On Thu, 06 Jan 2005 16:12:54 -0800, Carl Banks wrote:
> Arich Chanachai wrote:
>> But
>> then again, if you don't like C++, you probably won't like Java.
> They
>> can be very different languages, but in my experience, the reasons
> why
>> one does not like C++ is usually due to a quality/flaw tha
On Wed, 05 Jan 2005 15:36:30 +0900, Daewon YOON wrote:
>
> Python 1.5.2 (#1, Jul 5 2001, 03:02:19) [GCC 2.96 2731 (Red Hat
> Linux 7.1 2 on linux-i386
> Copyright 1991-1995 Stichting Mathematisch Centrum, Amsterdam
> >>> x=9
> >>> y=4
> >>> x%y
> 1
> >>> for z in range(44):
> ... z
On Tue, 04 Jan 2005 15:52:03 +, Mark Carter wrote:
> ;; This buffer is for notes you don't want to save, and for Lisp evaluation.
> ;; If you want to create a file, first visit that file with C-x C-f,
> ;; then enter the text in that file's own buffer.
Now, _where_ have I seen that before?
>
On Mon, 03 Jan 2005 12:24:09 -0800, RajaSrinivasan wrote:
> I have seen some previous messages about such a problem. I have this
> problem but it is not clear what the solution really was.
>
> I am running FC2, python 2.3.3
>
> the script i have sock.py runs if i say something like :
>
> python
On Mon, 03 Jan 2005 13:05:48 +0200, Ville Vainio wrote:
>> "jfj" == jfj <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> jfj> There were functional and non-functional programming
> jfj> languages (the first being *much* simpler to
> jfj> implement). There is a *reason* people chose C over
> j
On Fri, 31 Dec 2004 05:54:05 -0800, Paul Rubin wrote:
> Bulba! <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> OK, so what projects and why would you consider Python:
>>
>> 1. "clearly unsuitable"
>
> An OS kernel, a high-performance signal processing application like a
> video encoder, or maybe a compact embed
On Fri, 31 Dec 2004 04:03:53 -0800, Paul Rubin wrote:
> Christopher Koppler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> IMO (and - indubitably limited - experience) in the many cases where it
>> *would* be an excellent choice, it *is* most often a matter of politics,
>> to have a
On Fri, 31 Dec 2004 03:49:44 -0800, Paul Rubin wrote:
> Christopher Koppler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> The moral is, of course, that either the Python community's alpha
>> geeks need to get access to controlling interest in a *major*
>> company (or to become
On Fri, 31 Dec 2004 12:05:47 +0100, Peter Dembinski wrote:
> "Thomas Bartkus" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> [...]
>
>> > What makes such companies to choose Java over dynamic, productive
>> > languages like Python? Are there any viable, technical reasons
>> > for that?
>>
>> Are there "viable
On Fri, 31 Dec 2004 02:13:27 +0100, Bulba! wrote:
> On 30 Dec 2004 08:58:36 -0800, "Sridhar R"
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
[snip]
>
>>What makes such companies to choose Java over dynamic, productive
>>languages like Python? Are there any viable, technical reasons for
>>that?
>
> It's the
10 matches
Mail list logo
