On May 6, 9:29 pm, John Nagle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Isaac Gouy wrote:
> > On May 6, 6:09 pm, John Nagle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> >>Alex Martelli wrote:
>
> >>>John Nagle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> >On Apr 27, 9:07 am, John Nagle <[EMAIL PROTECTE
Neil Hodgson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Alex Martelli:
>
> > Can you run a generic benchmark "inside the current implementation of
> > Flash" to check out its Javascript performance? I can't, so, ...
>
> I can't either (without going to a lot of effort) so here is a page
> comparing Spide
Isaac Gouy wrote:
> On May 6, 6:09 pm, John Nagle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>>Alex Martelli wrote:
>>
>>>John Nagle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>>
>On Apr 27, 9:07 am, John Nagle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>>The CPython implementation is unreasonably sl
Alex Martelli:
> Can you run a generic benchmark "inside the current implementation of
> Flash" to check out its Javascript performance? I can't, so, ...
I can't either (without going to a lot of effort) so here is a page
comparing SpiderMonkey and Tamarin from someone with an adobe.com add
On May 6, 6:09 pm, John Nagle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Alex Martelli wrote:
> > John Nagle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> >>[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> >>>On Apr 27, 9:07 am, John Nagle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> The CPython implementation is unreasonably slow compared
> to good im
John Nagle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
...
> The CPython implementation is unreasonably slow compared
> to good implementations of other dynamic languages such
> as LISP and JavaScript.
...
> >>Tamarin is a just-in-time compiler for Javascript.
> >
> > ...and is not yet released,
Alex Martelli wrote:
> John Nagle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
>>[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>>
>>>On Apr 27, 9:07 am, John Nagle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>>
>>>
The CPython implementation is unreasonably slow compared
to good implementations of other dynamic languages such
as LISP
John Nagle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > On Apr 27, 9:07 am, John Nagle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> >>The CPython implementation is unreasonably slow compared
> >>to good implementations of other dynamic languages such
> >>as LISP and JavaScript.
> >
> >
> > Why
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> On Apr 27, 9:07 am, John Nagle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>>The CPython implementation is unreasonably slow compared
>>to good implementations of other dynamic languages such
>>as LISP and JavaScript.
>
>
> Why do you say CPython is slower than JavaScript? Please pro
On Apr 27, 9:07 am, John Nagle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> The CPython implementation is unreasonably slow compared
> to good implementations of other dynamic languages such
> as LISP and JavaScript.
Why do you say CPython is slower than JavaScript? Please provide
examples.
--
http://mail.pytho
Steven D'Aprano wrote:
> There are bad programmers in every language, but RPL conditional
> blocks aren't the cause of them. Once you learn how RPL works, if
> statements work consistently and obviously (although maybe not to
> programmers who don't get RP notation).
ACK. What made me anwswer was
On Sat, 28 Apr 2007 10:58:25 +0200, Bjoern Schliessmann wrote:
> Dennis Lee Bieber wrote:
>
>> You didn't take account of what b, c, and d were...
>>
>> RPL: if else end
>> Python:if else
>>
>> (RPL is a somewhat common reference to the stack based language of
>> t
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
John Nagle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>(P.S. PEP 3117 is a joke, right?)
I expect so, especially given its creation date.
Gary Duzan
Motorola CHS
--
http://mail.python.org/mail
Dennis Lee Bieber wrote:
> You didn't take account of what b, c, and d were...
>
> RPL: if else end
> Python:if else
>
> (RPL is a somewhat common reference to the stack based language of
> the later calculators -- HP48, for instance)
I still don't see the "more se
On Sat, 28 Apr 2007 06:57:54 +, Dennis Lee Bieber wrote:
> On Fri, 27 Apr 2007 22:39:25 +0200, Bjoern Schliessmann
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> declaimed the following
> in comp.lang.python:
>
>> Dennis Lee Bieber wrote:
>>
>> > And I'll probably ignore those expressions whenever I do get
>> > arou
In <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Bjoern Schliessmann wrote:
> Dennis Lee Bieber wrote:
>
>> HP RPL made more sense: b if c [else d] end
>
> Please explain.
>
> HP RPL: b if c [else d] end
> Python: b if c else d
>
> What's the "more sense" here?
The HP RPL leaves even more questions. If the square br
Dennis Lee Bieber wrote:
> And I'll probably ignore those expressions whenever I do get
> around to 2.5+... That syntax, in my mind, just... stinks...
>
> HP RPL made more sense: b if c [else d] end
Please explain.
HP RPL: b if c [else d] end
Python: b if c else d
What's the "more sense" here?
On Apr 27, 12:42 pm, John Nagle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Dennis Lee Bieber wrote:
> > On 27 Apr 2007 08:34:42 -0700, Paul McGuire <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > declaimed the following in comp.lang.python:
>
> >>deficient - ternary expressions are now part of the language after
> >>years of refugees f
Dennis Lee Bieber wrote:
> On 27 Apr 2007 08:34:42 -0700, Paul McGuire <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> declaimed the following in comp.lang.python:
>
>
>>deficient - ternary expressions are now part of the language after
>>years of refugees from C and C++ asking how to write "a = b ? c : d",
>>and now they
John Nagle wrote:
> (P.S. PEP 3117 is a joke, right?)
Note date of creation.
--
Michael Hoffman
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Paul McGuire wrote:
> Python is not VB and Python is not Java and Python is not Ruby and
> Python is not any other language that is not Python.
As someone who's written in too many programming languages over
a long career, I'm quite pleased with Python as a programming
language. It's straigh
Python is not VB and Python is not Java and Python is not Ruby and
Python is not any other language that is not Python.
1. Functions cannot be called without the parens (like in VB)
2. Python uses some naming conventions as programmer cues, such as
leading and trailing double-underscores to indic
22 matches
Mail list logo
