On 29/03/2012 04:58, Ross Ridge wrote:
Chris Angelico<ros...@gmail.com> wrote:
Actually, he is justified. It's one thing to work in C or assembly and
write code that depends on certain bit-pattern representations of data
(although even that causes trouble - assuming that
sizeof(int)=3D=3Dsizeof(int*) isn't good for portability), but in a high
level language, you cannot assume any correlation between objects and
bytes. Any code that depends on implementation details is risky.
How does that in anyway justify Evan Driscoll maliciously lying about
code he's never seen?
Ross Ridge
We appear to have a case of "would you stand up please, your voice is
rather muffled". I can hear all the *plonks* from miles away.
--
Cheers.
Mark Lawrence.
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
