"Nick Coghlan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Michael Tobis wrote:
>> Also there's the question of typo-driven bugs, where an attempted
>> rebinding of "epsilon" instead cerated a reference called "epselon".
/cerated/created/
>> (The epselon bug) This is the bane
Well, many scientists and engineers don't have the time, motivation or
ability to master the intricacies of recent fortran vintages either.
That's the problem.
Very large codes written by teams of software engineers for
well-delimited application spaces will continue to be written in some
version
Alex Martelli wrote:
> Used to be that C compilers didn't do register allocation with any skill
> nor finesse, but did let you give a hint by using "register" as the
> storage class of a variable. Smart programmers studied the generated
> machine code on a few architectures of interest, placed "r
Alex Martelli wrote:
> Michael Tobis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>...
> > .x = 1
> > .def foo():
> > . if False:
> > . global x
> > . x = 2
> > .foo()
> > .print x
> >
> > prints "1"
>
> Wrong:
> >>> foo()
> >>> print x
> 2
>
> And indeed, that IS the problem.
Right. That's what I me
On Mon, 07 Feb 2005 08:52:40 -0500, Arthur <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> I happen to think Guido's choice was a good and
>courageous one.
which given my perceived track record (in some quarters), is probably
not a very good sign.
Or else by agreeing with Guido sometimes, I get to be right sometime
On 6 Feb 2005 20:34:22 -0800, "Michael Tobis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>General usage has "declaration" meaning "statement which does not
>generate executable bytecode but merely affects the compiler". My
>assertion that decorator syntax is "declarative" is therefore formally
>false.
I'm not
Michael Tobis wrote:
Also there's the question of typo-driven bugs, where an attempted
rebinding of "epsilon" instead cerated a reference called "epselon".
(The epselon bug) This is the bane of fortran, and after generations it
was generally agreed that optionally one could require all references
t
Alex Martelli wrote:
> > socks off yet again, but I can't see counting on it. So the
successor
> > to Fortran (presuming it isn't C++, which I do presume) may be
> > influenced by Python, but probably it won't be Python.
>
> You appear to assume that Fortran is dead, or dying, or is gonna die
> so
Michael Tobis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
...
> .x = 1
> .def foo():
> . if False:
> . global x
> . x = 2
> .foo()
> .print x
>
> prints "1"
Wrong:
>>> x = 1
>>> def foo():
... if False:
... global x
... x = 2
...
>>> foo()
>>> print x
2
And indeed, that IS the problem.
> P
Summary of my understanding of a recent interesting thread:
General usage has "declaration" meaning "statement which does not
generate executable bytecode but merely affects the compiler". My
assertion that decorator syntax is "declarative" is therefore formally
false.
The common assertion that "
10 matches
Mail list logo
