23 -0500
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-04-05 16:55 +1100
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Mark H Harris <harrismh777@gmail.com> - 2014-04-05 00:23 -0500
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Rustom Mody <rustompmody@gmail.com> - 2014-04-04 20:42 -0700
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Mark H Harris <harrismh777@gmail.com> - 2014-04-05 00:02 -0500
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-04-05 16:24 +1100
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Ben Finney <ben+python@benfinney.id.au> - 2014-04-05 16:29 +1100
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-04-05 16:57 +1100
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Rustom Mody <rustompmody@gmail.com> - 2014-04-04 23:59 -0700
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-04-05 18:10 +1100
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2014-04-05 10:19 +0000
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Terry Reedy <tjreedy@udel.edu> - 2014-04-05 07:20 -0400
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Roy Smith <roy@panix.com> - 2014-04-05 10:28 -0400
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2014-04-04 09:53 +0000
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Rustom Mody <rustompmody@gmail.com> - 2014-04-04 03:24 -0700
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Terry Reedy <tjreedy@udel.edu> - 2014-04-04 06:43 -0400
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Mark H Harris <harrismh777@gmail.com> - 2014-04-05 22:59 -0500
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Mark H Harris <harrismh777@gmail.com> - 2014-04-05 23:59 -0500
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Marko Rauhamaa <marko@pacujo.net> - 2014-04-06 12:05 +0300
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2014-04-06 16:52 +0000
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Rustom Mody <rustompmody@gmail.com> - 2014-04-06 10:31 -0700
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-04-07 03:54 +1000
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Rustom Mody <rustompmody@gmail.com> - 2014-04-06 11:13 -0700
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-04-07 04:46 +1000
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Rustom Mody <rustompmody@gmail.com> - 2014-04-06 19:32 -0700
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Mark H Harris <harrismh777@gmail.com> - 2014-04-07 20:33 -0500
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) MRAB <python@mrabarnett.plus.com> - 2014-04-08 02:52 +0100
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-04-08 13:02 +1000
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Steven D'Aprano <steve@pearwood.info> - 2014-04-08 08:21 +0000
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) alex23 <wuwei23@gmail.com> - 2014-04-09 10:39 +1000
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-04-09 12:26 +1000
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Rustom Mody <rustompmody@gmail.com> - 2014-04-08 03:53 -0700
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-04-07 03:27 +1000
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Marko Rauhamaa <marko@pacujo.net> - 2014-04-06 23:23 +0300
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Mark Lawrence <breamoreboy@yahoo.co.uk> - 2014-04-06 19:09 +0100
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-04-07 04:14 +1000
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Marko Rauhamaa <marko@pacujo.net> - 2014-04-06 23:10 +0300
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Mark Lawrence <breamoreboy@yahoo.co.uk> - 2014-04-06 21:56 +0100
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2014-04-06 23:48 +0000
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Terry Reedy <tjreedy@udel.edu> - 2014-04-06 20:45 -0400
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Rustom Mody <rustompmody@gmail.com> - 2014-04-06 18:54 -0700
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Steven D'Aprano <steve@pearwood.info> - 2014-04-07 05:10 +0000
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Marko Rauhamaa <marko@pacujo.net> - 2014-04-07 08:14 +0300
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Antoon Pardon <antoon.pardon@rece.vub.ac.be> - 2014-04-08 09:03 +0200
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Marko Rauhamaa <marko@pacujo.net> - 2014-04-07 07:54 +0300
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2014-04-07 12:19 +0000
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Mark H Harris <harrismh777@gmail.com> - 2014-04-05 23:01 -0500
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Rustom Mody <rustompmody@gmail.com> - 2014-03-28 23:10 -0700
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Mark H Harris <harrismh777@gmail.com> - 2014-03-29 00:51 -0500
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2014-03-29 17:53 +0000
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Mark H Harris <harrismh777@gmail.com> - 2014-03-30 01:22 -0500
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2014-03-30 16:22 +0000
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Marko Rauhamaa <marko@pacujo.net> - 2014-03-29 13:39 +0200
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Roy Smith <roy@panix.com> - 2014-03-29 07:53 -0400
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Marko Rauhamaa <marko@pacujo.net> - 2014-03-29 13:59 +0200
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Gene Heskett <gheskett@wdtv.com> - 2014-03-29 13:48 -0400
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Mark H Harris <harrismh777@gmail.com> - 2014-03-30 00:57 -0500
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Gene Heskett <gheskett@wdtv.com> - 2014-03-29 13:46 -0400
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-03-25 10:01 +1100
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Mark H Harris <harrismh777@gmail.com> - 2014-03-24 18:44 -0500
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-03-25 10:57 +1100
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Steven D'Aprano <steve@pearwood.info> - 2014-03-25 06:16 +0000
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Ian Kelly <ian.g.kelly@gmail.com> - 2014-03-24 17:58 -0600
Time we switched to unicode? (was Explanation of this Python language feature?) Rustom Mody <rustompmody@gmail.com> - 2014-03-24 20:00 -0700
Re: Time we switched to unicode? (was Explanation of this Python language feature?) Mark H Harris <harrismh777@gmail.com> - 2014-03-24 22:15 -0500
Re: Time we switched to unicode? (was Explanation of this Python language feature?) Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-03-25 14:17 +1100
Re: Time we switched to unicode? (was Explanation of this Python language feature?) Mark H Harris <harrismh777@gmail.com> - 2014-03-24 22:25 -0500
Re: Time we switched to unicode? (was Explanation of this Python language feature?) Mark H Harris <harrismh777@gmail.com> - 2014-03-24 22:28 -0500
Re: Time we switched to unicode? (was Explanation of this Python language feature?) Roy Smith <roy@panix.com> - 2014-03-24 23:29 -0400
Re: Time we switched to unicode? (was Explanation of this Python language feature?) Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-03-25 14:51 +1100
Re: Time we switched to unicode? (was Explanation of this Python language feature?) Mark H Harris <harrismh777@gmail.com> - 2014-03-24 22:59 -0500
Re: Time we switched to unicode? (was Explanation of this Python language feature?) Rustom Mody <rustompmody@gmail.com> - 2014-03-24 21:08 -0700
Re: Time we switched to unicode? (was Explanation of this Python language feature?) Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-03-25 15:29 +1100
Re: Time we switched to unicode? (was Explanation of this Python language feature?) Rustom Mody <rustompmody@gmail.com> - 2014-03-24 22:00 -0700
Re: Time we switched to unicode? (was Explanation of this Python language feature?) Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-03-25 16:08 +1100
Re: Time we switched to unicode? (was Explanation of this Python language feature?) Mark H Harris <harrismh777@gmail.com> - 2014-03-25 00:14 -0500
Re: Time we switched to unicode? (was Explanation of this Python language feature?) Rustom Mody <rustompmody@gmail.com> - 2014-03-24 22:23 -0700
Re: Time we switched to unicode? (was Explanation of this Python language feature?) Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-03-25 16:31 +1100
Re: Time we switched to unicode? (was Explanation of this Python language feature?) Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-03-25 16:27 +1100
Re: Time we switched to unicode? (was Explanation of this Python language feature?) Mark H Harris <harrismh777@gmail.com> - 2014-03-25 00:34 -0500
Re: Time we switched to unicode? (was Explanation of this Python language feature?) Rustom Mody <rustompmody@gmail.com> - 2014-03-24 22:42 -0700
Re: Time we switched to unicode? (was Explanation of this Python language feature?) Mark H Harris <harrismh777@gmail.com> - 2014-03-25 00:47 -0500
Re: Time we switched to unicode? (was Explanation of this Python language feature?) Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-03-25 16:54 +1100
Re: Time we switched to unicode? (was Explanation of this Python language feature?) Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-03-25 16:48 +1100
Re: Time we switched to unicode? (was Explanation of this Python language feature?) Mark H Harris <harrismh777@gmail.com> - 2014-03-25 00:56 -0500
Re: Time we switched to unicode? (was Explanation of this Python language feature?) Roy Smith <roy@panix.com> - 2014-03-25 08:36 -0400
Re: Time we switched to unicode? (was Explanation of this Python language feature?) Rustom Mody <rustompmody@gmail.com> - 2014-03-25 05:53 -0700
Re: Time we switched to unicode? (was Explanation of this Python language feature?) Antoon Pardon <antoon.pardon@rece.vub.ac.be> - 2014-03-25 14:43 +0100
Re: Time we switched to unicode? (was Explanation of this Python language feature?) Rustom Mody <rustompmody@gmail.com> - 2014-03-25 06:52 -0700
Re: Time we switched to unicode? (was Explanation of this Python language feature?) Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-03-26 00:56 +1100
Re: Time we switched to unicode? (was Explanation of this Python language feature?) Rustom Mody <rustompmody@gmail.com> - 2014-03-25 07:08 -0700
Re: Time we switched to unicode? (was Explanation of this Python language feature?) Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2014-03-25 14:23 +0000
Re: Time we switched to unicode? (was Explanation of this Python language feature?) Rustom Mody <rustompmody@gmail.com> - 2014-03-25 08:19 -0700
Re: Time we switched to unicode? (was Explanation of this Python language feature?) Gregory Ewing <greg.ewing@canterbury.ac.nz> - 2014-03-26 09:33 +1300
Re: Time we switched to unicode? (was Explanation of this Python language feature?) Mark H Harris <harrismh777@gmail.com> - 2014-03-25 11:58 -0500
Re: Time we switched to unicode? (was Explanation of this Python language feature?) Dennis Lee Bieber <wlfraed@ix.netcom.com> - 2014-03-25 20:02 -0400
Re: Time we switched to unicode? (was Explanation of this Python language feature?) Mark H Harris <harrismh777@gmail.com> - 2014-03-25 01:01 -0500
Re: Time we switched to unicode? (was Explanation of this Python language feature?) Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-03-25 17:19 +1100
Re: Time we switched to unicode? (was Explanation of this Python language feature?) Steven D'Aprano <steve@pearwood.info> - 2014-03-25 07:03 +0000
Re: Time we switched to unicode? (was Explanation of this Python language feature?) Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-03-25 18:12 +1100
Re: Time we switched to unicode? (was Explanation of this Python language feature?) Dennis Lee Bieber <wlfraed@ix.netcom.com> - 2014-03-25 20:05 -0400
Re: Time we switched to unicode? Marko Rauhamaa <marko@pacujo.net> - 2014-03-25 10:05 +0200
Re: Time we switched to unicode? Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-03-25 19:23 +1100
Re: Time we switched to unicode? Steven D'Aprano <steve@pearwood.info> - 2014-03-25 08:59 +0000
Re: Time we switched to unicode? Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-03-25 20:03 +1100
Re: Time we switched to unicode? Chris “Kwpolska” Warrick <kwpolska@gmail.com> - 2014-03-25 18:24 +0100
Re: Time we switched to unicode? Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2014-03-26 01:01 +0000
Re: Time we switched to unicode? Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-03-26 06:40 +1100
Re: Time we switched to unicode? (was Explanation of this Python language feature?) Rustom Mody <rustompmody@gmail.com> - 2014-03-24 22:28 -0700
Re: Time we switched to unicode? (was Explanation of this Python language feature?) Mark H Harris <harrismh777@gmail.com> - 2014-03-25 00:36 -0500
Re: Time we switched to unicode? (was Explanation of this Python language feature?) Steven D'Aprano <steve@pearwood.info> - 2014-03-25 06:07 +0000
Re: Time we switched to unicode? (was Explanation of this Python language feature?) Mark H Harris <harrismh777@gmail.com> - 2014-03-25 01:48 -0500
Re: Time we switched to unicode? (was Explanation of this Python language feature?) Antoon Pardon <antoon.pardon@rece.vub.ac.be> - 2014-03-25 10:43 +0100
Re: Time we switched to unicode? (was Explanation of this Python language feature?) Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-03-25 20:54 +1100
Re: Time we switched to unicode? (was Explanation of this Python language feature?) Antoon Pardon <antoon.pardon@rece.vub.ac.be> - 2014-03-25 11:38 +0100
Re: Time we switched to unicode? (was Explanation of this Python language feature?) Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2014-03-25 11:14 +0000
Re: Time we switched to unicode? (was Explanation of this Python language feature?) Antoon Pardon <antoon.pardon@rece.vub.ac.be> - 2014-03-25 12:46 +0100
Re: Time we switched to unicode? (was Explanation of this Python language feature?) Rustom Mody <rustompmody@gmail.com> - 2014-03-25 05:09 -0700
Re: Time we switched to unicode? (was Explanation of this Python language feature?) Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2014-03-25 15:18 +0000
Re: Time we switched to unicode? (was Explanation of this Python language feature?) Terry Reedy <tjreedy@udel.edu> - 2014-03-25 19:55 -0400
Re: Time we switched to unicode? (was Explanation of this Python language feature?) Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2014-03-26 00:12 +0000
Re: Time we switched to unicode? (was Explanation of this Python language feature?) Terry Reedy <tjreedy@udel.edu> - 2014-03-26 00:30 -0400
Re: Time we switched to unicode? (was Explanation of this Python language feature?) Rustom Mody <rustompmody@gmail.com> - 2014-03-25 21:56 -0700
Delayed evaluation of expressions [was Re: Time we switched to unicode?] Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2014-03-26 16:05 +0000
Re: Delayed evaluation of expressions [was Re: Time we switched to unicode?] Rustom Mody <rustompmody@gmail.com> - 2014-03-26 10:32 -0700
Re: Delayed evaluation of expressions [was Re: Time we switched to unicode?] Rustom Mody <rustompmody@gmail.com> - 2014-03-26 10:57 -0700
Re: Delayed evaluation of expressions [was Re: Time we switched to unicode?] Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-03-27 09:24 +1100
Re: Delayed evaluation of expressions Marko Rauhamaa <marko@pacujo.net> - 2014-03-27 00:45 +0200
Re: Delayed evaluation of expressions Rustom Mody <rustompmody@gmail.com> - 2014-03-26 22:02 -0700
Re: Delayed evaluation of expressions [was Re: Time we switched to unicode?] Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2014-03-26 23:43 +0000
Re: Delayed evaluation of expressions [was Re: Time we switched to unicode?] Rustom Mody <rustompmody@gmail.com> - 2014-03-26 18:59 -0700
Re: Delayed evaluation of expressions [was Re: Time we switched to unicode?] Terry Reedy <tjreedy@udel.edu> - 2014-03-26 20:44 -0400
Re: Delayed evaluation of expressions [was Re: Time we switched to unicode?] Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2014-03-27 02:16 +0000
Re: Time we switched to unicode? (was Explanation of this Python language feature?) Roy Smith <roy@panix.com> - 2014-03-25 08:35 -0400
Re: Time we switched to unicode? (was Explanation of this Python language feature?) Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-03-26 00:13 +1100
Re: Time we switched to unicode? (was Explanation of this Python language feature?) Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2014-03-25 14:13 +0000
Re: Time we switched to unicode? (was Explanation of this Python language feature?) Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-03-26 01:37 +1100
Re: Time we switched to unicode? (was Explanation of this Python language feature?) Gregory Ewing <greg.ewing@canterbury.ac.nz> - 2014-03-26 09:58 +1300
Re: Time we switched to unicode? (was Explanation of this Python language feature?) Dennis Lee Bieber <wlfraed@ix.netcom.com> - 2014-03-25 20:10 -0400
Re: Time we switched to unicode? (was Explanation of this Python language feature?) Gregory Ewing <greg.ewing@canterbury.ac.nz> - 2014-03-26 09:21 +1300
Re: Time we switched to unicode? (was Explanation of this Python language feature?) Larry Martell <larry.martell@gmail.com> - 2014-03-25 16:31 -0400
Re: Time we switched to unicode? (was Explanation of this Python language feature?) Mark Lawrence <breamoreboy@yahoo.co.uk> - 2014-03-25 21:22 +0000
Re: Time we switched to unicode? (was Explanation of this Python language feature?) Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-03-25 15:19 +1100
Re: Time we switched to unicode? (was Explanation of this Python language feature?) Steven D'Aprano <steve@pearwood.info> - 2014-03-25 06:04 +0000
Re: Time we switched to unicode? (was Explanation of this Python language feature?) Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-03-25 17:26 +1100
Re: Time we switched to unicode? (was Explanation of this Python language feature?) Roy Smith <roy@panix.com> - 2014-03-25 08:24 -0400
Re: Time we switched to unicode? (was Explanation of this Python language feature?) Dennis Lee Bieber <wlfraed@ix.netcom.com> - 2014-03-25 19:44 -0400
Re: Time we switched to unicode? (was Explanation of this Python language feature?) Rustom Mody <rustompmody@gmail.com> - 2014-03-24 20:43 -0700
Re: Time we switched to unicode? (was Explanation of this Python language feature?) Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-03-25 14:57 +1100
Re: Time we switched to unicode? (was Explanation of this Python language feature?) Steven D'Aprano <steve@pearwood.info> - 2014-03-25 05:47 +0000
Re: Time we switched to unicode? (was Explanation of this Python language feature?) Rustom Mody <rustompmody@gmail.com> - 2014-03-24 23:10 -0700
Re: Time we switched to unicode? (was Explanation of this Python language feature?) Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-03-25 17:33 +1100
Re: Time we switched to unicode? (was Explanation of this Python language feature?) Rustom Mody <rustompmody@gmail.com> - 2014-03-24 23:41 -0700
Re: Time we switched to unicode? (was Explanation of this Python language feature?) Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-03-25 17:50 +1100
Re: Time we switched to unicode? (was Explanation of this Python language feature?) Terry Reedy <tjreedy@udel.edu> - 2014-03-25 18:39 -0400
Re: Time we switched to unicode? (was Explanation of this Python language feature?) Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-03-25 17:12 +1100
Re: Time we switched to unicode? (was Explanation of this Python language feature?) Rustom Mody <rustompmody@gmail.com> - 2014-03-24 23:35 -0700
Re: Time we switched to unicode? (was Explanation of this Python language feature?) Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-03-25 17:45 +1100
Re: Time we switched to unicode? (was Explanation of this Python language feature?) Rustom Mody <rustompmody@gmail.com> - 2014-03-24 23:52 -0700
Re: Time we switched to unicode? (was Explanation of this Python language feature?) "Rhodri James" <rhodri@wildebst.org.uk> - 2014-03-27 01:16 +0000
Re: Time we switched to unicode? (was Explanation of this Python language feature?) Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-03-27 12:26 +1100
Re: Time we switched to unicode? (was Explanation of this Python language feature?) Rustom Mody <rustompmody@gmail.com> - 2014-03-24 20:44 -0700
Re: Time we switched to unicode? (was Explanation of this Python language feature?) Rustom Mody <rustompmody@gmail.com> - 2014-03-24 20:56 -0700
Re: Time we switched to unicode? (was Explanation of this Python language feature?) Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-03-25 15:14 +1100
Re: Time we switched to unicode? (was Explanation of this Python language feature?) Steven D'Aprano <steve@pearwood.info> - 2014-03-25 07:03 +0000
Re: Time we switched to unicode? (was Explanation of this Python language feature?) Rustom Mody <rustompmody@gmail.com> - 2014-03-25 00:22 -0700
Re: Time we switched to unicode? (was Explanation of this Python language feature?) Antoon Pardon <antoon.pardon@rece.vub.ac.be> - 2014-03-25 11:24 +0100
Re: Time we switched to unicode? (was Explanation of this Python language feature?) Roy Smith <roy@panix.com> - 2014-03-25 08:21 -0400
Re: Time we switched to unicode? (was Explanation of this Python language feature?) Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2014-03-25 13:36 +0000
Re: Time we switched to unicode? (was Explanation of this Python language feature?) Antoon Pardon <antoon.pardon@rece.vub.ac.be> - 2014-03-25 15:01 +0100
Re: Time we switched to unicode? (was Explanation of this Python language feature?) Terry Reedy <tjreedy@udel.edu> - 2014-03-25 22:10 -0400
Re: Time we switched to unicode? (was Explanation of this Python language feature?) Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-03-26 13:39 +1100
Re: Time we switched to unicode? (was Explanation of this Python language feature?) Ian Kelly <ian.g.kelly@gmail.com> - 2014-03-27 01:32 -0600
Re: Time we switched to unicode? (was Explanation of this Python language feature?) Ian Kelly <ian.g.kelly@gmail.com> - 2014-03-27 01:43 -0600
Re: Time we switched to unicode? (was Explanation of this Python language feature?) Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-03-25 22:12 +1100
Re: Time we switched to unicode? (was Explanation of this Python language feature?) Antoon Pardon <antoon.pardon@rece.vub.ac.be> - 2014-03-25 13:07 +0100
Re: Time we switched to unicode? (was Explanation of this Python language feature?) Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-03-25 23:45 +1100
Re: Time we switched to unicode? (was Explanation of this Python language feature?) Rustom Mody <rustompmody@gmail.com> - 2014-03-25 06:07 -0700
Re: Time we switched to unicode? (was Explanation of this Python language feature?) Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-03-26 00:50 +1100
Re: Time we switched to unicode? (was Explanation of this Python language feature?) Gregory Ewing <greg.ewing@canterbury.ac.nz> - 2014-03-26 09:37 +1300
Re: Time we switched to unicode? (was Explanation of this Python language feature?) Antoon Pardon <antoon.pardon@rece.vub.ac.be> - 2014-03-25 14:07 +0100
Re: Time we switched to unicode? (was Explanation of this Python language feature?) Terry Reedy <tjreedy@udel.edu> - 2014-03-25 20:24 -0400
Re: Time we switched to unicode? (was Explanation of this Python language feature?) Antoon Pardon <antoon.pardon@rece.vub.ac.be> - 2014-03-26 10:22 +0100
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Steven D'Aprano <steve@pearwood.info> - 2014-03-25 06:20 +0000
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Steven D'Aprano <steve@pearwood.info> - 2014-03-24 09:49 +0000
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-03-24 22:21 +1100
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Mark H Harris <harrismh777@gmail.com> - 2014-03-24 14:47 -0500
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2014-03-25 01:45 +0000
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-03-25 13:17 +1100
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Mark Lawrence <breamoreboy@yahoo.co.uk> - 2014-03-25 02:06 +0000
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Mark H Harris <harrismh777@gmail.com> - 2014-03-24 22:48 -0500
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Mark Lawrence <breamoreboy@yahoo.co.uk> - 2014-03-24 09:58 +0000
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Mark H Harris <harrismh777@gmail.com> - 2014-03-24 13:58 -0500
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Mark Lawrence <breamoreboy@yahoo.co.uk> - 2014-03-24 19:13 +0000
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Ian Kelly <ian.g.kelly@gmail.com> - 2014-03-24 13:12 -0600
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-03-25 06:22 +1100
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2014-03-24 22:58 +0000
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-03-25 10:07 +1100
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Terry Reedy <tjreedy@udel.edu> - 2014-03-24 21:04 -0400
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-03-25 06:45 +1100
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2014-03-22 04:47 +0000
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-03-22 16:05 +1100
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Marko Rauhamaa <marko@pacujo.net> - 2014-03-22 12:24 +0200
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Ian Kelly <ian.g.kelly@gmail.com> - 2014-03-22 03:09 -0600
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Marko Rauhamaa <marko@pacujo.net> - 2014-03-22 12:30 +0200
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Rustom Mody <rustompmody@gmail.com> - 2014-03-22 10:16 -0700
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Mark Lawrence <breamoreboy@yahoo.co.uk> - 2014-03-22 10:40 +0000
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Mark Lawrence <breamoreboy@yahoo.co.uk> - 2014-03-22 17:57 +0000
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Marko Rauhamaa <marko@pacujo.net> - 2014-03-22 20:40 +0200
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Rustom Mody <rustompmody@gmail.com> - 2014-03-22 11:42 -0700
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) 88888 Dihedral <dihedral88888@gmail.com> - 2014-03-25 03:17 -0700
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Gregory Ewing <greg.ewing@canterbury.ac.nz> - 2014-03-22 10:34 +1300
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) vasudevram <vasudevram@gmail.com> - 2014-03-22 13:59 -0700
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Mark H Harris <harrismh777@gmail.com> - 2014-03-24 20:56 -0500
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Dan Stromberg <drsalists@gmail.com> - 2014-03-27 16:45 -0700
How to flatten a list of lists was (Explanation of this Python language feature?) Mark H Harris <harrismh777@gmail.com> - 2014-03-28 17:00 -0500
How to flatten a list of lists was (Explanation of this Python language feature?) Mark H Harris <harrismh777@gmail.com> - 2014-03-28 17:00 -0500
To flatten a nested list was (Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] Mark H Harris <harrismh777@gmail.com> - 2014-03-28 17:05 -0500
Re: To flatten a nested list was (Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2014-03-29 02:31 +0000
Re: To flatten a nested list was (Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] Mark H Harris <harrismh777@gmail.com> - 2014-03-28 22:33 -0500
To flatten a nested list was (Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] Mark H Harris <harrismh777@gmail.com> - 2014-03-28 17:05 -0500
Page 10 of 21 — ← Prev page 1 … 8 9 [10] 11 12 … 21 Next page →
| From | Mark H Harris <harrismh777@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-04-05 00:23 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <533F936E.1000102@gmail.com> |
| In reply to | #69708 |
On 4/4/14 11:49 PM, Chris Angelico wrote: > On Sat, Apr 5, 2014 at 3:31 PM, Mark H Harris <harrismh777@gmail.com> wrote: >> Its has always seemed to me that Java or C++ would be better suited to >> creating python. I wonder will C always be the standard canonical PSF python >> interpreter base language? Has the C python community considered making the >> standard base language Java or C++ ? > > what's the advantage of C++ over C? > A Python interpreter needs to do broadly this: > > 1) Parse a text file into an abstract syntax tree > 2) Compile the AST into bytecode > 3) Execute the bytecode: > 3a) Manage object lifetimes and garbage collection > 3b) Perform lower-level calls > 3c) Efficiently handle namespaces etc > The only advantage of C++ over C is polymorphism, really. There are in my view only three reasons to even use C++: 1) the iostream library, and 2) polymorphism, and 3) operator overloading. If you need to do all three, then C++ is a really good candidate. I am still thinking about the concept of unifying Number; Number as a C++ abstract base class, and an entire Class hierarchy which carries through making *any* Number just work. The ability of the C++ compiler to construct and maintain the virtual function tables would be an advantage. Operator overloading (and maybe templates) would make C++ advantageous also. Guido told me that the modern C python is object oriented. Operator overloading is a big part of this. It seems to me that a modern object oriented language would best be implemented with a true object oriented base language, C++ rather than C. I have always questioned this, just curious why the decision for C was made--- historically, methodologically, and maybe scientifically. It would be tons of work, but maybe not as much as one might think, initially. marcus
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-04-05 16:55 +1100 |
| Message-ID | <mailman.8922.1396677350.18130.python-list@python.org> |
| In reply to | #69715 |
On Sat, Apr 5, 2014 at 4:23 PM, Mark H Harris <harrismh777@gmail.com> wrote: > The only advantage of C++ over C is polymorphism, really. There are in my > view only three reasons to even use C++: 1) the iostream library, and 2) > polymorphism, and 3) operator overloading. If you need to do all three, then > C++ is a really good candidate. The iostream library actually gives you very little over the stdio functions (printf, FILE*, etc), beyond that they're arguably easier to use. (I say "arguably" because there've been plenty of times when I've been writing C++ code and just not bothered with cout, finding printf the better option. Sometimes you find yourself arguing with cout and it's not worth arguing with.) Operator overloading, ultimately, is just this: x + y // becomes x.operator+(y) // or operator+(x,y) When you're actually writing C++ code, that's a huge advantage in readability. But if you're writing an interpreter for another language, there's no benefit; you may as well not bother. Maybe it'd be of value if you want to write a Python-to-C++ translator that then lets you compile the resulting C++ code, but only if you want the C++ code to be readable. So all you're left with is polymorphism. Well, big problem: Python and C++ have distinctly different semantics for multiple inheritance. It wouldn't be possible, much less practical, to try to implement Python's MRO on top of a C++ class structure, other than by basically ignoring the whole structure and using it much the same way PyObject * is used in the existing C code. > I am still thinking about the concept of unifying Number; Number as a C++ > abstract base class, and an entire Class hierarchy which carries through > making *any* Number just work. The ability of the C++ compiler to construct > and maintain the virtual function tables would be an advantage. Operator > overloading (and maybe templates) would make C++ advantageous also. The virtual function tables don't cater for the MRO, see above. But even with simple single inheritance, the effort of creating a new class at run-time would be quite a problem; remember, 'class' in C++ is a declaration to the compiler, but 'class' in Python is an executable statement. > Guido told me that the modern C python is object oriented. Operator > overloading is a big part of this. It seems to me that a modern object > oriented language would best be implemented with a true object oriented base > language, C++ rather than C. I have always questioned this, just curious > why the decision for C was made--- historically, methodologically, and maybe > scientifically. Python is object oriented, and it has operator overloading. But it's possible to implement operator overloading in a language that doesn't have it - it's not OOPs all the way down, turtle-style - so somewhere there has to be that boundary, and building one object oriented language on top of another doesn't necessarily actually give many benefits. ChrisA
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Mark H Harris <harrismh777@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-04-05 00:23 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <mailman.8925.1396678023.18130.python-list@python.org> |
| In reply to | #69708 |
On 4/4/14 11:49 PM, Chris Angelico wrote: > On Sat, Apr 5, 2014 at 3:31 PM, Mark H Harris <harrismh777@gmail.com> wrote: >> Its has always seemed to me that Java or C++ would be better suited to >> creating python. I wonder will C always be the standard canonical PSF python >> interpreter base language? Has the C python community considered making the >> standard base language Java or C++ ? > > what's the advantage of C++ over C? > A Python interpreter needs to do broadly this: > > 1) Parse a text file into an abstract syntax tree > 2) Compile the AST into bytecode > 3) Execute the bytecode: > 3a) Manage object lifetimes and garbage collection > 3b) Perform lower-level calls > 3c) Efficiently handle namespaces etc > The only advantage of C++ over C is polymorphism, really. There are in my view only three reasons to even use C++: 1) the iostream library, and 2) polymorphism, and 3) operator overloading. If you need to do all three, then C++ is a really good candidate. I am still thinking about the concept of unifying Number; Number as a C++ abstract base class, and an entire Class hierarchy which carries through making *any* Number just work. The ability of the C++ compiler to construct and maintain the virtual function tables would be an advantage. Operator overloading (and maybe templates) would make C++ advantageous also. Guido told me that the modern C python is object oriented. Operator overloading is a big part of this. It seems to me that a modern object oriented language would best be implemented with a true object oriented base language, C++ rather than C. I have always questioned this, just curious why the decision for C was made--- historically, methodologically, and maybe scientifically. It would be tons of work, but maybe not as much as one might think, initially. marcus
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Rustom Mody <rustompmody@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-04-04 20:42 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <8eaca90c-cd43-40b7-92c3-ad8676a11cbd@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #69678 |
On Saturday, April 5, 2014 2:28:29 AM UTC+5:30, Mark H. Harris wrote: > hi Mark, yes that's my point. I have heard rumors of python2.8? At some > point I would expect that the Cpython interpreter would 'freeze' and no > one would fix it any longer. I have a serious question, namely, why does > the Cpython community continue to suppport two interpreters rather than > asking the Cpython user-base to migrate to Cpython3? Computer-hobbyists and computer-professionals are quite different sets of people. Are you aware That people FORTRAN, COBOL, mainframes are still in use? That people deep in those would not be amused if their systems suddenly stopped working? That some of the above people have not clue that the world around is not exactly in the same state they see it? And that YOU would not be amused if your credit card suddenly stopped working? (very likely running in some cloistered COBOL mainframe env). IOW: 1. Python is a fun language; its also a serious language 2. Python is not as old as FORTRAN and COBOL but at 20 years its not exactly young either 3. Its reached so far because core-devs behave responsibly towards different constituencies
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Mark H Harris <harrismh777@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-04-05 00:02 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <lho2q1$1vm$1@speranza.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #69702 |
On 4/4/14 10:42 PM, Rustom Mody wrote:
>
> Computer-hobbyists and computer-professionals are quite different sets of people.
>
I know its just a gut feel, and I know there are a lot of lurkers
here too, but it seems that there are *way* more folks from the
professional camp on comp.lang.python than otherwise. Do you have a gut
feel for the % of hobbyists vs. professionals participating here?
> Are you aware
> That [people?] FORTRAN, COBOL, mainframes are still in use?
Well, the S390 is still in use (running gnu/linux these days) and
the z series machines from IBM. FORTRAN and COBOL have government
(military) niche. I remember during the Y2K problem COBOL coders were
working their butts off. There is a 2014 standard doc replacing the
2002 standard, believe.
The last time I used FORTRAN IV was in about 1977, on the
System360-44, but GNU still supports it, and as far as I know it still
has a wide user group (mostly academic). I have it on my system here,
but I don't use it.
> 1. Python is a fun language; its also a serious language
A very serious language; yes, its fun too.
> 2. Python is not as old as FORTRAN and COBOL but at 20 years its not exactly young either
It won't have its day until it becomes ubiquitous... and its coming!
As the gnu/linux numbers continue to climb, more everyday is C python
becoming ubiquitous. I'm hoping the ubiquitous version is C python 3.4+
> 3. Its reached far because core-devs behave responsibly
> towards different constituencies
I think its because the language is flexible, extensible, &powerful
(batteries included), and is supported by a world-wide community of
software engineers (both amateur and professional) who are committed to
its development and adoption world-wide. The PEP process has had a lot
to due with this (and not to ape the BDFL) it has had a lot to due with
some Dutch genius. ;-)
However, knowing your user-base is certainly important. Its always a
problem (any venue, any environment) to try to please everyone. Tough
choices have to be made. The C python community does a pretty good job
of this. Python-ideas and the PEP process are a unique and unparalleled
strategy for enhancement. Very nice.
Having said that, I do believe that the migration to C python3 has
been too conservative. Nobody wants to maintain a fork, not really. I
don't think its something anyone should be afraid of. Somebody should
put a date on C python 3.4+ migration and cut off support for 2.7.x/
Its just an opinion. If 'Twisted' isn't ready for 3.x, well, they need
to get ready. That's also just an opinion.
marcus
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-04-05 16:24 +1100 |
| Message-ID | <mailman.8920.1396675502.18130.python-list@python.org> |
| In reply to | #69709 |
On Sat, Apr 5, 2014 at 4:02 PM, Mark H Harris <harrismh777@gmail.com> wrote: > I know its just a gut feel, and I know there are a lot of lurkers here > too, but it seems that there are *way* more folks from the professional camp > on comp.lang.python than otherwise. Do you have a gut feel for the % of > hobbyists vs. professionals participating here? Impossible to say. However, I would suggest that the more prolific posters are going to be those who use Python more (and thus it's worth investing more time in), which is going to skew the post stats towards the professional end of the spectrum. ChrisA
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Ben Finney <ben+python@benfinney.id.au> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-04-05 16:29 +1100 |
| Message-ID | <mailman.8921.1396675811.18130.python-list@python.org> |
| In reply to | #69709 |
Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> writes: > I would suggest that the more prolific posters are going to be those > who use Python more (and thus it's worth investing more time in), > which is going to skew the post stats towards the professional end of > the spectrum. It's also plausible that the more prolific posters are those who spend *less* time actually coding, and instead spend their free time being prolific in this forum. Other explanations are plausible. Any of them could be contributing factors in any mixture. Without actual data – which neither of us has on this matter – all of these hypotheses are unfounded speculation. Let's not draw any conclusions in the absence of evidence. -- \ “I went to the cinema, it said ‘Adults: $5.00, Children $2.50’. | `\ So I said ‘Give me two boys and a girl.’” —Steven Wright | _o__) | Ben Finney
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-04-05 16:57 +1100 |
| Message-ID | <mailman.8923.1396677437.18130.python-list@python.org> |
| In reply to | #69709 |
On Sat, Apr 5, 2014 at 4:29 PM, Ben Finney <ben+python@benfinney.id.au> wrote: > Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> writes: > >> I would suggest that the more prolific posters are going to be those >> who use Python more (and thus it's worth investing more time in), >> which is going to skew the post stats towards the professional end of >> the spectrum. > > It's also plausible that the more prolific posters are those who spend > *less* time actually coding, and instead spend their free time being > prolific in this forum. Heh. Very true. > Other explanations are plausible. Any of them could be contributing > factors in any mixture. > > Without actual data – which neither of us has on this matter – all of > these hypotheses are unfounded speculation. Let's not draw any > conclusions in the absence of evidence. Not to mention that there's not a lot of difference between an unemployed professional coder and a serious hobbyist. :) ChrisA
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Rustom Mody <rustompmody@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-04-04 23:59 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <fd89a45d-d42f-4934-8e04-5227f7afb0d1@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #69720 |
On Saturday, April 5, 2014 11:27:08 AM UTC+5:30, Chris Angelico wrote: > On Sat, Apr 5, 2014 at 4:29 PM, Ben Finney wrote: > > Without actual data - which neither of us has on this matter - all of > > these hypotheses are unfounded speculation. Let's not draw any > > conclusions in the absence of evidence. > > Not to mention that there's not a lot of difference between an > unemployed professional coder and a serious hobbyist. :) Since I started this distinction, I would like to clarify that I dont take it too seriously. My impressions: 1. The number of people who read (lurk (on GG!!)) is significantly higher than those who post. 3 times? 10 times? Dunno 2. And they fall into an in-between limbo region: ie students -- some formal, some informal -- who would like to become python 'professionals' but dont see themselves as that right now And in case you missed it, I was suggesting that the idea that python 2 support should be cavalierly dropped implied a completely hobbyist viewpoint. Professionalism implies at bottom that a client is God even if he is being an asshole. Intel, Microsoft, IBM and any successful brick-n-mortar corp of your choice, will be seen to follow this principle scrupulously Of course you are free to prefer the '90%' [Run your favorite search engine on "90 percent of startups..." Of course that does not mean that I find the 'conservatism' of python's choices happy. Here is a recent thread https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-list/2014-February/667169.html and its contained link http://bugs.python.org/issue2506 I am too far removed from the details to comment on the technical merit of it However reading it suggests that decisions are being made on "conservatism is good, change is not" basis
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-04-05 18:10 +1100 |
| Message-ID | <mailman.8928.1396681842.18130.python-list@python.org> |
| In reply to | #69724 |
On Sat, Apr 5, 2014 at 5:59 PM, Rustom Mody <rustompmody@gmail.com> wrote: > Professionalism implies at bottom that a client is God even if > he is being an asshole. Not really :) Sometimes, your employer or client just has to go jump. Professionalism implies that you treat your client at least as well as s/he deserves, and try to solve his/her problems. If that becomes impractical, your client can find a new Charlie. :) ChrisA
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-04-05 10:19 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <533fd894$0$29993$c3e8da3$5496439d@news.astraweb.com> |
| In reply to | #69709 |
On Sat, 05 Apr 2014 00:02:58 -0500, Mark H Harris wrote: > Having said that, I do believe that the migration to C python3 has > been too conservative. Why? Is it a race? Does Python 2.x turn into PHP at midnight? Some people think the move to Python 3 has been too radical and too fast for them. Are they wrong? > Nobody wants to maintain a fork, not really. There will be no serious fork of Python 2.7. Oh, I dare say that when the core developers finally announce Python 2.7 is end-of-lifed, probably in another five or so years, there will be a flurry of cheap talk about forking Python, and maybe even a few "Python2.8" projects on Github. But nobody will use them, and they will fade away into obscurity. I can't see *anyone* with the necessary resources taking on the job and gathering enough community support for a successful fork. With perhaps one exception. Twisted has apparently said they cannot migrate to 3.x. They might, I suppose, take up maintenance of Python 2.7. But I doubt it. I expect that when push comes to shove in 4 or 5 years time, they'll find a way to migrate. Python 2.7 will continue to get paid-for support from RedHat until 2024, and I expect that there will be companies like Activestate that will offer extended support for Python 2.7 for a few years too. But that's it. > I don't think its something anyone should be afraid of. Nobody is *afraid* of a fork. But forks do split the community, and introduce FUD (Fear, Uncertainty, Doubt), except for the rare occasions like the XFree86 to X.Org fork where the entire community moved almost overnight to the fork. That was a HUGE vote of no confidence to the original maintainer, and (so I'm told) deservedly so. Nothing like that is plausible with Python. There simply isn't anywhere near that level of dissatisfaction with the way the language is being managed, mild grumbling from a few people aside. Most importantly, the core devs have been *very* responsive to people's complaints. > Somebody should > put a date on C python 3.4+ migration and cut off support for 2.7.x/ 2045-04-01. If you're not migrated to Python 3.4 by then, no cake for you. A date will be set when the time is right, but rushing to set a date now when we don't know the state of the language in five years time is just silly. It is expected to be five years from now, but if there is a flurry of migration activity it may be brought forward, and if five years is not long enough it may be delayed. *May* be delayed. It's fine if people don't migrate to 3.4. Waiting until 3.5 or even 3.6 is perfectly acceptable too. Leaving it to 3.7 (expected about 5 years from now) is probably okay too. The longer you wait to migrate, the easier it will be: migrate when the benefit of migrating exceeds the cost. (I'm talking about application-level projects here. Libraries and frameworks are somewhat different.) Each point release of 3.x has added not just new features to entice users, but new features (and sometimes old features) to aid in porting. For example, some things that had been dropped, like the callable() built- in, were re-added in 3.2. 3.3 re-added the u'' syntax solely to aid in porting from 2.x. There is a lot of discussion going on to make it easier to deal with mixed bytes and ASCII text, which is a very important use- case which by accident was suited well to the Python 2.x byte-string model, but not well suited to the Python 3.x unicode-text versus bytes model. You should expect that to come into production in 3.5. > Its > just an opinion. If 'Twisted' isn't ready for 3.x, well, they need to > get ready. Are you volunteering to do the work for them? > That's also just an opinion. Ah, but is it an *informed* opinion? Do you know why Twisted say they cannot migrate to 3.x? -- Steven D'Aprano http://import-that.dreamwidth.org/
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Terry Reedy <tjreedy@udel.edu> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-04-05 07:20 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <mailman.8929.1396696847.18130.python-list@python.org> |
| In reply to | #69729 |
On 4/5/2014 6:19 AM, Steven D'Aprano wrote: > Oh, I dare say that when the core developers finally announce Python 2.7 > is end-of-lifed, probably in another five or so years, Bug fixing will end in May/June 2015 with 2.7.8, maybe 2.7.9. It will probably start tapering off before that on the basis that fixes may break working code that has worked around bugs. I am not sure how long I will backport Idle patches. Code-only security patches after that? Undecided. I think PEP 466 defines what the focus will be -- keeping 2.7 web apps from becoming bad internet citizens. -- Terry Jan Reedy
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Roy Smith <roy@panix.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-04-05 10:28 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <roy-0FED34.10282105042014@news.panix.com> |
| In reply to | #69729 |
In article <533fd894$0$29993$c3e8da3$5496439d@news.astraweb.com>, Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> wrote: > Twisted has apparently said they cannot migrate to 3.x. They might, I > suppose, take up maintenance of Python 2.7. But I doubt it. I expect > that when push comes to shove in 4 or 5 years time, they'll find a > way to migrate. Is Twisted really that relevant? I know they've been around for a long time, and there are a few high-profile projects using them, but I get the impression they've become a bit of a legacy product by now, and 5 years from now, I suspect that will be even more true. Their big claim to fame was the ability to do asynchronous I/O in Python. There's other ways to do that now. > Nobody is *afraid* of a fork. But forks do split the community, and > introduce FUD A classic example would be the BSD world (Free, Net, Open, Dragonfly, and a host of minor players). There's a lot of really smart people working on those projects, but they're all pushing in different directions. Meanwhile, Linux ate their lunch. >> Somebody should >> put a date on C python 3.4+ migration and cut off support for 2.7.x/ > > 2045-04-01. If you're not migrated to Python 3.4 by then, no cake for you. But, somewhere, somebody will still be running XP on their desktop, and haggling with Microsoft over another deadline extension.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-04-04 09:53 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <533e811a$0$29993$c3e8da3$5496439d@news.astraweb.com> |
| In reply to | #69593 |
On Thu, 03 Apr 2014 11:38:13 -0500, Mark H Harris wrote: > On 4/1/14 5:33 PM, Terry Reedy wrote: > > hi Terry, hope you are well today, despite gmane difficulties; > >> If you narrowly meant "The python interpreter only starting using >> unicode as the default text class in 3.0", then you are, in that narrow >> sense, correct. > > Yes. When I speak of 'python' I am almost always speaking about the > interpreter. Which interpreter? PyPy, Numba, Nuitka, or perhaps even the newest in the family, Pyston? https://tech.dropbox.com/2014/04/introducing-pyston-an-upcoming-jit-based- python-implementation/ Wait, all of those are compilers! Nuitka is a static compiler, the others are JIT compilers. Perhaps you meant Jython, IronPython, or Stackless? They're all interpreters. Ah, they're compilers too! Specifically, byte-code compilers. There's even a compile() built-in function. I'm not just being pedantic for the sake of being annoying[1], there's an important point here. Namely, that we shouldn't conflate Python the language with any one specific compiler or interpreter. Not even -- *especially* not even -- CPython the reference implementation. So we have Python *the language*, and any of a number of implementations. By my count, including experimental, obsolete and abandoned versions, I know of at least 50 different implementations, at least 10 of which might count as "the Python interpreter" for somebody. So the question is, when you speak of "Python", do you mean *a specific implementation*, or do you mean *the language*? > If I speak of the python community, and I rarely do, I > explicitly use the word 'community'. I am concerned with backward > compatibility in my own stuff, but I am primarily interested in python3, > and I have made the conscious decision to use only python3 moving > forward, except in those cases (like QPython 2.7.2 on the Android > platform ). So, python(3)'s use of unicode is exciting, not only as a > step forward for the python interpreter, but also as a leadership step > forward in computer science around the world. I appreciate your enthusiasm, but let's not get too excited. Python is neither the first, nor the most influential, language to include Unicode. And as for it being a "leadership" step in computer science, that's rather like me proclaiming that my local take-away Italian restaurant shifting to gluten-free pasta is a revolution in chemistry. Python is not a computer-science-ey language. It is of little or no interest to computer scientists involved in the mathematics of computation, or compiler-theory, or type-theory, or any of the other academic disciplines under comp-sci. It's true that you might get a semester or two of learning Python in a comp-sci course (but more likely to be Java), but that's only because students have to be taught *something*. Comp-sci researchers are far more likely to be using something like Mercury or Haskell, not Python. Unicode is completely uninteresting to comp-sci. Whether strings contain 127 symbols or 1114112 or 2 is just a boring detail. [...] > On the python unicode continuum version (3) is more useful than > version (2). ( this is of course relative and debatable, so the > statement is rhetorical ) Now that's funny. You make a completely non-controversial statement, that Python 3's Unicode implementation is more useful (i.e. more functionally complete, fewer design flaws, more efficient) than Python 2's, and *that* is the claim that you smother to death in disclaimers. Whereas other statements you make, which sometimes have been as wrong as an utterly wrong thing, you've been prepared to go to the battlements and fight to the death over. [1] Although that's a bonus *wink* -- Steven D'Aprano http://import-that.dreamwidth.org/
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Rustom Mody <rustompmody@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-04-04 03:24 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <236f592a-757f-489d-ba05-b2085cd70f8f@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #69661 |
On Friday, April 4, 2014 3:23:31 PM UTC+5:30, Steven D'Aprano wrote: > On Thu, 03 Apr 2014 11:38:13 -0500, Mark H Harris wrote: > > > On 4/1/14 5:33 PM, Terry Reedy wrote: > > > > hi Terry, hope you are well today, despite gmane difficulties; > > > >> If you narrowly meant "The python interpreter only starting using > >> unicode as the default text class in 3.0", then you are, in that narrow > >> sense, correct. > > > > Yes. When I speak of 'python' I am almost always speaking about the > > interpreter. > > > > Which interpreter? PyPy, Numba, Nuitka, or perhaps even the newest in the > family, Pyston? > > > > https://tech.dropbox.com/2014/04/introducing-pyston-an-upcoming-jit-based- > python-implementation/ > > Wait, all of those are compilers! Nuitka is a static compiler, the others > are JIT compilers. Perhaps you meant Jython, IronPython, or Stackless? > They're all interpreters. > > Ah, they're compilers too! Specifically, byte-code compilers. There's > even a compile() built-in function. > > > I'm not just being pedantic for the sake of being annoying[1], I thought you were being statistic... Now who was the chap with the new statistics module?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Terry Reedy <tjreedy@udel.edu> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-04-04 06:43 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <mailman.8891.1396608212.18130.python-list@python.org> |
| In reply to | #69661 |
On 4/4/2014 5:53 AM, Steven D'Aprano wrote: > On Thu, 03 Apr 2014 11:38:13 -0500, Mark H Harris wrote: > >> On 4/1/14 5:33 PM, Terry Reedy wrote: >>> If you narrowly meant "The python interpreter only starting using >>> unicode as the default text class in 3.0", then you are, in that narrow >>> sense, correct. I really should have said "3.0 was the first version of Python (the language) to specify that code and strings are unicode" >> Yes. When I speak of 'python' I am almost always speaking about the >> interpreter. > > Which interpreter? Since the unicode change is a language and not an interpreter issue, it does not matter. > Unicode is completely uninteresting to comp-sci. Whether strings > contain 127 symbols or 1114112 or 2 is just a boring detail. Until CS researchers want to write academic papers with non-ascii symbols ;-). >> On the python unicode continuum version (3) is more useful than >> version (2). ( this is of course relative and debatable, so the >> statement is rhetorical ) > > Now that's funny. I agree. > You make a completely non-controversial statement, that > Python 3's Unicode implementation is more useful (i.e. more functionally > complete, fewer design flaws, more efficient) than Python 2's, and *that* > is the claim that you smother to death in disclaimers. -- Terry Jan Reedy
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Mark H Harris <harrismh777@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-04-05 22:59 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <5340D11B.8070802@gmail.com> |
| In reply to | #69661 |
On 4/4/14 4:53 AM, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
> Python is not a computer-science-ey language.
Really ?
> It is of little or no
> interest to computer scientists involved in the mathematics of
> computation,
... you mean no one except me, then ?
> or compiler-theory, or type-theory, or any of the other
> academic disciplines under comp-sci.
So, I understand as you say, that there are no academics using C
python interpreter within the rubric of their particular comp sci
discipline? none? anyplace?
I am surprised. They might be surprised as well.
You probably think the same is true of common lisp? then?
Under the covers there are some striking similarities between the
way lisp does things, and the way python does things. You know this, right?
The python interpreter is actually an excellent computer science
language (not only for education) because of its structure, data types,
flexibility, and extensibility. It is an excellent research language.
There seems to be a considerable difference of opinion as to 'what'
comprises computer science; very interesting. Not only is C python
interpreter an excellent research language, but the study of the Python
language itself is of major interest for anyone who studies languages in
general; ie., Lambda the Ultimate λ
marcus
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Mark H Harris <harrismh777@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-04-05 23:59 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <lhqmvk$paq$1@speranza.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #69661 |
On 4/4/14 4:53 AM, Steven D'Aprano wrote: > Python is not a computer-science-ey language. Every programming language is interesting from a comp sci standpoint. Some are more useful for research; python is one of those. For what reasons do you disagree? marcus
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Marko Rauhamaa <marko@pacujo.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-04-06 12:05 +0300 |
| Message-ID | <874n26su9f.fsf@elektro.pacujo.net> |
| In reply to | #69751 |
Mark H Harris <harrismh777@gmail.com>: > On 4/4/14 4:53 AM, Steven D'Aprano wrote: >> Python is not a computer-science-ey language. > > Every programming language is interesting from a comp sci standpoint. > Some are more useful for research; python is one of those. > > For what reasons do you disagree? Computer science doesn't mean "anything related to computers." Physicists typically couldn't care less about your heating up your lunch in the microwave oven. Similarly, computer scientists aren't interested in the mundane applications of their lofty research topics. Python, BTW, is perfectly suitable for computer science. Normally, though, you either use a pseudolanguage or some sort of formalism that hasn't been implemented. In theoretical computer science, they cherish off-the-wall models that detach the topic from everyday applications. Here are examples that I remember from graduate school: * combinatory birds in forests * unfaithful husbands on an island ruled by female logicians * dining philosophers getting into a deadlock over forks * Byzantine generals trying to agree on a surprise onslaught on a besieged city Marko
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-04-06 16:52 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <53418644$0$29993$c3e8da3$5496439d@news.astraweb.com> |
| In reply to | #69760 |
On Sun, 06 Apr 2014 12:05:16 +0300, Marko Rauhamaa wrote:
> Mark H Harris <harrismh777@gmail.com>:
>
>> On 4/4/14 4:53 AM, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
>>> Python is not a computer-science-ey language.
>>
>> Every programming language is interesting from a comp sci standpoint.
>> Some are more useful for research; python is one of those.
>>
>> For what reasons do you disagree?
>
> Computer science doesn't mean "anything related to computers."
> Physicists typically couldn't care less about your heating up your lunch
> in the microwave oven. Similarly, computer scientists aren't interested
> in the mundane applications of their lofty research topics.
>
> Python, BTW, is perfectly suitable for computer science.
I don't think it is. Python is not a pure functional language, so it's
very difficult to prove anything about the code apart from running it.
For example, see Brett Cannon's master's thesis, where he essentially
demonstrates that:
- you can't do compile-time type inference of general types in Python;
- although you can infer a very small amount of information about a
few built-in types;
- adding specialized byte-codes to handle those types gives, at best,
a marginal performance boost, and sometimes even slows code down.
To quote from the conclusion:
"Introducing over 3,000 lines of new C code to Python’s compiler
to get, at best, a 1% improvement is in no way justified. The
level of added complexity that would be introduced into the
compilation step would definitely need to lead to a noticeable
performance improvement, the 5% that was the goal, to justify the
cost of code maintenance."
http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?
doi=10.1.1.90.3231&rep=rep1&type=pdf
What does it mean to say that a language like Python is suitable for use
in computer science? It can mean (at least) four things:
(1) If you do an undergraduate computer science course, they will teach
you Python.
While this is good for the general Python community, it's hardly *doing*
computer science. It's *learning* computer science. (I read a book by
Richard Dawkins. That doesn't mean I'm a biologist.) So while I agree
that it is significant that some universities will teach Python to
undergraduates, I don't count this as Python being used in computer
science. I think we need to look at postgraduate use of Python, not
undergraduate.
(2) Some post-grads use Python as a tool, e.g. they use a Python script
to analyse some data. In this case, the use of Python is incidental to
the research they are doing. They might have used Perl, or a bash script,
or calculated the results by hand. In a similar fashion, they probably
wrote up their results using Microsoft Word. It's just a tool.
(3) Some post-grads do original research *into* Python, as a language.
Brett Cannon's thesis is proof that this has happened at least once.
I think this does count as doing computer science with Python, although
only marginally. No slight intended, but it should be obvious that
something like Brett's thesis has very little application outside of
Python itself. Perhaps a little: if there is another language with
similar types of dynamism as Python, you might conclude that it too is
not a good candidate for compile-time type inference.
(4) This is the category which I was referring to when I said that Python
wasn't a "computer-science-ey language": do people use Python for
research into language-independent fundamental principles of computation?
I don't think so. I agree with Marko that normally you:
> you either use a pseudolanguage or some sort of formalism that
> hasn't been implemented.
E.g. most of the really deep stuff by Turing wasn't even performed on a
computer, since there were no computers[1], or languages to program them
in. A lot (all?) of Knuth's published work is written in an assembly
language for an imaginary processor. Douglas Hofstadter invented two
languages, BlooP and FlooP, to demonstrate the difference between
programming languages that are, or aren't, Turing complete. (He also
named a mythical super-Turing language GlooP.)
Some languages are better suited for academic research of this nature.
Python is too... messy, I suppose. Python's mix of imperative, functional
and OOP paradigms makes it really useful for solving problems, but less
useful for academic research of this type, where pure functional, pure
OOP paradigms are more useful. Naturally I'm not saying that there is
*absolutely no* comp-sci work done using Python, that would be foolish,
only that it is in a minority and is not well-suited for the sort of
problems academics are interested in.
But since I'm not a computer scientist, perhaps I'm wrong. Anyone have
any studies showing what percentage of research papers use various
languages?
> In theoretical computer science, they cherish off-the-wall models that
> detach the topic from everyday applications. Here are examples that I
> remember from graduate school:
>
> * combinatory birds in forests
I don't believe that came from academia. If I've understood correctly,
that was from a non-academic book on applying the lambda calculus to
solve practical applications.
> * unfaithful husbands on an island ruled by female logicians
I don't know that one.
> * dining philosophers getting into a deadlock over forks
>
> * Byzantine generals trying to agree on a surprise onslaught on a
> besieged city
[1] Actually there were. They were women who had the tedious job of
performing large numbers of tedious computations by hand. But there were
no *electronic* computers.
--
Steven D'Aprano
http://import-that.dreamwidth.org/
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 10 of 21 — ← Prev page 1 … 8 9 [10] 11 12 … 21 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | comp.lang.python
csiph-web