----- Original Message ----- From: Dethe Elza <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > 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. Obviously once I become convinced that the mutable complex numbers happens to work for my purposes, there is nothing preventing me from implementing as an extension in C. Would that put the issue to bed? What - pedagogically - do you imagine you are communicating to me by telling me that *this* is generally considered better than *that*. Nakedly - pretty much nothing. And it would be easier to converse, no doubt,l if we all felt we were listening to each other. You always seem to be listening with half an ear. I said in the course of the discussion - maybe 3 times - that I understood that I was giving up performance, and that I could understand an objection on that basis, but for where I am going - knowing for example that a C extension is always doable - that I wasn't going to let that be short-term decisive. You come back to me explaining to be that I am giving up performance. Yeah. I know. > 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. Kirby understands. I am from New York ;) You seemed married to Arthur as the desruptive bad guy. I don't buy it, but don't expect to change your mind either. Art _______________________________________________ Edu-sig mailing list Edu-sig@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/edu-sig
