Re: [OT] Prolog and Regular Expressions, Was: Re: perspective on ruby

Kenneth McDonald <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: [snip] > > That said, it'd be nice if there were some easy way to access a Prolog > engine from Python. When Prolog is appropriate, it's _really_ > appropriate. > > > Cheers, > Ken > http://christophe.delord.free.fr/en/pylog/ http://aspn.activestate

[OT] Prolog and Regular Expressions, Was: Re: perspective on ruby

Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote: > In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, > Edward Elliott <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > >> XML? Conceptually (and more elegantly) covered >> as LISP s-expressions. >> > > "...Lisp is still #1 for key algorithmic techniques such as recursion > and condescension." >

Re: perspective on ruby

robert wrote: > Yes - start them explore. I'd not want to be "teached" a specific > _language_ in a course longer that one day. A language cannot be teached. > Who of the posters in this thread want themselves to be _teached_ more > than one day on a language? > > Isn't the fun, finding the ri

Re: perspective on ruby

Edward Elliott wrote: > Alex Martelli wrote: > >> While Mozart appears cool, I really think that a wider variety of >> languages would help -- some machine code (possibly abstract a la >> Mixal), C (a must, *SO* much is written in it!), at least one of C++, D, >> or ObjectiveC, either Scheme or L

Re: perspective on ruby

In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Edward Elliott <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >XML? Conceptually (and more elegantly) covered >as LISP s-expressions. "...Lisp is still #1 for key algorithmic techniques such as recursion and condescension." -- Verity Stob

OT: Mozart (was Re: perspective on ruby)

On Thu, 20 Apr 2006, Alex Martelli wrote: > Edward Elliott <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > ... >> course in C++ doesn't cut it, the curriculum should either use different >> languages fitted to each task or emphasize a single language with broad >> abilities (picking the best programming model for

Re: perspective on ruby

In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Edward Elliott <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >The fact that even >numeric literals are objects make me suspicious of Ruby as a >general-purpose language though. Isn't Python going that way? -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list

Re: perspective on ruby

Alex Martelli wrote: > The only "single language" I could see fitting that role is Mozart, > deliberately designed to be SUPER-multi-paradigm -- not even Lisp and > Scheme (the only real competition) can compare. Don't know Mozart. After 5 minutes of googling, it looks like strictly a high-level

Re: perspective on ruby

Edward Elliott <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: ... > course in C++ doesn't cut it, the curriculum should either use different > languages fitted to each task or emphasize a single language with broad > abilities (picking the best programming model for each task). Java is The only "single language"

Re: perspective on ruby

Peter Otten wrote: > Edward Elliott wrote: >>The fact that even numeric literals are objects make me suspicious of Ruby >>as a general-purpose language though. > add_one = 1 .__add__ > > Just in case you didn't know... True enough, but I don't often see Python code treating numbers as objec

Re: perspective on ruby

Edward Elliott wrote: > The fact that even numeric literals are objects make me suspicious of Ruby > as a general-purpose language though. >>> add_one = 1 .__add__ >>> add_one(42) 43 Just in case you didn't know... Peter -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list

Re: perspective on ruby

RK wrote: > I just don't get it. The scripted object-oriented clean programming > language is done. Nothing's ever done except LISP. There's always room for experimentation and improvement. > I'm more than willing to supprt RoR if it's being sold as the popular > alternative to .NET programmin

Re: perspective on ruby

RK, I always liked this Martelli post, which I found by searching on Ruby early on when I was still trying to decide to learn Python or Ruby. For a mere hobbyist doing both is out of the question: http://groups.google.com/group/comp.lang.python/msg/28422d707512283 If you want more just search on

perspective on ruby

I apologize if this is a stupid question, I'm asking Python group for perspective on Ruby, but I don't see how the alternative of going to a ruby group for a perspective on Ruby is going to do me any good... I just unpacked and tried out InstantRails, after turning off the local P