> What defines a "primitive type". My understanding is that in many languages > there > is no complex primitive type.
Each language defines its own primitive types, some have no primitive types (or hide them better), some are more primitive than others. In Python, complex numbers have an implementation which is coded in C and quite fast compared to anything achievable in pure Python. > Perhaps it is a bit less primitive, and that the thinking about, say, > floats does not apply, one-to-one, about thinking about complex numbers. In the sense that they are not based on hardware-implemented types that's true. In the sense that they are "special" in Python (i.e., faster and more efficient than user-created types), then they are still primitives. > How about the rub of the Dethe/Arthur dynamics. You think I am being a wise > guy, > when I think I am being an iniquisitive student - I think. I understand that you're an inquisitive student, but the style you respond in is often more aggressive than inquisitive, as far as I've been able to observe. Nothing wrong with challenging the status quo, or whatever, but it does tend to squelch participation on the list at times, especially from members who are less thick-skinned (or patient) than Kirby. Just saying. --Dethe _______________________________________________ Edu-sig mailing list Edu-sig@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/edu-sig
