On Jan 29, 2008 2:43 PM, John Nagle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Submitting Python 2.5 to ISO/ANSI might be a good idea.
>From GvR himself:
"""
- Does a specification (ISO, ECMA, ..) is planned for Python and when ?
No, never. I don't see the point.
"""
http://blogs.nuxeo.com/sections/blogs/ta
On Feb 1, 12:13 pm, Paul Boddie <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Ultimately, this leaves the W3C as the only genuinely open formal
> standards body that I can think of immediately, but I think Python is
> somewhat peripheral for them, despite extensive usage of Python by
> various W3C people.
>
> Paul
Paul Boddie <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Yes, you don't really want standardisation ANSI/ISO-style as the
> standards themselves are not freely distributable
Some ISO standards have been made available for free. Copyright terms
apply. Over 300 are listed here:
http://standards.iso.org/itt
On 1 Feb, 01:18, "Terry Reedy" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> ANSI standards are owned by ANSI or perhaps the accrediting body. In any
> case, electronic copies sell for $30. They cannot legally be accessed free
> as for the docs at python.org.
Yes, you don't really want standardisation ANSI/ISO
John Nagle a écrit :
(snip)
> Python is not standardized by any standards body.
> And no
> two implementations are even close to compiling the same language.
>
> A consequence of the lack of standardization is that it discourages
> implementations. There are about four implementations of som
> Depends entirely on the operative meaning of standardized. Formal
> standards body? Obviously no.
>
> Specified in a standard-setting document? Yes. In fact, in someways,
> Python is better standardized that C, for instance, in that the Python
> standard usefully standardizes some things that t
"Paddy" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
| On Feb 1, 12:18 am, "Terry Reedy" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
| > ANSI does not actually make standards. It make metastandards about how
to
| > make standards (both style and process) and accredites US
standard-making
| > bod
On Feb 1, 12:18 am, "Terry Reedy" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> "John Nagle" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> > Submitting Python 2.5 to ISO/ANSI might be a good idea.
>
> ANSI does not actually make standards. It make metastandards about how to
> make standards
"John Nagle" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Submitting Python 2.5 to ISO/ANSI might be a good idea.
ANSI does not actually make standards. It make metastandards about how to
make standards (both style and process) and accredites US standard-making
bodies tha
Colin J. Williams wrote:
> John Nagle wrote:
>> Paddy wrote:
>>> I would value the opinion of fellow Pythoneers who have also
>>> contributed to Wikipedia, on the issue of "Is Python Standardized".
>>> Specifically in the context of this table:
>>>
>>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_
"John Nagle" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
| And no two implementations are even close to compiling the same language.
That is not what some alternate implementors have claimed. How you done
actual tests to prove them wrong? (And, of course, 'close' would need so
John Nagle wrote:
> Paddy wrote:
>> I would value the opinion of fellow Pythoneers who have also
>> contributed to Wikipedia, on the issue of "Is Python Standardized".
>> Specifically in the context of this table:
>>
>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_programming_languages#General_com
Paddy wrote:
> I would value the opinion of fellow Pythoneers who have also
> contributed to Wikipedia, on the issue of "Is Python Standardized".
> Specifically in the context of this table:
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_programming_languages#General_comparison
> (Comparison o
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
"Terry Reedy" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> "Roy Smith" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> | But, surely Python has plenty of "implementation defined" aspects.
> | Especially in the libraries.
>
> I personally do not consider the libra
"Roy Smith" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
| But, surely Python has plenty of "implementation defined" aspects.
| Especially in the libraries.
I personally do not consider the libraries as part of the language (as
opposed to the distribution) and was not referring t
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
"Terry Reedy" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> "Paddy" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> |I would value the opinion of fellow Pythoneers who have also
> | contributed to Wikipedia, on the issue of "Is Python Standardized".
>
> Depends en
"Paddy" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
|I would value the opinion of fellow Pythoneers who have also
| contributed to Wikipedia, on the issue of "Is Python Standardized".
Depends entirely on the operative meaning of standardized. Formal
standards body? Obviously no
On 28 Jan, 02:05, ajaksu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Hmmm. Seems to me that "Is X Standardized" in the given context means
> having a formal, published standard issued by some Standards
> organization. While you can discuss the meaning of some so-called
> standards (like W3C's 'recommendations',
On Jan 28, 4:44 am, "Russ P." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Jan 27, 5:41 pm, Roy Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
>
> > In article
> > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
>
> > ajaksu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > On Jan 27, 10:32 pm, Paddy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > > I would value the opinion of
On Jan 27, 5:41 pm, Roy Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> In article
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
>
>
>
> ajaksu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On Jan 27, 10:32 pm, Paddy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > I would value the opinion of fellow Pythoneers who have also
> > > contributed to Wikipedia, on the
In article
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
ajaksu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Jan 27, 10:32 pm, Paddy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > I would value the opinion of fellow Pythoneers who have also
> > contributed to Wikipedia, on the issue of "Is Python Standardized".
> > Specifically in the context of th
On Jan 28, 1:05 am, ajaksu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Jan 27, 10:32 pm, Paddy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > I would value the opinion of fellow Pythoneers who have also
> > contributed to Wikipedia, on the issue of "Is Python Standardized".
> > Specifically in the context of this table:
> >
On Jan 27, 10:32 pm, Paddy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I would value the opinion of fellow Pythoneers who have also
> contributed to Wikipedia, on the issue of "Is Python Standardized".
> Specifically in the context of this table:
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_programming_languages
23 matches
Mail list logo
