IDE for python similar to visual basic

2009-08-28 Thread qwe rty
i have been searching for am IDE for python that is similar to Visual
Basic but had no luck.shall you help me please?
-- 
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list


What python can NOT do?

2009-08-28 Thread qwe rty
i know that an interpreted language like python can't be used to make
an operating system or system drivers.

what else can NOT be done in python? what are the limitations of the
language?
-- 
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list


Re: IDE for python similar to visual basic

2009-08-28 Thread qwe rty
On Aug 29, 1:22 am, Craig  wrote:
> Try wingware i have it and i like it.
>
> --- On Fri, 8/28/09, qwe rty  wrote:
>
> > From: qwe rty 
> > Subject: IDE for python similar to visual basic
> > To: python-l...@python.org
> > Date: Friday, August 28, 2009, 5:19 PM
> > i have been searching for am IDE for
> > python that is similar to Visual
> > Basic but had no luck.shall you help me please?
> > --
> >http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
>
>

OMG, it has no visual designer !!
-- 
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list


Re: What python can NOT do?

2009-08-28 Thread qwe rty
On Aug 29, 3:14 am, Tim Chase  wrote:
> >> what else can NOT be done in python? what are the limitations of the
> >> language?
>
> > I understand there's a little trouble getting Python to prove
> > that P=NP  You'll also find that it only comes close to solving
> > the unrestricted three-body problem and the Traveling Salesman
> > problem is still limited to fallible heuristics and searching the
> > entire solution set in better than O(2**n) time.
>
> I forgot about solving the Spam problem entirely.  And answering
> poorly worded/thought-out questions on the internet...
>
> I've also been sorely disappointed by Python's ability to make a
> good chocolate cream silk pie.
>
> -tkc

if you don't know the answer please don't reply
-- 
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list


Re: What python can NOT do?

2009-08-28 Thread qwe rty

> > if you don't know the answer please don't reply
>
> I'm not sure you understand -- Being a Turing complete language,
> anything you can do in any other language, you can do in Python.
>   As "r" observed, it might not be a pleasant experience (though
> there are a lot of things I'd rather do in Python than in C or
> Assembly) but certainly doable.
>
> So clearly the issue resides in your nonsensical question.  You
> asked for things you can't do with Python so I listed some.  The
> things you can't do in Python are things you can't do in any
> other language either.  To turn your snark on end, "If you can't
> post a sensible question, please don't post in the first place".
>
> But this is usenet, and Python can't solve the problem of
> nonsensical questions posted on usenet. :-/
>
> -tkc

i am free to post , you are free to ignore

-- 
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list


Re: What python can NOT do?

2009-08-28 Thread qwe rty
On Aug 29, 4:17 am, Steven D'Aprano  wrote:
> On Fri, 28 Aug 2009 15:37:46 -0700, qwe rty wrote:
> > i know that an interpreted language like python
>
> Languages are neither interpreted nor compiled. *Implementations* are
> interpreted or compiled.
>
> Perl has only one implementation, which is interpreted (as far as I
> know); Java has a number of implementations, some of which compile to
> byte-code, some compile to machine-code. There are C interpreters as well
> as C compilers. And languages like Forth have an unusual programming
> model which doesn't easily match the conventional interpreted/compiled
> distinction.
>
> Python has a number of implementations, all of which are compiled to byte-
> code, like early Java. None are purely interpreted; none are compiled to
> machine-code, although there are add-ons to CPython which will compile
> most Python code to machine-code. Some day, Python may include
> implementations which compile directly to machine-code.
>
> > can't be used to make an operating system or system drivers.
>
> With existing Python implementations, it would be difficult to write an
> OS, because the implementations assume there is already an operating
> system available to handle things like memory and disk IO. So before you
> could write an OS in Python, you would need to write a new Python
> implementation. However, you could easily write a "virtual OS" in Python
> which sat on top of the regular OS.
>
> Device drivers would be less difficult, but performance may be slow
> compared to drivers written in (say) C.
>
> Boot loaders are another type of software which would be impractical to
> write in existing Python implementations.
>
> > what else can NOT be done in python? what are the limitations of the
> > language?
>
> As a language, Python has no theoretical limits -- it is Turing Complete,
> which means anything you can do in C, Java, Lisp, or any other Turing
> Complete language, you could do in Python -- with sufficient effort, and
> provided you don't care about efficiency.
>
> In practice, though, we *do* care about efficiency, and about the effort
> required to write the program in the first case. In practical terms,
> Python the language makes most things easy to write but slower to run, so
> there are very few applications which couldn't be written in Python.
>
> A few things are more difficult than others. One of the hardest things to
> do is to "sandbox" some arbitrary Python code from an untrusted source
> and execute it in a restricted environment.
>
> In practical terms, Python will let you write nearly any sort of program
> you want, provided absolute performance isn't your provided. (To put it
> another way, Python code is rarely "the fastest", but it is usually "fast
> enough".) If performance is too slow, Python is an excellent "glue"
> language, letting you write the bulk of your program in Python for ease,
> the performance-critical parts in C for speed.
>
> Some practical restrictions... if you are writing a web app, some hosting
> providers don't provide access to Python on their webserver, so you're
> limited to using whatever languages they provide, or finding another
> provider.
>
> All existing Python implementations require a minimum amount of memory to
> operate. This is relatively high, so you probably couldn't use Python on
> a device where you only had (say) 64K of memory. There's no Python
> implementation for your ancient Mac Plus or Commodore 64, and there
> probably never will be. Python the language is based on an execution
> model with relatively high overhead, so even if you wrote an
> implementation for such ancient machines, you probably couldn't do much
> with it.
>
> Existing Python implementations don't give you direct access to hardware,
> and bit-manipulation has a lot of overhead in Python. Numerical
> calculations (e.g. scientific array calculations) also suffer from
> overhead, which is barely noticeable if you're doing a few thousand
> calculations, but if you're doing a few tens of millions may be a little
> slow. For these, you should use Python as an interface to numeric
> libraries written in C, like Scipy and Numpy.
>
> --
> Steven

thank you very much ,THIS is the sort of answer i wanted
-- 
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list


Re: What python can NOT do?

2009-08-28 Thread qwe rty
On Aug 29, 5:11 am, Nobody  wrote:
> On Fri, 28 Aug 2009 17:26:06 -0700, qwe rty wrote:
> > if you don't know the answer please don't reply
>
> If you don't understand the question, don't post it in the first place.

don't be so angry ,not good for your health
-- 
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list