On Mon, Oct 21, 2013 at 6:42 PM, Saager Mhatre <saager.mha...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Oct 21, 2013 3:21 PM, "Dhananjay Nene" <dhananjay.n...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> On Mon, Oct 21, 2013 at 3:02 PM, Saager Mhatre <saager.mha...@gmail.com> > wrote: >> > On Oct 21, 2013 12:09 PM, "Dhananjay Nene" <dhananjay.n...@gmail.com> > wrote: >> >> >> >> On Mon, Oct 21, 2013 at 11:53 AM, Saager Mhatre < > saager.mha...@gmail.com> >> > wrote: >> >> > On Oct 21, 2013 11:39 AM, "Dhananjay Nene" <dhananjay.n...@gmail.com> >> > wrote: >> >> >> >> >> >> On Mon, Oct 21, 2013 at 10:55 AM, Saager Mhatre < >> > saager.mha...@gmail.com> >> >> > wrote: >> >> >> >> >> >> > Which generally lead to poor (or at least poorer) abstractions; > but I >> >> > digress. >> >> >> >> >> >> Leaky ?? :) >> >> > >> >> > For the most part, yes. >> >> > >> >> >> > >> >> >> >> I think OOPs concepts across a number of languages are quite >> > different. >> >> >> >> You will find python having superior constructs eg. metaclasses > etc. >> >> > if you were comparing Python OOP to C++/Java. >> >> >> > >> >> >> > Superior constructs implemented inferiorly. Meteclasses are much^3 >> > more >> >> > powerful in Groovy, Ruby and SmallTalk (where some would claim Python >> >> > borrowed them from; but that's just not true.) >> >> >> >> >> >> I wonder if you meant syntactically/stylistically. Would be keen to >> >> > learn, if there are examples where ruby / groovy (I don't know much >> > about >> >> > smalltalk) allow things that python does not. >> >> > >> >> > Semantically! MetaClasses are a much more powerful construct in those >> >> > languages. >> >> >> >> I'm specifically looking for evidence to support that. And I suspect >> >> it might be out there to be found , just that I haven't so far. One of >> >> my early attempts was documented here >> >> >> > > http://blog.dhananjaynene.com/2010/01/dynamically-adding-methods-with-metaprogramming-ruby-and-python/ >> >> >> > >> > Don't look for metaprogramming, you'll end up with a lot of ancillary >> > stuff. Look for metaclasses or metaobject protocol. >> >> Is there an example or two which demonstrates ruby can do things via >> metaprogramming / metaclasses / metaobject protocol that python cannot >> ? Something more than syntactic or stylistic differences. >> >> It wouldn't be normally fair for me to ask for that and I should go >> hunt it down myself, but given the earlier assertions made in this >> thread, i believe it is reasonable in this case. > > Sorry, on GPRS, so hunting for videos will kill my phone & tablet. Add > 'Yehuda Katz' or 'wykatz' in your queries; methinks he's done a bunch of > talks about this. There was also one from the RuPy conference, but I don't > remember if it dealt with metaprogramming per se. But you should be able to > find some videos. That said, it might be hard to find comparisons as the > Ruby folk usually just outright ignore Python, the Groovy folk are too busy > embettering Groovy and the SmallTalk folk are in a cave somewhere that I > know not of!
Still doesn't help me. Since you suggested that "Superior constructs implemented inferiorly." and did not respond to the line which wondered if that was based on syntactic or stylistic differences, I presumed that comment was based on one or two examples of scenarios that you had run into where you found python metaprogramming / metaclasses constraining in some particular way. Anyways it seems there aren't any such examples I can elicit from a continuing discussion. > > Also, just to clarify, metaprogramming is distinct from metaclasses and > presence of one in a platform is not essential to the presence of the > other. Metaprogramming is more to do with code that writes, unwrites or > modifies more code; while metaclasses are about some seriously dynamic > dispatch. > > Incidentally, that is another place Python's implementation departs from > metaclasses in other languages. Where Python provides metaclasses as a hook > to rewrite class internals/implementation before it becomes available to > other code, other platforms attach metaclasses to classes (or objects, in > some cases) at runtime to control/alter the way messages to/methods of the > class (or object) are dispatched. Python conflates metaprogramming into > metaclasses where it is not a necessity, in that Python metaclasses can do > little more of value than add/remove/modify attributes of the class; in > other words, metaprogram elements of class definition. Sure python does do a lot of things differently. But the question I am interested in an answer to is does it empower the user to do / constrain the user from doing certain things as compared to similar languages, distribution of functionality within meta* terms notwithstanding. > > Man, I should start a list of misnamed concepts in Python! Hey, there's my > talk for the next PyCon- Python, the misnamed bits! :D > > That said, I've been meaning to do a decent talk on metaprogramming and > wanted to do a first round at PythonPune. Maybe if thinrhino bugs me about > it enough, I might just... :) > Maybe if thinrhino doesn't bug you about it you still should :) > - d > _______________________________________________ > BangPypers mailing list > BangPypers@python.org > https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/bangpypers -- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- http://blog.dhananjaynene.com twitter: @dnene google plus: http://gplus.to/dhananjaynene _______________________________________________ BangPypers mailing list BangPypers@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/bangpypers
