Xah Lee wrote:
>
> well yes... but this was emulation of Mathematica functions.
> (Disclaimer: Mathematica is a trademark of Wolfram Research Inc, who is
> not affliated with this project)
You could have fooled me.
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
John McGrath wrote:
> Unfortunately, there is no
> consensus as to what the term means.
If the language allows the programmer to write programs from the 'slack'
domain, by saying "just trust me on this", then it's not strongly typed.
What other meanings are there? I wasn't aware of the lack of c
Tassilo v. Parseval wrote:
> Also sprach John W. Kennedy:
>
>> alex goldman wrote:
>>> John W. Kennedy wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>Strong typing has been a feature of mainstream programming languages
>>>>since the late 1950's.
>&
John W. Kennedy wrote:
> Strong
> typing has been a feature of mainstream programming languages since the
> late 1950's.
Is Fortran a strongly typed language? I don't think so. Strong typing has
been invented in the 70's, if I'm not mistaken, when ML was invented, but
strong typing has never been
John W. Kennedy wrote:
> Strong
> typing has been a feature of mainstream programming languages since the
> late 1950's.
I'm just curious, what do you mean by /strong/ typing, and which strongly
typed languages do you know?
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Lawrence Kirby wrote:
> On Tue, 10 May 2005 06:52:18 -0700, alex goldman wrote:
>
>> Lawrence Kirby wrote:
>
> ...
>
>>> However the original quote was in the context of regular expressions, so
>>> discussion of the terminology used in regular expres
Lawrence Kirby wrote:
> On Tue, 10 May 2005 04:58:48 -0700, alex goldman wrote:
>
>> Sean Burke wrote:
>
> ...
>
>>> No, you're just confused about the optimization metric.
>>> In regexes, "greedy" match optimizes for the longest match,
Sean Burke wrote:
>
> alex goldman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
>> vermicule wrote:
>>
>> >
>> > What is so hard to understand ?
>> > Should be perfectly clear even to a first year undergraduate.
>> >
>> > As for &qu
vermicule wrote:
>
> What is so hard to understand ?
> Should be perfectly clear even to a first year undergraduate.
>
> As for "greedy" even a minimal exposure to Djikstra's shortest path
> algorithm would have made the concept intuitive. And from memory,
> that is the sort of thing done in Com
Artie Gold wrote:
> Torsten Bronger wrote:
>> Hallöchen!
>>
>> Daniel Silva <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>>
>>
>>>Shriram Krishnamurthi has just announced the following elsewhere; it
>>>might be of interest to c.l.s, c.l.f, and c.l.p:
>>>http://list.cs.brown.edu/pipermail/plt-scheme/2005-April/0
Daniel Silva wrote:
> At any rate, FOLD must fold.
I personally think GOTO was unduly criticized by Dijkstra. With the benefit
of hindsight, we can see that giving up GOTO in favor of other primitives
failed to solve the decades-old software crisis.
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/pyt
11 matches
Mail list logo
