Chris Angelico <[email protected]> wrote:
>Actually, he is justified. It's one thing to work in C or assembly and
>write code that depends on certain bit-pattern representations of data
>(although even that causes trouble - assuming that
>sizeof(int)=3D=3Dsizeof(int*) isn't good for portability), but in a high
>level language, you cannot assume any correlation between objects and
>bytes. Any code that depends on implementation details is risky.
How does that in anyway justify Evan Driscoll maliciously lying about
code he's never seen?
Ross Ridge
--
l/ // Ross Ridge -- The Great HTMU
[oo][oo] [email protected]
-()-/()/ http://www.csclub.uwaterloo.ca/~rridge/
db //
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
