On Tue, Oct 15, 2013 at 1:11 PM, Mark Janssen <dreamingforw...@gmail.com> wrote: >> "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" interpreter, but > then, that what is supposed to happen. I don't think it's fair to > call it "naive". An interpreter can't guess what you mean to do in > every circumstance (threading?). It's better to do it right (i.e. > well-defined), *slowly* than to do it fast, incorrectly.
The only thing that's unfair is the interpretation of "naive" as meaning somehow inferior. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Naivety#Science As you say, it's better to do it right slowly than wrong quickly. The naive method is more easily proven. ChrisA -- https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
