Chris Angelico <ros...@gmail.com>: > On Wed, Jun 28, 2017 at 5:34 AM, Marko Rauhamaa <ma...@pacujo.net> wrote: >> What would *not* be cheating? A language without a library would be >> dead. > > Sure, but there are different levels of cheating. Using a > general-purpose programming language and its standard library isn't > usually considered cheating, but using a language or library that's > specifically designed for this purpose is less about "hey look how > simple this is" and more about "hey look how awesome this lang/lib > is". Which is a perfectly reasonable thing to brag; Python is > beautifully expressive in the general case, but there are some amazing > tools for special purposes. > > So I wouldn't call it cheating; it's a demonstration of the > expressiveness of numpy.
You saw the APL example, right? APL's standard runtime/library contains most of Numpy functionality because that's what APL has been designed for. Is that cheating? Marko -- https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
