>>> Python objects have dynamic operations suited
>>> to a naive interpreter like CPython.
>>
>> Naive, no.
>
> "Naive", in this instance, means executing code exactly as written,
> without optimizing things (and it's not an insult, btw).
In that case, you're talking about a "non-optimizing" inter
> Objects in programming languages (or 'values' if one is more functional
> programming oriented) correspond to things in the world.
One of the things you're saying there is that "values correspond to
things in the world". But you will not get agreement in computer
science on that anymore than s
On Tue, Oct 15, 2013 at 2:46 PM, Grant Edwards wrote:
> On 2013-10-15, Mark Janssen wrote:
>
>> Yeah, well 40 years ago they didn't have parsers.
>
> That seems an odd thing to say. People were assembling and compiling
> computer programs long before 1973.
I'm
>>> Types on the other hand correspond to our classifications and so are
>>> things in our minds.
>>
>> That is not how a C programmer views it. They have explicit
>> "typedef"s that make it a thing for the computer.
>
> Speaking as a C programmer, no. We have explicit typedefs to create new
> la
Who uses "object abstraction" in C? No one. That's why C++ was invented.
>>>
>> If not, Linux, how about Python?
>>
>> http://hg.python.org/cpython/file/e2a411a429d6/Objects
>
> Or huge slabs of the OS/2 Presentation Manager, which is entirely
> object oriented and mostly C. It's done with S
> And your earlier idea that punched cards didn't have tokens is wildly
> ignorant of the state of software and languages 50 years ago.
Please tell me how you parsed tokens with binary switches 50 years
ago. Your input is rubbish.
--
MarkJ
Tacoma, Washington
--
https://mail.python.org/mailman/l
>Prior to that [the '70s] you have punch cards where there's no meaningful
> definition of "parsing" because there are no tokens.
>
> I have no idea what you mean by this. [...]
> You seem drawn to sweeping statements about the current state and history of
> computer science, but then make clai
On Thu, Oct 17, 2013 at 10:32 AM, rusi wrote:
> On Wednesday, October 16, 2013 1:56:27 AM UTC+5:30, zipher wrote:
>> Yes, well clearly we are not "having the same thoughts", yet the
>> purpose of the academic establishment is to pin down such terminology
>> and not have these sloppy understandings
On Thu, Oct 17, 2013 at 3:10 PM, Ethan Furman wrote:
> On 10/17/2013 01:57 PM, Ned Batchelder wrote:
>>
>>
>> Read and listen more. Write and say less.
>
>
> Mark Janssen has no interest in learning. From a thread long-ago:
>
> Mark Janssen wrote:
>>
&
>> It's like this. No matter how you cut it, you're going to get back to
>> the computers where you load instructions with switches. At that point,
>> I'll be very much looking in anticipation to your binary-digit lexer.
>
> Why stop there? If you go back far enough, you've got Babbage with his
>
> Gccpy is an Ahead of time implementation of Python ontop of GCC. So it
> works as you would expect with a traditional compiler such as GCC to
> compile C code. Or G++ to compile C++ etc.
That is amazing. I was just talking about how someone should make a
front-end to GCC on this list a couple o
On Mon, Oct 21, 2013 at 12:46 AM, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
> On Sun, 20 Oct 2013 20:35:03 -0700, Mark Janssen wrote:
>
> [Attribution to the original post has been lost]
>>> Is a jit implementation of a language (not just python) better than
>>> traditional ahead o
On Mon, Oct 21, 2013 at 4:08 AM, Philip Herron
wrote:
> Thanks, i've been working on this basically on my own 95% of the compiler is
> all my code, in my spare time. Its been fairly scary all of this for me. I
> personally find this as a real source of interest to really demystify
> compilers a
> No its not like those 'compilers' i dont really agree with a compiler
> generating C/C++ and saying its producing native code. I dont really believe
> its truely within the statement. Compilers that do that tend to put in alot
> of type saftey code and debugging internals at a high level to ge
> A language specification in BNF is just syntax. It doesn't say anything
> about semantics. So how could this be used to produce executable C code
> for a program? BNF is used to produce parsers. But a parser isn't
> sufficient.
A C program is just syntax also. How does the compiler generate
exe
syntax that a BNF specification of
the language would not allow (even though Steven calls it "syntax"
which is what BNF in Dave's claim parses).
So which of you is confused? I ask that in the inclusive (not
exclusive OR) sense ;^) <-- face says "both".
Mark Janssen
Tacoma, Washington.
--
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
>> So which of you is confused? I ask that in the inclusive (not
>> exclusive OR) sense ;^) <-- face says "both".
>
> Could you please be less snarky? We're trying to communicate here, and it
> is not at all clear yet who is confused and who is not. If you are
> interested in discussing tec
So which of you is confused? I ask that in the inclusive (not
exclusive OR) sense ;^) <-- face says "both".
>>>
>>> Could you please be less snarky?
>>
>> Okay. The purpose of BNF (at least as I envision it) is to
>> produce/specify a *context-free* "grammar". A lexer parses the t
>> Okay. The purpose of BNF (at least as I envision it) is to
>> produce/specify a *context-free* "grammar". A lexer parses the tokens
>> specified in the BNF into an Abstract Syntax Tree. If one can produce
>> such a tree for any given source, the language, in theory, can be
>> compiled by GCC
>> Is your language Turing complete?
>>
>
> 1) No, it's not.
> 2) So what? That should make it easier to compile to C, if anything.
> 3) Don't change the subject.
Well, if your language is not Turing complete, it is not clear that
you will be able to compile it at all. That's the difference
On Thu, Oct 24, 2013 at 8:40 PM, Mark Lawrence wrote:
> On 22/10/2013 18:37, Oscar Benjamin wrote:
>> OTOH why in particular would you want to initialise them with zeros? I
>> often initialise arrays to nan which is useful for debugging.
Is this some kind of joke? What has this list become?
--
OTOH why in particular would you want to initialise them with zeros? I
often initialise arrays to nan which is useful for debugging.
>>
>> Is this some kind of joke? What has this list become?
>
> It's a useful debugging technique to initialize memory to distinctive values
> that should
>> OTOH why in particular would you want to initialise them with zeros? I
>> often initialise arrays to nan which is useful for debugging.
Is this some kind of joke? What has this list become?
>>>
>>> It's a useful debugging technique to initialize memory to distinctive
>>> value
On Fri, Oct 25, 2013 at 11:59 AM, rusi wrote:
> On Saturday, October 26, 2013 12:15:43 AM UTC+5:30, zipher wrote:
>> Clearly the python list has been taken over by TheKooks. Notice he
>> did not respond to the request. Since we are talking about digital
>> computers (with digital memory), I'm re
zing memory to anything but 0 -- UNLESS you're from Stupid
University.
Thanks for providing fodder...
Mark Janssen, Ph.D.
Tacoma, WA
--
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
>>> As for the hex value for Nan who really gives a toss? The whole point is
>>> that you initialise to something that you do not expect to see. Do you
>>> not have a text book that explains this concept?
>>
>> No, I don't think there is a textbook that explains such a concept of
>> initializing
>>> We've been discussing *DEBUGGING*.
>>
>> Are you making it LOUD and *clear* that you don't know what you're
>> talking about?
>
> Input: Yes/no
>
> no
>
> Now please explain what you do not understand about the data below that's
> been written by Oscar Benjamin, myself and Ned Batchelder, spec
>> But OTOH, it can also be explained away entirely by (as you previously
>> noted) the Dunning-Kruger effect, with the same uninformed responses
>> trotted out to everything.
>
> It was rusi who first mentioned this, I merely replied in my normal dead pan
> way.
>
> Slight aside, I spelt your surn
On Fri, Oct 25, 2013 at 2:07 PM, Ned Batchelder wrote:
> (Offlist)
>
> Mark, these conversations would go much more smoothly if you would make
> direct statements about technical points. Your messages are usually
> insinuating questions, or personal insults.
Yes, thank you. That is correct.
>
[Getting back to some old comments]
>>> A language specification in BNF is just syntax. It doesn't say anything
>>> about semantics. So how could this be used to produce executable C code
>>> for a program? BNF is used to produce parsers. But a parser isn't
>>> sufficient.
>>
>> A C program is
> Apologies will be accepted on the list.
BTW, I can't resist pointing out that you guys are like a cup already
full of (black) coffee -- too full to allow the pure water of clarity
to enter.
(cf. Buddhism) .. (boom)
MarkJanssen
Tacoma, Washington
--
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listin
> What a mess of a discussion.
I see the big man stepping in to answer for his homies, but while his
explanation satisfies their question of "well why do these magic
values get used then, if what Mark says is true?", it doesn't address
the real confusion: What is the difference between "script" c
> that is where John, while benevolent, hasn't done the homework of
> computer science. Ask him.
Otherwise, most of this, while sloppy, still stands.
Mark Janssen
Tacoma, Washington
--
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
On Wed, Oct 30, 2013 at 11:21 AM, wrote:
> I am searching for the program or algorithm that makes the best possible of
> completly (diffused data/random noise) and wonder what the state of art
> compression is.
Is this an April Fool's Joke? A key idea of "completely" random is
that you *can't
f(f(...f(f(f(f(f(x)...))
> and eventually the result get down to a single bit. I hope it is clear
> that there's no way to restore a single bit back into different source
> texts.
Hey, that's a nice proof!
Cheers,
Mark Janssen
--
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
>> Congratulations Jonas. My kill file for this list used to have only one
>> name, but now has 2.
>
> You have more patience than I! Jonas just made mine seven. :)
Gosh, don't kill the guy. It's not an obvious thing to hardly anyone
but computer scientists. It's an easy mistake to make.
--
> Note that I *can* make a "compression" algorithm that takes any
> length-n sequence and compresses all but one sequence by at least one
> bit, and does not ever expand the data.
>
> "00" -> ""
> "01" -> "0"
> "10" -> "1"
> "11" -> "00"
>
> This, obviously, is just 'cause the length is an extra pi
>>Well let me try to explain why it is working and i have implemented one.
>>I only need to refresh my memory it was almost 15 years ago.
>>This is not the solution but this is why it is working.
>>65536=256^2=16^4=***4^8***=2^16
>
> All of those values are indeed the same, and yet that is complete
On Thu, Nov 7, 2013 at 6:17 PM, Chris Angelico wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 8, 2013 at 1:05 PM, wrote:
>> I guess what matter is how fast an algorithm can encode and decode a big
>> number, at least if you want to use it for very big sets of random data, or
>> losless video compression?
>
> I don't ca
>> I am not sure if it is just stupidness or laziness that prevent you from
>> seeing that 4^8=65536.
>
> I can see that 4^8 = 65536. Now how are you going to render 65537? You
> claimed that you could render *any* number efficiently. What you've
> proven is that a small subset of numbers can be r
A little late, but a couple of cents worth more data:
> I've just got a few thoughts I'd like to share and ask about:
>
> * Why not allow floater=float(int1/int2) - rather than floater=float
> (int1)/float(int2)?
This has to do with evaluation order, the stuff inside the parens gets
evaluated fir
> I'd be interested to hear your thoughts on where the field of computer
> languages is heading, and how that affects the choice of languages for
> building web sites.
Well, there aren't that many groupings towards which languages
specialize for (not including embedded or other application-speci
On Sat, Nov 9, 2013 at 2:58 PM, Chris Angelico wrote:
> So, on what basis _would_ you choose a language for some purpose?
> Without speaking specifically of web development here, how do you
> choose a language?
Most generally, you choose a language informed by the language
designer's intentions o
On Mon, Nov 11, 2013 at 3:32 AM, Chris Angelico wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 11, 2013 at 10:17 PM, Steven D'Aprano
> wrote:
>> On Mon, 11 Nov 2013 21:39:27 +1100, Chris Angelico wrote:
>>> denormalizes it into a lookup table by creating 70 entries quoting the
>>> first string, 15 quoting the second, 5, a
On Sat, Feb 9, 2013 at 8:20 PM, Chris Angelico wrote:
> On Sun, Feb 10, 2013 at 2:54 PM, Rick Johnson
> wrote:
>> My point was this: All mutate methods should mutate "in-place", if the
>> programmer wishes to create a mutated copy of the object, then the
>> programmer should /explicitly/ create
On Sun, Feb 10, 2013 at 5:30 AM, Oscar Benjamin
wrote:
> On 10 February 2013 04:53, Mark Janssen wrote:
>> I have to agree with Rick, I think requiring the user to explicitly
>> create a new object, which is already a good and widely-used practice,
>> should be the Only One
On Sun, Feb 10, 2013 at 6:29 AM, Steven D'Aprano
wrote:
> Mark Janssen wrote:
>> I have to agree with Rick, I think requiring the user to explicitly
>> create a new object, which is already a good and widely-used practice,
>
> Perhaps so, but consider how you creates n
On Sun, Feb 10, 2013 at 1:51 PM, Chris Angelico wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 11, 2013 at 8:28 AM, Mark Janssen
> wrote:
>> Yes, I was aware of his sarcasm. But I was actually wanting to agree
>> with the fundamental idea: that one could reduce all data types to 1
>> at
On Sun, Feb 10, 2013 at 4:10 PM, Steven D'Aprano
wrote:
> Mark Janssen wrote:
>
>> A unified data model as I define it, specifies a canonical atomic unit
>> (like the unit integer) and an abstract grouping construct in which
>> these atomic units can be arranged.
On Fri, Feb 8, 2013 at 9:48 AM, Rick Johnson
wrote:
> On Friday, February 8, 2013 9:16:42 AM UTC-6, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
>> Rick Johnson wrote:
> Just because /everything/ in Python is an object does not mean that Python is
> 100% OOP.
The whole idea of "make everything an object" is possibly
On Mon, Feb 11, 2013 at 8:55 PM, Rick Johnson
wrote:
> On Monday, February 11, 2013 7:27:30 AM UTC-6, Chris Angelico wrote:
>
>> So...
>> flatten([None, 23, [1, 2, 3], (2, 3), ["spam", "ham"]])
>>
>> would return
>>
>> [None, 23, 1, 2, 3, (2, 3), "spam", "ham"]
>>
>> I think that's even more unexp
See the python extension called "Vigil": https://github.com/munificent/vigil
.
mark
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
On Thu, Feb 21, 2013 at 2:08 AM, Claira wrote:
> The problem: I've done reading (like on quora), and it seems lots of
> beginners (and I know first-hand for me), and even for those that have done
> 4 years at university -- that they say they don't know how to build
> something after all the theory
Sorry, I gave you the wrong book (a different Lutz book). The correct
title is _Programming Python_, by Mark Lutz. It's like 1600 pages and
is application focused.
Cheers!
mark
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
On Tue, Feb 26, 2013 at 4:54 AM, Steven D'Aprano <
steve+comp.lang.pyt...@pearwood.info> wrote:
> There's no doubt that one of PHP's strengths, perhaps its biggest
> strength, is the good state of documentation. But should we feel bad
> about Python's docs?
I don't think so at all. I think the
Continuing on this thread, there would be a new bunch of behaviors to
be defined. Since "everything is an object", there can now be a
standard way to define the *next* common abstraction of "every object
interacts with other objects". And going with my suggestion of
defining >> and << operators,
On Sun, Mar 17, 2013 at 9:26 PM, Mark Janssen wrote:
> Continuing on this thread, there would be a new bunch of behaviors to
> be defined. Since "everything is an object", there can now be a
> standard way to define the *next* common abstraction of "every object
> i
On Sun, Mar 17, 2013 at 11:46 PM, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
> I am very interested in this as a concept, although I must admit I'm not
> entirely sure what you mean by it. I've read your comment on the link above,
> and subsequent emails in this thread, and I'm afraid I don't understand what
> you me
> Ian Cordasco wrote:
>>
>> On Sun, Mar 17, 2013 at 11:53 PM, Mark Janssen
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Hello,
>>>
>>> I just posted an answers on quora.com about OOP (http://qr.ae/TM1Vb)
>>> and wanted to engage the python community on the
> You're dreaming of a utopia where computers just read our minds and
> know what we're thinking. So what if I can pass 42 into an object.
> What do I intend to happen with that 42? Do I want to add the element
> to a list? Access the 42nd element? Delete the 42nd element? Let the
> object pick a b
On Mon, Mar 18, 2013 at 12:06 PM, Georg Brandl wrote:
> Am 18.03.2013 05:26, schrieb Mark Janssen:
>> Continuing on this thread, there would be a new bunch of behaviors to
>> be defined. Since "everything is an object", there can now be a
>> standard way to defin
On Mon, Mar 18, 2013 at 2:51 PM, Andrew Barnert wrote:
> Have you even looked at a message-passing language?
>
> A Smalltalk "message" is a selector and a sequence of arguments. That's what
> you send around. Newer dynamic-typed message-passing OO and actor languages
> are basically the same as
On Tue, Mar 19, 2013 at 1:09 PM, Terry Reedy wrote:
> On 3/18/2013 11:31 PM, Andrew Barnert wrote:
>
>> The idea that message passing is fundamentally different from method
>> calling also turned out to be one of those strange ideas, since it
>> only took a couple years to prove that they are theo
Hopefully this won't be considered mail spam, but another quora answer that
gets to the idea I'm after: http://qr.ae/TMh7A
Reposted here for those who don't have accounts:
Q. Is it time for us to dump the OOP paradigm? If yes, what can replace it?
When I was using C++ and Java, more of my time
>
> Every line is now an element in list d. The question I have now is how can
> I make a dictionary out of the list d with the car manufacturer as the key
> and a tuple containing the year and the model should be the key's value.
> Here is a sample of what list d looks like:
>
> ['1899 Horsey Hors
On Fri, Apr 5, 2013 at 6:07 PM, Roy Smith wrote:
> In article
> ,
> Jake D wrote:
>
>> What is the licence?
>> --It's released under a special FOSS licence. Here it is:
>> You can do whatever you want with this program.
>
> I know this is off-topic, but I encourage people to NOT invent thei
> (Apologies in advance if you get multiple copies of this. My Usenet
> connection seems to be having a conniption fit at the moment.)
>
> I'm looking for an official way to tell what interpreter (if any) is
> running, or at least a not-too-horrible unofficial way.
I was going to work on this IDLE
x27;t pay for, because
they never entered into an agreement, not did you.
Mark Janssen
Tacoma, Washington.
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
On Mon, Apr 8, 2013 at 7:05 PM, Dave Angel wrote:
> On 04/08/2013 07:16 PM, Mark Janssen wrote:
>>
>> On Sun, Apr 7, 2013 at 3:36 PM, Steven D'Aprano
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> On Sun, 07 Apr 2013 14:47:11 -0700, jhunter.dunefsky wrote:
>>>
>>&g
> I'm not a lawyer, and I suspect you're not either. If a burglar climbs up
> my trellis to try to attain a second floor window, and comes crashing to the
> ground, he may very well successfully sue me for not having a warning sign.
No, I understand these cases are common lore, but it's this bull
On Tue, Apr 9, 2013 at 12:14 AM, Chris Angelico wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 9, 2013 at 1:37 PM, Mark Janssen
> wrote:
>> In the case of free (libre) open source
>> software, such a case would have no merit, because such software never
>> promises anyone *anything*.
>
> Where do YOU come up with the idea that you can't be sued if money
> didn't change hands? In what jurisdiction is that true? Unless it's
> true in every jurisdiction that the internet touches, I wouldn't trust
> it to protect me.
I know, the legal system has us all under their thumbs. If I hand
>> It doesn't have to say so, if it's not charging any money -- there's no
>> expectation that you're getting anything at all!
>
> Of course there is. If Oprah Winfrey stands up and publicly says that
> she's giving you a car, FOR FREE, no strings attached, and then gives you
> a piece of old bubbl
> I'm not a lawyer, and I suspect you're not either.
By the way, here's where part of the problem stems, right here. This
notion of that you have to be a lawyer -- as if their some other race
or something. Lawyers are people, that have been trained into a
historical system of conventions. That
>> By the way, here's where part of the problem stems, right here. This
>> notion of that you have to be a lawyer -- as if their some other race or
>> something.
>
> You wouldn't go to a lawyer for advice on the best way to program. You
> wouldn't go to a car mechanic to ask for the best way to se
>>> Where do YOU come up with the idea that you can't be sued if money
>>> didn't change hands? In what jurisdiction is that true? Unless it's
>>> true in every jurisdiction that the internet touches, I wouldn't trust
>>> it to protect me.
>>
>> I know, the legal system has us all under their thumb
> And by putting it online for free download, IN THE ABSENCE OF AN EXPLICIT
> DISCLAIMER, you are implying that it is fit for its purpose, and that you
> have a duty of care to make sure that it does do what you say it does.
No, there is no requirement for a disclaimer. In the US, what is not
exp
> Lots of obvious generalizations out there which are wrong, at least some of
> the time.
You know, Dave funny thing is, right there is one of them.
--
MarkJ
Tacoma, Washington
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
On Tue, Apr 9, 2013 at 2:40 AM, Chris Angelico wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 9, 2013 at 6:58 PM, Mark Janssen
> wrote:
>> If you want tin foil hats, though,
>> you'll have to notice what's right in front of your face -- you
>> already have voodoo right on yo
> Are there that many people in the country who have no clue how the
> legal system works?
Gads. I'm trying to show you how the legal system *doesn't* work.
All your points may be valid under court history, but that history is
tainted. It doesn't mean the system is working, only that cases have
On Sat, Apr 6, 2013 at 7:35 PM, Ned Batchelder wrote:
> Mark, so I can understand your mindset better, what do you mean by "let's
> update the OOP paradigm"? Do you mean, 1) "let's change Python in the next
> release," or 2) "let's see if we can imagine a different way of doing
> things, even tho
On Thu, Apr 11, 2013 at 5:34 PM, Mark Lawrence wrote:
> On 12/04/2013 01:29, Mark Janssen wrote:
>>
>>
>> You are right. It might not be realistic given the Python developer
>> environment at present. In fact, I'm moving the thread out of
>> python-idea
;m going to limit myself to Turing machines and not deal
at all with lamba calculii and abstract programming environments that
exist in the imagination.)
2) Everything outside the concrete types is an object.
3) Objects (not the concrete types) talk to other Objects, **otherwise
they would be a ma
> But there is no single "OOP" paradigm. Java vs Python vs Ruby vs
> Javascript, they're all subtly different.
"Subtly" is the keyword there. Predominately, they are the same --
they try to make a pure OOP object model in an imagined abstract
space.
>> Wikipedia suggests that there are four ma
On Fri, Apr 12, 2013 at 12:46 PM, Prasad, Ramit
wrote:
> Mark Janssen wrote:
>> But you see, there's the critical difference. First of all you're
>> making two errors in your comparison. Firstly, a *person* is saying
>> that she's going to *do something for
> Mark, this proposal is out of place on a Python list, because it proposes an
> object methodology radically different from any that is implemented in
> Python now, or is even remotely likely to be implemented in Python in the
> future.
Wow, you guys are a bunch of ninnies. I'm going to find som
On Sun, Apr 14, 2013 at 11:57 AM, pyth0n3r wrote:
> I came across a problem that when i deal with int data with ',' as thousand
> separator, such as 12,916, i can not change it into int() or float().
> How can i remove the comma in int data?
> Any reply will be appreciated!!
cleaned=''
for c in m
> I would do int(num.replace(',', ''))
That's much more pythonic than my C-ish version
Mark
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
On Sun, Apr 14, 2013 at 5:29 PM, Steven D'Aprano
wrote:
> On Sun, 14 Apr 2013 12:06:12 -0700, Mark Janssen wrote:
>
>> cleaned=''
>> for c in myStringNumber:
>>if c != ',':
>> cleaned+=c
>> int(cleaned)
>
> due to bei
cture of
object-oriented programming languages is a possible middle ground that
could unite them all.
Thank you for your time.
Mark Janssen
Tacoma, Washington
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
On Mon, Apr 15, 2013 at 3:32 PM, Chris Angelico wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 16, 2013 at 8:12 AM, Rotwang wrote:
>> Traceback (most recent call last):
>> File "", line 1, in
>> class C(type(lambda: None)):
>> TypeError: type 'function' is not an acceptable base type
>>
>>
>> and I don't think that
> I'm not quite sure I understand your question, but I'll give it a shot. :-)
Thank you, and my apologies for my late reply.
> The C/C++ model, in which the types are anchored to the machine hardware, in
> the exception, not the rule. In the academic literature, "type theory" is
> almost entir
On Mon, Apr 15, 2013 at 2:06 AM, Uday S Reddy wrote:
> In programming language theory, there is no law to the effect that
> "everything" should be of one kind or another. So, we would not go with
> Alan Kay's ideal.
I understand. I state Kay's points to show how the evolution of (this
part of)
On Tue, Apr 16, 2013 at 8:55 PM, rusi wrote:
> On Apr 17, 7:57 am, Bruce McGoveran wrote:
>> 3. Section 5.3.1 offers this definition of an attributeref:
>> attributeref ::= primary "." identifier
>>
>
> One general comment I will make is regarding your distress at what you
> call 'circular'
On Wed, Apr 17, 2013 at 5:29 PM, alex23 wrote:
> On Apr 18, 9:40 am, Mark Janssen wrote:
>> This is what this list (python) has not figured out yet, because they
>> look up to the theoretical C.S. field and it hasn't yet been
>> published.
>
> No one here idol
On Wed, Apr 17, 2013 at 5:33 PM, Ian Kelly wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 17, 2013 at 5:40 PM, Mark Janssen
> wrote:
>> Rercursion the "bedrock" of language-design. I don't think so. From
>> what I know, a well-defined language ends at its symbols. It makes no
>&g
ence the
evolution towards Object-Orientation), where in the latter (I'm
guessing, since it's not my area of expertise) the progression has
been towards function sophistication (where recursion seems to be
paramount).
In any case, I look forward to diving into the books and references
you&
> One of the nice things about OOP is it means so many different things to
> different people. All of whom believe with religious fervor that they
> know the true answer.
Here's a simple rule to resolve the ambiguity. Whoever publishes
first, gets to claim origin of a word and its usage, kind o
On Thu, Apr 18, 2013 at 7:10 PM, Ned Batchelder wrote:
> You won't solve the problem of confusing, ambiguous, or conflicting
> terminology by making up a rule. "Object-oriented" means subtly different
> things to different people.
That's a problem, not a solution.
> It turns out that computing
>> The main thing that I notice is that there is a heavy "bias" in
>> academia towards mathematical models.
>
> Yeah wonderful observation. Lets clean up!
>
> If I have a loop:
>
> while i < len(a) and a[i] != x:
>i++
>
> I need to understand that at the end of the loop:
> i >= len(a) or a[i]
101 - 200 of 203 matches
Mail list logo
