Concepts RE: Python evolution: Unease
On Wed, 5 Jan 2005, EP wrote: Roman wrote: Maybe OP doesn't yet fully comprehend the ways of Python universe? snip Don't misinterpret this response. I know it was a rambling. But *maybe* you have something to contribute to Python development, even good ideas only and no work. .Facundo Am I selling Snake Oil? What I do have is a forest instead of an in the trees perspective, and from a forest view I see a lot of defensiveness about Python's hypothetical shortcomings. No one needs be defensive, Python is an amazing programming language, and everyone involved with its development, evolution, support and codebase ought to feel quite good about it. -skip- It's c.l.p and people are free to express their opinions. Even negative. This helps improve Python. As for concepts, they are from Generic Programming (by Musser and Stepanov) and I feel that Python is in position to implement them to the fullest extent. And IMHO it will be nicer than just Java-like interfaces or Eiffel's contract approach. I can try to write a PEP Generic Programming Concepts. Sincerely yours, Roman Suzi -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] =\= My AI powered by GNU/Linux RedHat 7.3 -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Concepts RE: Python evolution: Unease
Roman Suzi [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: As for concepts, they are from Generic Programming (by Musser and Stepanov) and I feel that Python is in position to implement them to the fullest extent. And IMHO it will be nicer than just Java-like interfaces or Eiffel's contract approach. I keep hearing that term (GP). Can someone explain in a few sentences what it means, without resorting to marketing buzzwords? There is nothing in Wikipedia about it. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Concepts RE: Python evolution: Unease
Paul Rubin http://[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: There is nothing in Wikipedia about [Generic programming]. Oops: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Generic_programming This helps. But I don't see how it's different from what used to be called polymorphism. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Concepts RE: Python evolution: Unease
Paul Oops: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Generic_programming Paul This helps. But I don't see how it's different from what used to Paul be called polymorphism. I think of generic programming as polymorphism for statically typed languages. Using the example from the Wikipedia reference, you can't have a generic List class that can hold a list of ints as well as a list of animals without using templates. Skip -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Concepts RE: Python evolution: Unease
On Wed, 05 Jan 2005 12:15:29 +0300, Roman Suzi wrote: As for concepts, they are from Generic Programming (by Musser and Stepanov) and I feel that Python is in position to implement them to the fullest extent. And IMHO it will be nicer than just Java-like interfaces or Eiffel's contract approach. I can try to write a PEP Generic Programming Concepts. I'd like to see this. As corey says, sooner rather than later is good. Release Early, Release Often :-) I'm still skeptical on how *most* Generic Programming concepts are an improvement, but while I don't know much about how concepts formally work I know I like the name... and that's a start. I'd love to see my skepticism proved wrong. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
