On 26 April 2010 16:44, Dhananjay Nene <dhananjay.n...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Mon, Apr 26, 2010 at 4:12 PM, Anand Balachandran Pillai < > abpil...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> On Mon, Apr 26, 2010 at 3:46 PM, Dhananjay Nene <dhananjay.n...@gmail.com >> >wrote: >> >> > On Mon, Apr 26, 2010 at 3:18 PM, Sirtaj Singh Kang <sir...@sirtaj.net >> > >wrote: >> >> > This is not a deal-breaker of course, and this decision to use Python is >> a >> > > sensible, pragmatic one (lots of python programmers around, >> > > financial/statistical libraries are available and mature etc) but IMHO >> a >> > > more declarative language would have been nicer from a provability >> > > standpoint. Being able to write programs that reason about the >> contracts >> > is >> > > very important and trying to do it for a general purpose language like >> > > python will be difficult. >> > > >> > >> > I think a DSL based contract (or more precisely waterfall specification) >> > may >> > be more concise and self descriptive. But that would require a definition >> > of >> > a new language grammar. However reasoning about the contracts is not in >> > the >> > scope of the SEC specification. The scope is (in my understanding) a >> clear >> > communication of the how the waterfall implications are worked out (eg. >> how >> > much does each stakeholder get paid and what are the conditions under >> which >> > that gets decided) and at least in terms of standard programming >> languages >> > Python does pretty well. >> > >> >> Precisely. The program that SEC mentions is a "waterfall program" which >> calculates which investor gets paid first, second etc, when and how much >> etc >> >> in monetizing a commercial mortgage backed security asset. I read >> through the relevant sections of the SEC PDF and this does not look >> like it needs a DSL contract but more of routine programming. >> > > Apologies at persisting in this .. but I do think it is a very > unconventional usecase for programs to be used as specifications. > I understood the Python program as a means to play around with asset allocations to try and figure out what would be alternative scenarios and not as spec.
Re_reading what I wrote, it _is_ a spec :-$ A spec of what is supposed to happen. Well, Python as executable spec! [SNIPPED] -- Asokan Pichai *-------------------* We will find a way. Or, make one. (Hannibal) _______________________________________________ BangPypers mailing list BangPypers@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/bangpypers
