Re: Google and Python
On Sep 24, 10:40 am, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Alex Martelli) wrote: > > Good motto. So is most of Google's code base now in > > Python? About what is the ratio of Python code to C++ > > code? Of course lines of code is kine of a bogus measure. > > Of all those cycles Google executes, about what portion > > are executed by a Python interpreter? > > I don't have those numbers at hand, and if I did they would be > confidential I would be curious to know whether they code much "mixed model" coding. By that I mean (a) code your application in Python, and then (b) optimize it as necessary by moving some functionality into Python C/C++ modules. (Some of (b) may happen during design, of course.) I think of this as the state of the art in programming practice, and I wonder whether Google's doing this, or has a superior alternative. Mike -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Is pyparsing really a recursive descent parser?
On Nov 2, 6:47 am, Paul McGuire <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Well I'll be darned! All this time, I thought "recursive descent" > described the recursive behavior of the parser, which pyparsing > definitely has. I never knew that backing up in the face of parse > mismatches was a required part of the picture. I looked at pyparsing about a year ago for some project and realized that it wouldn't quite do what I needed it to. Maddeningly enough, I cannot remember exactly what the problem was, but I think that it was some combination of lack of backtracking and insufficient control over whitespace skipping. Mostly off-topic, what I could *really* use is something like this folded into the Python standard library. I cannot count the number of times that this would have saved me 30 lines of code. http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2004-August/047042.html Mike -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
