[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Magnus Lycka wrote:
>
>>I don't really know Haskell, so I can't really compare it
>>to Python. A smarter compiler can certainly infer types from
>>the code and assemble several implementations of an
>>algorithm, but unless I'm confused, this makes it difficult
>>to do the kind of dynamic linking / late binding that we do in
>>Python. How do you compile a dynamic library without locking
>>library users to specific types?
>
> I don't know. I am learning Haskell(and Python too), long way to go
> before I would get into the the usage you mentioned, if ever, be it
> Haskell or Python.
Huh? I must have expressed my thoughts badly. This is trivial to
use in Python. You could for instance write a module like this:
### my_module.py ###
import copy
def sum(*args):
result = copy.copy(args[0])
for arg in args[1:]:
result += arg
return result
### end my_module.py ###
Then you can do:
>>> from my_module import sum
>>> sum(1,2,3)
6
>>> sum('a','b','c')
'abc'
>>> sum([1,2,3],[4,4,4])
[1, 2, 3, 4, 4, 4]
>>>
Assume that you didn't use Python, but rather something with
static typing. How could you make a module such as my_module.py,
which is capable of working with any type that supports some
standard copy functionality and the +-operator?
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
