Re: Python Written in C?
2008/7/21 Krishnakant Mane [EMAIL PROTECTED]: First off all c# is absolute rubbish waist of time. What a pity others are joining in this pointless language flame-war. Look, I recently had to write a script for manipulating some data; I struggled to organise it in Python and in C++, but when I tried C# everything fell naturally into place and I had it done in next to no time. Other times it has been Python or C++ that has been the most natural way to express what I'm trying to do. Just because /you/ don't like C# doesn't mean it's rubbish or a waste of time; personally I loathe Perl, but I respect the fact that a lot of programmers can get good results very quickly in it. I reckon that the programmer who only knows one language is like a carpenter trying to make a cabinet with just a chisel. Ok for making the joints (although a hammer would have been handy to hit it with), not /really/ as good as a plane for getting large areas smooth, and the blade keeps jumping out when you try to use it as a screwdriver... The one-language programmer isn't really in a position to choose the right tool for the job, because they only have one tool. Anybody who says that a language in real use is a waste of time is denying the reality of those who find it an effective tool. Similarly, anybody who says that a language -- any language -- is right for all jobs plainly doesn't understand that language design involves a lot of compromises, and that the compromises that are appropriate choices for one task are inappropriate for another. Python is a great tool. So is C#. You /can/ do the same job with either, but the smart move is to choose the one that is best adapted to the task in hand. -- Tim Rowe -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Python Written in C?
2008/8/1 Tim Rowe [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008/7/21 Krishnakant Mane [EMAIL PROTECTED]: First off all c# is absolute rubbish waist of time. What a pity others are joining in this pointless language flame-war. Look, I recently had to write a script for manipulating some data; I struggled to organise it in Python and in C++, but when I tried C# everything fell naturally into place and I had it done in next to no time. Other times it has been Python or C++ that has been the most natural way to express what I'm trying to do. Just because /you/ don't like C# doesn't mean it's rubbish or a waste of time; personally I loathe Perl, but I respect the fact that a lot of programmers can get good results very quickly in it. I reckon that the programmer who only knows one language is like a carpenter trying to make a cabinet with just a chisel. Ok for making the joints (although a hammer would have been handy to hit it with), not /really/ as good as a plane for getting large areas smooth, and the blade keeps jumping out when you try to use it as a screwdriver... The one-language programmer isn't really in a position to choose the right tool for the job, because they only have one tool. Anybody who says that a language in real use is a waste of time is denying the reality of those who find it an effective tool. Similarly, anybody who says that a language -- any language -- is right for all jobs plainly doesn't understand that language design involves a lot of compromises, and that the compromises that are appropriate choices for one task are inappropriate for another. Python is a great tool. So is C#. You /can/ do the same job with either, but the smart move is to choose the one that is best adapted to the task in hand. Great, I agree! The only problem is to be so good in several languages. Generally programmers are proficient in one or two. Cheers, Fábio -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Python Written in C?
The OO overheads for C++ are almost non-existent.
http://www.informit.com/articles/article.aspx?p=1192024ns=15058
On Mon, Jul 21, 2008 at 2:05 PM, Dan Upton [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Mon, Jul 21, 2008 at 1:21 PM, Marc 'BlackJack' Rintsch
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Mon, 21 Jul 2008 18:12:54 +0200, mk wrote:
Seriously, though, would there be any advantage in re-implementing
Python in e.g. C++?
Not that current implementation is bad, anything but, but if you're not
careful, the fact that lists are implemented as C arrays can bite your
rear from time to time (it recently bit mine while using lxml). Suppose
C++ re-implementation used some other data structure (like linked list,
possibly with twists like having an array containing pointers to 1st
linked list elements to speed lookups up), which would be a bit slower
on average perhaps, but it would behave better re deletion?
Aside (actual reply below): at least for a sorted LL, you're basically
describing Henriksen's algorithm. They can asymptotically be faster,
based on amortized analysis, but they're somewhat more complicated to
implement.
An operation that most people avoid because of the penalty of shifting
down all elements after the deleted one. Pythonistas tend to build new
lists without unwanted elements instead. I can't even remember when I
deleted something from a list in the past.
Ciao,
Marc 'BlackJack' Rintsch
The other side of the equation though is the OO-overhead for C++
programs as compared to C. (A couple years ago we used an
instrumentation tool to check the instruction count for a simple hello
world program written in C (ie, main(){printf(Hello world!); return
0;}) and Python (main(){couthello worldendl;return 0;}), and the
instruction count was significantly higher for C++. I expect any sort
of C++ objects you used to implement Python structures will be slower
than the equivalent in C. So even if writing it in C++ would reduce
the overhead for deleting from a list, I expect you would lose a lot
more.
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
--
Warren Myers
http://warrenmyers.com
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Python Written in C?
On Jul 20, 3:50 pm, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I'm just learning about Python now and it sounds interesting. But I just read (on the Wiki page) that mainstream Python was written in C. That's what I was searching for: Python was written in what other language? See, my concern was something like: OK, if Python is so hot, then, hopefully someone is writing it in assembly language for each MPU chip out there. Otherwise, if, say, they've written it in C#, then it looks like the REAL, generally useful language to learn is C# and Python is akin to Visual Basic or something: a specialty languagewhereas REAL WORLD programmers who want to be generally useful go and learn C#. So I was suspecting the Python compiler or interpreter is written in a REAL language like C#. So, Wiki says it's written in C! It's almost as if it were an intentional trick...write your own, new language in an OLD, real world language that is passe. Compile it into executable modules of course, so it is a real, working compiler, alright. But the SOURCE is some old, high level language which no one wants to use anymore! So now you've got a hot new language package and no one can say well, it is written in, the SOURCE code is written in, a REAL language. No, it's not! The source is some outdated language and compiler and no one is going to prefer learning THAT to learning your hot new language! I'm not dissing Python, here. Just noting that, if it is written in C, that throws a curve at me in trying to balance the value of learning Python vs. some other major language. Thank you giveitawhril2...!! I haven't had so much fun reading a thead in years. Hilarious -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Python Written in C?
On Jul 23, 12:10 pm, Marc 'BlackJack' Rintsch [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Wed, 23 Jul 2008 09:42:29 -0700, castironpi wrote: On Jul 23, 9:11 am, Marc 'BlackJack' Rintsch [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Wed, 23 Jul 2008 14:10:22 +0200, mk wrote: Marc 'BlackJack' Rintsch wrote: I can't even remember when I deleted something from a list in the past. Still, doesn't that strike you as.. workaround? No, I find it actually safer; I don't have to care where modifications of the list might be seen elsewhere in the program. Ciao, Marc 'BlackJack' Rintsch a[:]= newlist and a= newlist have two completely different effects, and one is just as safe as 'del'. Besides, del isn't safe to be seen elsewhere in the program in other threads, if they aren't locking the GIL. As usual you are talking nonsense… Ciao, Marc 'BlackJack' Rintsch As usual you are taking flamebait! -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Python Written in C?
Marc 'BlackJack' Rintsch wrote: An operation that most people avoid because of the penalty of shifting down all elements after the deleted one. Pythonistas tend to build new lists without unwanted elements instead. Which is exactly what I have done with my big lxml.etree, from which I needed to delete some elements: constructed a new tree only with elements I wanted. Sure, that works. There _is_ a minor side effect: nearly doubling memory usage while the operation lasts. 99% of the time it's not a problem, sure. I can't even remember when I deleted something from a list in the past. Still, doesn't that strike you as.. workaround? I half-got used to it, but it would still be nice not to (practically) have to use it. Enough whining. Gonna eat my quiche and do my Python. :-) -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Python Written in C?
Actually, all of the compilers I'm familiar with (gcc and a handful of cross compilers for various microprocessors) translate from high-level languages (e.g. C, C++) into assembly, which is then assembled into relocatable object files, which are then linked/loaded to produce machine language. Doesn't g++ translate C++ into C and then compile C? Last I heard, most C++ compilers were doing that. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Python Written in C?
2008/7/23 mk [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Actually, all of the compilers I'm familiar with (gcc and a handful of cross compilers for various microprocessors) translate from high-level languages (e.g. C, C++) into assembly, which is then assembled into relocatable object files, which are then linked/loaded to produce machine language. Doesn't g++ translate C++ into C and then compile C? Last I heard, most C++ compilers were doing that. GCC translates every language into its one as a tree, which is then translated to assembly. Matthieu -- French PhD student Website : http://matthieu-brucher.developpez.com/ Blogs : http://matt.eifelle.com and http://blog.developpez.com/?blog=92 LinkedIn : http://www.linkedin.com/in/matthieubrucher -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Python Written in C?
On 2008-07-23, mk [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Actually, all of the compilers I'm familiar with (gcc and a handful of cross compilers for various microprocessors) translate from high-level languages (e.g. C, C++) into assembly, which is then assembled into relocatable object files, which are then linked/loaded to produce machine language. Doesn't g++ translate C++ into C and then compile C? No. Last I heard, most C++ compilers were doing that. A decade or two ago there were some C++ front-ends that did that, but I don't think it's common in modern C++ compilers. -- Grant Edwards grante Yow! Oh, I get it!! at The BEACH goes on, huh, visi.comSONNY?? -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Python Written in C?
On Wed, 23 Jul 2008 14:10:22 +0200, mk wrote: Marc 'BlackJack' Rintsch wrote: I can't even remember when I deleted something from a list in the past. Still, doesn't that strike you as.. workaround? No, I find it actually safer; I don't have to care where modifications of the list might be seen elsewhere in the program. Ciao, Marc 'BlackJack' Rintsch -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Python Written in C?
On Jul 23, 9:11 am, Marc 'BlackJack' Rintsch [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Wed, 23 Jul 2008 14:10:22 +0200, mk wrote: Marc 'BlackJack' Rintsch wrote: I can't even remember when I deleted something from a list in the past. Still, doesn't that strike you as.. workaround? No, I find it actually safer; I don't have to care where modifications of the list might be seen elsewhere in the program. Ciao, Marc 'BlackJack' Rintsch a[:]= newlist and a= newlist have two completely different effects, and one is just as safe as 'del'. Besides, del isn't safe to be seen elsewhere in the program in other threads, if they aren't locking the GIL. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Python Written in C?
On Wed, 23 Jul 2008 09:42:29 -0700, castironpi wrote: On Jul 23, 9:11 am, Marc 'BlackJack' Rintsch [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Wed, 23 Jul 2008 14:10:22 +0200, mk wrote: Marc 'BlackJack' Rintsch wrote: I can't even remember when I deleted something from a list in the past. Still, doesn't that strike you as.. workaround? No, I find it actually safer; I don't have to care where modifications of the list might be seen elsewhere in the program. Ciao, Marc 'BlackJack' Rintsch a[:]= newlist and a= newlist have two completely different effects, and one is just as safe as 'del'. Besides, del isn't safe to be seen elsewhere in the program in other threads, if they aren't locking the GIL. As usual you are talking nonsense… Ciao, Marc 'BlackJack' Rintsch -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Python Written in C?
On Jul 22, 5:59 am, Larry Bates [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Grant Edwards wrote: On 2008-07-22, Larry Bates [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: You talk about writing it in assembly language for each MPU chip. Actually it is even better than that. We now have these modern inventions, called compilers that do that type of work for us. They translate high level instructions, not into assembler but into machine language. Actually, all of the compilers I'm familiar with (gcc and a handful of cross compilers for various microprocessors) translate from high-level languages (e.g. C, C++) into assembly, which is then assembled into relocatable object files, which are then linked/loaded to produce machine language. I just learned something I did not know. I was under the impression that they translated directly to machine code without ever actually generating Assembler text files. Seems like a waste to generate the text and turn around run that through the assembler, but what do I know. I guess that way the compiler can have pluggable assembler back-ends. -Larry I also I have just learned something new! Troll threads are useful. Yay. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Python Written in C?
DaveM [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: On Mon, 21 Jul 2008 03:18:01 +0200, Michiel Overtoom [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Many major text/word processing programs (Emacs, vi, MS-Word) are also written in C. I thought Emacs was written in Lisp. The core - including the lisp interpreter - is written in C. A lot of the user functionality is written in (emacs) lisp. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Python Written in C?
On 2008-07-22, Larry Bates [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Grant Edwards wrote: On 2008-07-22, Larry Bates [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: You talk about writing it in assembly language for each MPU chip. Actually it is even better than that. We now have these modern inventions, called compilers that do that type of work for us. They translate high level instructions, not into assembler but into machine language. Actually, all of the compilers I'm familiar with (gcc and a handful of cross compilers for various microprocessors) translate from high-level languages (e.g. C, C++) into assembly, which is then assembled into relocatable object files, which are then linked/loaded to produce machine language. I just learned something I did not know. I was under the impression that they translated directly to machine code without ever actually generating Assembler text files. There may indeed be compilers that work that way. On Unix systems (which is what I work with) compilers have traditionally generated assembly language files. Seems like a waste to generate the text and turn around run that through the assembler, but what do I know. I guess that way the compiler can have pluggable assembler back-ends. Since you probably need an assembler anyway, generating assembly-language in the compiler prevents you from having to duplicate a bunch of object-code-generation code in two places. -- Grant Edwards grante Yow! Okay ... I'm going at home to write the I HATE visi.comRUBIK's CUBE HANDBOOK FOR DEAD CAT LOVERS ... -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Python Written in C?
Iain King wrote: On Jul 21, 6:58 am, Krishnakant Mane [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: First off all c# is absolute rubbish waist of time. if I need to learn it then I better lern java or pythonfor that matter. and by the way what is a real programmer? The story of a Real Programmer: http://www.pbm.com/~lindahl/mel.html Iain Wow. Awesome story. ~Ethan -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Python Written in C?
giveitawhril2008 wrote... I think someone should write a compiler, Revenge of BASIC. Your remark made an immediate association with me with the following soundtrack: http://www.empire-of-the-claw.com/files/Empire%20of%20The%20Claw%20-%20Tranc e%20of%20the%2080's%20Arcade.mp3 A creature for my amusement Greetings, -- The ability of the OSS process to collect and harness the collective IQ of thousands of individuals across the Internet is simply amazing. - Vinod Vallopillil http://www.catb.org/~esr/halloween/halloween4.html -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Python Written in C?
Erik Max Francis wrote: Ethan Furman wrote: Iain King wrote: The story of a Real Programmer: http://www.pbm.com/~lindahl/mel.html Iain Wow. Awesome story. If my google-fu is up to snuff, these are screenshots (scans of printouts) of the actual blackjack game in operation: http://wps.com/projects/LGP-21/Software/LGP30-Blackjack1.jpg http://wps.com/projects/LGP-21/Software/LGP30-Blackjack2.jpg and here's a scan of a printout of some source code (machine language): http://wps.com/projects/LGP-21/Software/CrapGame.tiff The high school I went to had an LGP-30, and I learned to program on it. Rumor had it that a student from two years before me used to work late in the lab, and allow the janitors to play blackjack, and it is further rumored that he made a bit of money leaning on the transfer control button. --Scott David Daniels [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Python Written in C?
Grant Edwards wrote: On 2008-07-22, Larry Bates [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Grant Edwards wrote: On 2008-07-22, Larry Bates [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: You talk about writing it in assembly language for each MPU chip. Actually it is even better than that. We now have these modern inventions, called compilers that do that type of work for us. They translate high level instructions, not into assembler but into machine language. Actually, all of the compilers I'm familiar with (gcc and a handful of cross compilers for various microprocessors) translate from high-level languages (e.g. C, C++) into assembly, which is then assembled into relocatable object files, which are then linked/loaded to produce machine language. I just learned something I did not know. I was under the impression that they translated directly to machine code without ever actually generating Assembler text files. There may indeed be compilers that work that way. On Unix systems (which is what I work with) compilers have traditionally generated assembly language files. Seems like a waste to generate the text and turn around run that through the assembler, but what do I know. I guess that way the compiler can have pluggable assembler back-ends. Since you probably need an assembler anyway, generating assembly-language in the compiler prevents you from having to duplicate a bunch of object-code-generation code in two places. I'm not sure I understand what you mean here. The code generation phase of the top level compiler would have to generate assembler mnemonics instead of just generating machine coded directly. At that point it should be just as easy to generate machine code, unless you take advantage of macros, or other helpers provided in the assembly phase. My compiler work was way back on mainframes and the ones I worked with definitely didn't produce assembler then needed to be run through the assembler. They created likable objects directly. But that was over 30 years ago! All this may be a moot point, because assembler is just a mnemonic representations of machine language anyway. -Larry -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Python Written in C?
Marc 'BlackJack' Rintsch wrote: On Mon, 21 Jul 2008 18:12:54 +0200, mk wrote: Seriously, though, would there be any advantage in re-implementing Python in e.g. C++? Not that current implementation is bad, anything but, but if you're not careful, the fact that lists are implemented as C arrays can bite your rear from time to time (it recently bit mine while using lxml). Suppose C++ re-implementation used some other data structure (like linked list, possibly with twists like having an array containing pointers to 1st linked list elements to speed lookups up), which would be a bit slower on average perhaps, but it would behave better re deletion? An operation that most people avoid because of the penalty of shifting down all elements after the deleted one. Pythonistas tend to build new lists without unwanted elements instead. I can't even remember when I deleted something from a list in the past. Ciao, Marc 'BlackJack' Rintsch When I use os.walk and need to remove directories or files. Seems to be the only way to do the in-place delete that is required. But you are right, it is very seldom. -Larry -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Python Written in C?
On 2008-07-23, Larry Bates [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Since you probably need an assembler anyway, generating assembly-language in the compiler prevents you from having to duplicate a bunch of object-code-generation code in two places. I'm not sure I understand what you mean here. The code generation phase of the top level compiler would have to generate assembler mnemonics instead of just generating machine coded directly. At that point it should be just as easy to generate machine code, unless you take advantage of macros, or other helpers provided in the assembly phase. Generating assembly language can be a lot easier than generating machine code. One of the big advantage if you're generating assembly language is you don't have to handle relocation and address fix-up issues -- you can let the assembler and linker take care of it. Letting the linker do the final machine-code generation step also allows certain optimizations that can't really be done by the compiler. My compiler work was way back on mainframes and the ones I worked with definitely didn't produce assembler then needed to be run through the assembler. They created likable objects directly. There probably are plenty of compilers that do that. My background is Unix and microprocessor stuff, and it could be that for various reasons the emit assembly approach was more common in that genre. But that was over 30 years ago! All this may be a moot point, because assembler is just a mnemonic representations of machine language anyway. On many architectures, a particular mnemonic can end up being translated into one of several slightly different machine instructions -- for example a simple jump mnemonic might generate any one of several instructions depending on how far away the destination is located. If you've already got an assembler and linker than know how to deal with that stuff, then rather than duplicate the same functionality in the compiler, one might just decided to emit a jump mnemonic and a label. -- Grant Edwards grante Yow! Wow! Look!! A stray at meatball!! Let's interview visi.comit! -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Python Written in C?
Larry Bates [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I just learned something I did not know. I was under the impression that they translated directly to machine code without ever actually generating Assembler text files. Some do, some don't. It's an implementation chioce. gcc generates a text file and pipes it to gas. The __asm__ directive just adds strings to the assembler file. Visual C++ generates machine language. The compiler has to include an assembler for inline assembly. -- Tim Roberts, [EMAIL PROTECTED] Providenza Boekelheide, Inc. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Python Written in C?
On 21/07/2008, [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I'm just learning about Python now and it sounds interesting. But I just read (on the Wiki page) that mainstream Python was written in C. That's what I was searching for: Python was written in what other language? Are you a PH.d researcher In the first place why do you want to make an issue of what an x language is compiled in and if that' is what you are researching in, then sorry to say you don't seam to have a mindset needed for researcher. See, my concern was something like: OK, if Python is so hot, then, hopefully someone is writing it in assembly language for each MPU chip out there. Otherwise, if, say, they've written it in C#, then it looks like the REAL, generally useful language to learn is C# and Python is akin to Visual Basic or something: a specialty languagewhereas REAL WORLD programmers who want to be generally useful go and learn C#. First off all c# is absolute rubbish waist of time. if I need to learn it then I better lern java or pythonfor that matter. and by the way what is a real programmer? I never knew that there are robots who program vertually and a real programmer . What do you think I am a spam bot who is writing a vertual program every day? first give me your defination for real programmer. So I was suspecting the Python compiler or interpreter is written in a REAL language like C#. So, Wiki says it's written in C! It's almost as if it were an intentional trick...write your own, new language in an OLD, real world language that is passe. Compile it into executable modules of course, so it is a real, working compiler, alright. But the SOURCE is some old, high level language which no one wants to use anymore! So now you've got a hot new language package and no one can say well, it is written in, the SOURCE code is written in, a REAL language. No, it's not! The source is some outdated language and compiler and no one is going to prefer learning THAT to learning your hot new language! what! no one is using c? I want to know what people use to write device drivers? I am such a fool I really never new that people use c# to create device drivers for hardware and for creating firmware. I admit my stupidity that I never knew that c# is real programming language . and what is your programming language?python is a free and open source programming language and does not belong to one person. I'm not dissing Python, here. Just noting that, if it is written in C, that throws a curve at me in trying to balance the value of learning Python vs. some other major language. My request and strong recommendation to you is don't learn python, because you don't deserve to. I am not saying for dissing you, i know you are real programmer . but you seam to have a typical mindset which the rubbish microsoft has inculcated in many programmers, aa sorry real programmers line you. I don't think there is any point saying vvb kind of some thing is great and python is rubbish. every language has its value and vb is not a language in the first place. python is made with a view that it is usefull for all purposes and it has been so far successful and I don't really care why it is done in c as long as it does the work. happy hacking. Krishnakant. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Python Written in C?
Michael Torrie wrote: [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I'm not dissing Python, here. Just noting that, if it is written in C, that throws a curve at me in trying to balance the value of learning Python vs. some other major language. Definitely one of the most non-sequitor statements I have ever heard. Actually your entire post doesn't make much sense. Maybe you are a brother bot to castropini? or that perl troll making another attempt to add noise to this newsgroup? I'm a bit surprised that he managed to generate this many replies, really. /F -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Python Written in C?
Bah, new-fangled languages like Pascal... Real programmers write Fortran. Using punch-cards and paper-tape. Real programmers can edit their programs with a pointy stick and some home-made sticky-tape. -- Grant Edwards Reminds me of a funny story from my past working life. I had this fibre tipped pen, given to me as a freebie by some computer company. The pen had something like Floppy Disk Pen printed down the barrel. A colleague who was more into IT management than programming or hands-on support picked it up at a meeting and said something like - That's interesting, what's it for? Seeing an opportunity I replied Its a new bit of technology that allows you to write directly to your floppy disks when you are away from your computer! What a great idea! he replied in all seriousness! Maybe our friend could find one to code C# with! ;-) Peter -- Peter Anderson There is nothing more difficult to take in hand, more perilous to conduct, or more uncertain in its success, than to take the lead in the introduction of a new order of things — Niccolo Machiavelli, /The Prince/, ch. 6 -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Python Written in C?
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED], Michiel Overtoom wrote: Many major text/word processing programs (Emacs, vi, MS-Word) are also written in C. Does that mean you should do all your text processing in C? How else would you implement a Boyer-Moore algorithm? -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Python Written in C?
On Jul 21, 6:58 am, Krishnakant Mane [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: First off all c# is absolute rubbish waist of time. if I need to learn it then I better lern java or pythonfor that matter. and by the way what is a real programmer? The story of a Real Programmer: http://www.pbm.com/~lindahl/mel.html Iain -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Python Written in C?
[EMAIL PROTECTED] a écrit : (snip clueless nonsense) Surely a troll... No one on earth can be *that* clueless. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Python Written in C?
On Jul 20, 5:50 pm, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I'm just learning about Python now and it sounds interesting. But I just read (on the Wiki page) that mainstream Python was written in C. That's what I was searching for: Python was written in what other language? See, my concern was something like: OK, if Python is so hot, then, hopefully someone is writing it in assembly language for each MPU chip out there. Otherwise, if, say, they've written it in C#, then it looks like the REAL, generally useful language to learn is C# and Python is akin to Visual Basic or something: a specialty languagewhereas REAL WORLD programmers who want to be generally useful go and learn C#. So I was suspecting the Python compiler or interpreter is written in a REAL language like C#. So, Wiki says it's written in C! It's almost as if it were an intentional trick...write your own, new language in an OLD, real world language that is passe. Compile it into executable modules of course, so it is a real, working compiler, alright. But the SOURCE is some old, high level language which no one wants to use anymore! So now you've got a hot new language package and no one can say well, it is written in, the SOURCE code is written in, a REAL language. No, it's not! The source is some outdated language and compiler and no one is going to prefer learning THAT to learning your hot new language! I'm not dissing Python, here. Just noting that, if it is written in C, that throws a curve at me in trying to balance the value of learning Python vs. some other major language. Sounds like you program only because someone's paying you. Any programmer who says that C is outdated and not real *is* outdated and not real. Not used anymore? M I wonder, have you heard of something called Linux? The open source Unix-like system? Or perhaps you are familiar with Apache? Does GNOME ring any bells to you? Vim? Git? You got some serious research to do, STFW. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Python Written in C?
Bruno Desthuilliers wrote: [EMAIL PROTECTED] a écrit : (snip clueless nonsense) Surely a troll... No one on earth can be *that* clueless. I disagree he has upper management written all over him. -- mph -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Python Written in C?
On Jul 20, 3:50 pm, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I'm just learning about Python now and it sounds interesting. But I just read (on the Wiki page) that mainstream Python was written in C. That's what I was searching for: Python was written in what other language? See, my concern was something like: OK, if Python is so hot, then, hopefully someone is writing it in assembly language for each MPU chip out there. Otherwise, if, say, they've written it in C#, then it looks like the REAL, generally useful language to learn is C# and Python is akin to Visual Basic or something: a specialty languagewhereas REAL WORLD programmers who want to be generally useful go and learn C#. So I was suspecting the Python compiler or interpreter is written in a REAL language like C#. So, Wiki says it's written in C! It's almost as if it were an intentional trick...write your own, new language in an OLD, real world language that is passe. Compile it into executable modules of course, so it is a real, working compiler, alright. But the SOURCE is some old, high level language which no one wants to use anymore! So now you've got a hot new language package and no one can say well, it is written in, the SOURCE code is written in, a REAL language. No, it's not! The source is some outdated language and compiler and no one is going to prefer learning THAT to learning your hot new language! I'm not dissing Python, here. Just noting that, if it is written in C, that throws a curve at me in trying to balance the value of learning Python vs. some other major language. You're either --- A. A Troll B. A young, immature programmer trying to show off or C. A total idiot. Who cares what language a language is written in as long as you can be productive - which you certainly can be in Python. RCB -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Python Written in C?
rynt wrote: You're either --- A. A Troll B. A young, immature programmer trying to show off or C. A total idiot. you forgot the All of the above choice. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Python Written in C?
Martin P. Hellwig wrote: I disagree he has upper management written all over him. In any case, the OP should remember that programming languages are all theoretically the same: if you can do it in one language, then you can theoretically do it any other. When choosing a language, you just need to find one that (a) has the right tools to do the job (libraries, methods of deployment, supported platforms, etc.) and (b) that you and your team are comfortable using. Python has the tools to tackle a huge range of problems (you can often use the standard library when you would have to write C code from scratch), and many find it, dare I say, fun to use (whereas I find C# roughly equivalent to being shot). Whether you should use it depends on your domain and your team's preference. -Matt -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Python Written in C?
Grant Edwards wrote: Using punch-cards and paper-tape. Real programmers can edit their programs with a pointy stick and some home-made sticky-tape. Wrong! Real programmers can program using only Touring machine (and something having to do with post for some reason). I'm sure our brilliant OP[1] could program in both. [1] Troll, really. Don't feed the troll. I wouldn't have posted about him because that only adds to the noise. oops. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Python Written in C?
mk wrote: Grant Edwards wrote: Using punch-cards and paper-tape. Real programmers can edit their programs with a pointy stick and some home-made sticky-tape. Wrong! Real programmers can program using only Touring machine Is that some kind of bicycle? TJG -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Python Written in C?
Tim Golden wrote: Wrong! Real programmers can program using only Touring machine Is that some kind of bicycle? there's a nearly infinite number of software projects with that name, but the Ultimate Touring Machine could be found in sydney not long ago: http://tinyurl.com/5t2dl4 /F -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Python Written in C?
Hi everyone, Yes, python is written in C. Maybe the original poster is looking for ultimate language and thus finds it uncomfortable that python should be written in C and not python itself. Actually it doesnt matter if IronPython is written in C# and Python in C. Each programming language is like a tool to the programmer and no, C is not outdate, its just a language with a much higher learning curve and its best left to do stuffs requiring drivers or optimized algorithms and other embedded stuffs that is usable by other languages. What do you think C# is written in? C# ? You see how flawed this logic is. Anyway, good luck on your search. But why look for ultimate language, when the core difference is the programmmer him/herself. In the hands of an skilled programmer, any language could accomplish much and then there is an issue with time. I would cringe to do in C what i do in python nowadays, and i have like 14 years of C/C++ programming background. Someone wrote bittorrent in python and today its Utorrent written in C/C++ that is cool, you see that doesnt mean that the next guy wrote write it in python would not beat the cool factor, its a matter of design, look, feel and its all about the programmer. Like they say in racing, its the driver not the car. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Python Written in C?
Who cares what language a language is written in as long as you can be productive - which you certainly can be in Python. Seriously, though, would there be any advantage in re-implementing Python in e.g. C++? Not that current implementation is bad, anything but, but if you're not careful, the fact that lists are implemented as C arrays can bite your rear from time to time (it recently bit mine while using lxml). Suppose C++ re-implementation used some other data structure (like linked list, possibly with twists like having an array containing pointers to 1st linked list elements to speed lookups up), which would be a bit slower on average perhaps, but it would behave better re deletion? -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Python Written in C?
Its called a BMW today. Fredrik Lundh wrote: Tim Golden wrote: Wrong! Real programmers can program using only Touring machine Is that some kind of bicycle? there's a nearly infinite number of software projects with that name, but the Ultimate Touring Machine could be found in sydney not long ago: http://tinyurl.com/5t2dl4 /F -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Python Written in C?
On Mon, 21 Jul 2008 11:26:27 -0700, castironpi wrote: On Jul 20, 11:59 pm, Michael Torrie [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I'm not dissing Python, here. Just noting that, if it is written in C, that throws a curve at me in trying to balance the value of learning Python vs. some other major language. Definitely one of the most non-sequitor statements I have ever heard. Actually your entire post doesn't make much sense. Maybe you are a brother bot to castropini? Perhaps a less-trained one, although none of castropini's posts seem to make sense either. The AI needs a bit of work. Are you saying Python is not good for writing A.I., or the A.I. isn't good at writing Python? Are you saying python is not as smart as you. Ciao, Marc 'BlackJack' Rintsch -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
RE: Python Written in C?
On 20 jul, 19:50, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I'm just learning about Python now and it sounds interesting. But I just read (on the Wiki page) that mainstream Python was written in C. That's what I was searching for: Python was written in what other language? See, my concern was something like: OK, if Python is so hot, then, hopefully someone is writing it in assembly language for each MPU chip out there. Otherwise, if, say, they've written it in C#, then it looks like the REAL, generally useful language to learn is C# and Python is akin to Visual Basic or something: a specialty languagewhereas REAL WORLD programmers who want to be generally useful go and learn C#. So I was suspecting the Python compiler or interpreter is written in a .. if Python is so hot.. Python represents progress not the ultimate goal. Thank goodness we are continuing to learn from past mistakes. All compilers and interpreters started out being written in another language. You do not help us by stating the obvious. This is even true of the interpreter in your own brain that processes English. IMHO The latter still has some bugs in it. ;-) -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Python Written in C?
Fredrik Lundh wrote: rynt wrote: You're either --- A. A Troll B. A young, immature programmer trying to show off or C. A total idiot. you forgot the All of the above choice. Or Aspiring Comic. This is certain one of the more entertaining troll posts we have had ;-). -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Python Written in C?
mk wrote: Seriously, though, would there be any advantage in re-implementing Python in e.g. C++? Considered and rejected by Guido and the CPython developer crew. Anyone who wants C++Python is free to make one, just as people have done JavePython (Jython), C#Python, (IonPython), PythonPython (PyPy), and compiled-CPython (multiple). Not that current implementation is bad, anything but, but if you're not careful, the fact that lists are implemented as C arrays can bite your rear from time to time (it recently bit mine while using lxml). Suppose C++ re-implementation used some other data structure (like linked list, possibly with twists like having an array containing pointers to 1st linked list elements to speed lookups up), which would be a bit slower on average perhaps, but it would behave better re deletion? This is a data structure issue, not a language issue. The tradeoffs for practical implementation include code-length, code-complexity, code-fragility, and ease of cross-platform compilation as well as classical time and space issues. tjr -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Python Written in C?
On Mon, 21 Jul 2008 03:18:01 +0200, Michiel Overtoom [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Many major text/word processing programs (Emacs, vi, MS-Word) are also written in C. I thought Emacs was written in Lisp. DaveM -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Python Written in C?
On Jul 21, 8:26 am, Johannes Bauer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Mensanator schrieb: You want cool? THIS is cool: j = ((invert(xyz[1]-xyz[0],xyz[1]**(k-1))*(xyz[1]**(k-1)-prev_gen[2])) % xyz[1]**(k-1))/xyz[1]**(k-2) You call it cool, I call it NameError: name 'invert' is not defined. It is when you do: from gmpy import * That single line wasn't the whole program. What's cool is that it IS a single line, that does answers with 5 decimal digits without breaking a sweat. Sure, you can use GMP with C (and I've done it). But it's nothing like doing it in Python. Regards, Johannes -- Wer etwas kritisiert muss es noch lange nicht selber besser können. Es reicht zu wissen, daß andere es besser können und andere es auch besser machen um einen Vergleich zu bringen. - Wolfgang Gerber in de.sci.electronics [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Python Written in C?
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I'm just learning about Python now and it sounds interesting. But I just read (on the Wiki page) that mainstream Python was written in C. That's what I was searching for: Python was written in what other language? Well, yes, the interpreter and a handful of the core modules are written in C. However, most of Python -- especially the cool bits -- aren't written in C. They're written in ... Python! -- Teiresias -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Python Written in C?
On Mon, Jul 21, 2008 at 3:53 PM, DaveM [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Mon, 21 Jul 2008 03:18:01 +0200, Michiel Overtoom [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Many major text/word processing programs (Emacs, vi, MS-Word) are also written in C. I thought Emacs was written in Lisp. Large parts of Emacs are indeed implemented in Emacs Lisp. There's are some core functions implemented in C. MS-Word, afaik, had very substantial parts written in Visual Basic. Tom DaveM -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Python Written in C?
On Jul 20, 9:18 pm, Michiel Overtoom [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: . Many major text/word processing programs (Emacs, vi, MS-Word) are also written in C. Does that mean you should do all your text processing in C? Well, actually, as a COBOL geezer I should not complain about Python. Rumor had it that the COMPUTE statement in COBOL invoked FORTRAN arithmetic modules. Yes, real programmers DO write in FORTRAN! Frankly, I say screw not only object-oriented programming but structured programming as well. I think someone should write a compiler, Revenge of BASIC. It would have good old REMs, FOR...TO...NEXTs, GOSUBS, GOTOs, etc. Standard libraries of subroutines, and/or Copy Libraries of source code, could handle switching to new screens or forms, placement of objects, alteration of characteristics of all these, detection of mouse and keyboard actions, graphics, sound, placement of HTML code, EVERYTHING! If anyone wants to write this compiler, they should probably do it in Python. Make it open source, of course. I'm waiting! -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
RE: Python Written in C?
Fredrik Lundh wrote: rynt wrote: You're either --- A. A Troll B. A young, immature programmer trying to show off or C. A total idiot. you forgot the All of the above choice. I read it as an inclusive or. Tim Delaney -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Python Written in C?
it's clear to me that the perfect language should exist a priori, coming to being causa sui. Having to actually implement a language is disgusting and unnatural. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Python Written in C?
On Jul 20, 6:50 pm, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: So I was suspecting the Python compiler or interpreter is written in a REAL language like C#. So, Wiki says it's written in C! It's almost as if it were an intentional trick...write your own, new language in an OLD, real world language that is passe. Compile it into executable modules of course, so it is a real, working compiler, alright. But the SOURCE is some old, high level language which no one wants to use anymore! So now you've got a hot new language package and no one can say well, it is written in, the SOURCE code is written in, a REAL language. No, it's not! The source is some outdated language and compiler and no one is going to prefer learning THAT to learning your hot new language! Young people these days... I will just answer using one of old Microsoft's ads: My compiler compiled yours. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Python Written in C?
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I'm just learning about Python now and it sounds interesting. But I just read (on the Wiki page) that mainstream Python was written in C. That's what I was searching for: Python was written in what other language? See, my concern was something like: OK, if Python is so hot, then, hopefully someone is writing it in assembly language for each MPU chip out there. Otherwise, if, say, they've written it in C#, then it looks like the REAL, generally useful language to learn is C# and Python is akin to Visual Basic or something: a specialty languagewhereas REAL WORLD programmers who want to be generally useful go and learn C#. So I was suspecting the Python compiler or interpreter is written in a REAL language like C#. So, Wiki says it's written in C! It's almost as if it were an intentional trick...write your own, new language in an OLD, real world language that is passe. Compile it into executable modules of course, so it is a real, working compiler, alright. But the SOURCE is some old, high level language which no one wants to use anymore! So now you've got a hot new language package and no one can say well, it is written in, the SOURCE code is written in, a REAL language. No, it's not! The source is some outdated language and compiler and no one is going to prefer learning THAT to learning your hot new language! I'm not dissing Python, here. Just noting that, if it is written in C, that throws a curve at me in trying to balance the value of learning Python vs. some other major language. SPSS (was and may still be) written in Fortran and the Fortran compiler was written in C. But NOBODY would suggest that you try to solve the problems that SPSS is used for in C. You talk about writing it in assembly language for each MPU chip. Actually it is even better than that. We now have these modern inventions, called compilers that do that type of work for us. They translate high level instructions, not into assembler but into machine language. -Larry -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Python Written in C?
I'm just learning about Python now and it sounds interesting. But I just read (on the Wiki page) that mainstream Python was written in C. That's what I was searching for: Python was written in what other language? See, my concern was something like: OK, if Python is so hot, then, hopefully someone is writing it in assembly language for each MPU chip out there. Otherwise, if, say, they've written it in C#, then it looks like the REAL, generally useful language to learn is C# and Python is akin to Visual Basic or something: a specialty languagewhereas REAL WORLD programmers who want to be generally useful go and learn C#. So I was suspecting the Python compiler or interpreter is written in a REAL language like C#. So, Wiki says it's written in C! It's almost as if it were an intentional trick...write your own, new language in an OLD, real world language that is passe. Compile it into executable modules of course, so it is a real, working compiler, alright. But the SOURCE is some old, high level language which no one wants to use anymore! So now you've got a hot new language package and no one can say well, it is written in, the SOURCE code is written in, a REAL language. No, it's not! The source is some outdated language and compiler and no one is going to prefer learning THAT to learning your hot new language! I'm not dissing Python, here. Just noting that, if it is written in C, that throws a curve at me in trying to balance the value of learning Python vs. some other major language. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Python Written in C?
On Jul 21, 8:50 am, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I'm not dissing Python, here. Just noting that, if it is written in C, that throws a curve at me in trying to balance the value of learning Python vs. some other major language. The advantage of Python over C - to me - is in the higher order abstractions it provides, not in pointless discussions of purity. Even better, Python allows me to -mix- both C Python together, to take advantage of the strengths of each as appropriate. Try writing something of complexity in Python. Then write the same thing in C. -Then- make your decision which you prefer. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Python Written in C?
On Jul 20, 5:50�pm, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I'm just learning about Python now and it sounds interesting. But I just read (on the Wiki page) that mainstream Python was written in C. That's what I was searching for: Python was written in what other language? See, my concern was something like: OK, if Python is so hot, then, hopefully someone is writing it in assembly language for each MPU chip out there. Otherwise, if, say, they've written it in C#, then it looks like the REAL, generally useful language to learn is C# and Python is akin to Visual Basic or something: a specialty languagewhereas REAL WORLD programmers who want to be generally useful go and learn C#. Python is for people who want to program, not REAL WORLD programmers. So I was suspecting the Python compiler or interpreter is written in a REAL language like C#. So, Wiki says it's written in C! It's almost as if it were an intentional trick...write your own, new language in an OLD, real world language that is passe. Compile it into executable modules of course, so it is a real, working compiler, alright. But the SOURCE is some old, high level language C isn't a high level language, that's part of its problem. which no one wants to use anymore! So now you've got a hot new language package and no one can say well, it is written in, the SOURCE code is written in, a REAL language. No, it's not! The source is some outdated language and compiler and no one is going to prefer learning THAT to learning your hot new language! I'm not dissing Python, here. Yes, you are. Just noting that, if it is written in C, that throws a curve at me in trying to balance the value of learning Python vs. some other major language. Then go learn C, nobody's stopping you. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Python Written in C?
In article [EMAIL PROTECTED], Mensanator [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: C isn't a high level language, that's part of its problem. C is the highest level assembler language I've ever used. And I've used a few. It really is cool that you can add two 32-bit integers and not have to worry about all those carry bits. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Python Written in C?
On Jul 21, 8:50 am, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I'm just learning about Python now and it sounds interesting. But I just read (on the Wiki page) that mainstream Python was written in C. That's what I was searching for: Python was written in what other language? See, my concern was something like: OK, if Python is so hot, then, hopefully someone is writing it in assembly language for each MPU chip out there. Why do that, when gcc has a code generator for just about every MPU chip out there? Otherwise, if, say, they've written it in C#, then it looks like the REAL, generally useful language to learn is C# A bit of a non sequitur and C# is available on how many different MPU chips? and Python is akin to Visual Basic chuckle/ or something: a specialty language whereas REAL WORLD programmers who want to be generally useful go and learn C#. ? So I was suspecting the Python compiler or interpreter is written in a REAL language like C#. So, Wiki says it's written in C! It's almost as if it were an intentional trick...write your own, new language in an OLD, real world language that is passe. Compile it into executable modules of course, so it is a real, working compiler, alright. But the SOURCE is some old, high level language which no one wants to use anymore! Nobody wants to use C any more? So now you've got a hot new language package and no one can say well, it is written in, the SOURCE code is written in, a REAL language. No, it's not! The source is some outdated language and compiler and no one is going to prefer learning THAT to learning your hot new language! I'm not dissing Python, here. Just noting that, if it is written in C, that throws a curve at me in trying to balance the value of learning Python vs. some other major language. It should be sublimely irrelevant to most people learning LanguageX what language LanguageX is written in. Some other implementations of Python: PyPy (written in Python), Jython (written in Java) and IronPython (written in C#). -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Python Written in C?
On Jul 20, 6:50 pm, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I'm not dissing Python, here. Just noting that, if it is written in C, that throws a curve at me in trying to balance the value of learning Python vs. some other major language. I somehow doubt the Python community will feel much of a loss if you decide to learn some other language. Carl Banks -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Python Written in C?
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I'm just learning about Python now and it sounds interesting. But I just read (on the Wiki page) that mainstream Python was written in C. That's what I was searching for: Python was written in what other language? Well, yes, the interpreter and a handful of the core modules are written in C. However, most of Python -- especially the cool bits -- aren't written in C. They're written in ... Python! -- Teiresias -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Python Written in C?
Giveitawhril wrote... REAL WORLD programmers who want to be generally useful go and learn C#. No: Real programmers first eat a quiche and then return to their Pascal programming. But the SOURCE is some old, high level language which no one wants to use anymore! C is alive and kicking. Every language has its place. Plus, there exists implementations of Python written in Python itself; see PyPy: http://codespeak.net/pypy/dist/pypy/doc/home.html Just noting that, if it is written in C, that throws a curve at me in trying to balance the value of learning Python vs. some other major language. Many major text/word processing programs (Emacs, vi, MS-Word) are also written in C. Does that mean you should do all your text processing in C? Greetings, -- The ability of the OSS process to collect and harness the collective IQ of thousands of individuals across the Internet is simply amazing. - Vinod Vallopillil http://www.catb.org/~esr/halloween/halloween4.html -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Python Written in C?
On Sun, Jul 20, 2008 at 9:18 PM, Michiel Overtoom [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Giveitawhril wrote... REAL WORLD programmers who want to be generally useful go and learn C#. No: Real programmers first eat a quiche and then return to their Pascal programming. Bah, new-fangled languages like Pascal... Real programmers write Fortran. But the SOURCE is some old, high level language which no one wants to use anymore! C is alive and kicking. Every language has its place. Plus, there exists implementations of Python written in Python itself; see PyPy: http://codespeak.net/pypy/dist/pypy/doc/home.html Just noting that, if it is written in C, that throws a curve at me in trying to balance the value of learning Python vs. some other major language. Many major text/word processing programs (Emacs, vi, MS-Word) are also written in C. Does that mean you should do all your text processing in C? Don't you? /snark -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Python Written in C?
On Jul 20, 7:37�pm, Roy Smith [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: In article [EMAIL PROTECTED], �Mensanator [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: C isn't a high level language, that's part of its problem. C is the highest level assembler language Isn't that like bragging about being the smartest kid on the short bus? I've ever used. �And I've used a few. �It really is cool that you can add two 32-bit integers and not have to worry about all those carry bits. Carry bits? Who worries about carry bits when you have unlimited precision arithmetic? You want cool? THIS is cool: j = ((invert(xyz[1]-xyz[0],xyz[1]**(k-1))*(xyz[1]**(k-1)-prev_gen[2])) % xyz[1]**(k-1))/xyz[1]**(k-2) -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Python Written in C?
Carry bits? Who worries about carry bits when you have unlimited precision arithmetic? You want cool? THIS is cool: j = ((invert(xyz[1]-xyz[0],xyz[1]**(k-1))*(xyz[1]**(k-1)-prev_gen[2])) % xyz[1]**(k-1))/xyz[1]**(k-2) You call that cool. I call it unreadable. -Steve Johnson -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Python Written in C?
On 2008-07-21, Dan Upton [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: REAL WORLD programmers who want to be generally useful go and learn C#. No: Real programmers first eat a quiche and then return to their Pascal programming. Bah, new-fangled languages like Pascal... Real programmers write Fortran. Using punch-cards and paper-tape. Real programmers can edit their programs with a pointy stick and some home-made sticky-tape. -- Grant Edwards grante Yow! While I'm in at LEVITTOWN I thought I'd visi.comlike to see the NUCLEAR FAMILY!! -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Python Written in C?
On Sun, Jul 20, 2008 at 5:06 PM, Grant Edwards [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 2008-07-21, Dan Upton [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Using punch-cards and paper-tape. Real programmers can edit their programs with a pointy stick and some home-made sticky-tape. Doesn't everyone know that REAL programmers use butterflies. http://xkcd.com/378/ -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Python Written in C?
On Jul 20, 10:05�pm, Stephen Johnson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Carry bits? Who worries about carry bits when you have unlimited precision arithmetic? You want cool? THIS is cool: j = ((invert(xyz[1]-xyz[0],xyz[1]**(k-1))*(xyz[1]**(k-1)-prev_gen[2])) % xyz[1]**(k-1))/xyz[1]**(k-2) You call that cool. I call it unreadable. Ok, but not in the sense that something like Scheme is unreadable as this is nothing but algebra (albeit complicaed). -Steve Johnson -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Python Written in C?
On Sun, Jul 20, 2008 at 11:51 PM, Mensanator [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Jul 20, 10:05�pm, Stephen Johnson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Carry bits? Who worries about carry bits when you have unlimited precision arithmetic? You want cool? THIS is cool: j = ((invert(xyz[1]-xyz[0],xyz[1]**(k-1))*(xyz[1]**(k-1)-prev_gen[2])) % xyz[1]**(k-1))/xyz[1]**(k-2) You call that cool. I call it unreadable. Ok, but not in the sense that something like Scheme is unreadable as this is nothing but algebra (albeit complicaed). Scheme doesn't *have* to be unreadable... any more unreadable than any other language when poorly documented/formatted, anyway. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Python Written in C?
Mensanator wrote: On Jul 20, 7:37�pm, Roy Smith [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: In article [EMAIL PROTECTED], �Mensanator [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: C isn't a high level language, that's part of its problem. C is the highest level assembler language Isn't that like bragging about being the smartest kid on the short bus? I've ever used. �And I've used a few. �It really is cool that you can add two 32-bit integers and not have to worry about all those carry bits. Carry bits? Who worries about carry bits when you have unlimited precision arithmetic? You want cool? Perhaps you missed the wonderful humor in Roy's post. It was rather brilliant. Sorry you missed it. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Python Written in C?
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I'm not dissing Python, here. Just noting that, if it is written in C, that throws a curve at me in trying to balance the value of learning Python vs. some other major language. Definitely one of the most non-sequitor statements I have ever heard. Actually your entire post doesn't make much sense. Maybe you are a brother bot to castropini? Perhaps a less-trained one, although none of castropini's posts seem to make sense either. The AI needs a bit of work. I am very confused over your incoherent ramblings about C# being some how more real than C, or Python, or Visual Basic, or any other language. I fail to grasp what connection the syntax of a language has to do with anything being real or not. You first say you hope someone was writing optimized assembly for python on the different platforms (I'm not familiar with the acronym MPU.) and then go on to say it should have been written with C#. I'm confused as to what C# has to do with optimized, platform-specific assembly. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Python Written in C?
I think your mixing things up. Even modern C compiler are mostly written in some other high level language. See GCC, for instance: it's mostly written in C. Many languages are made for build other major systems: * C was made in order to ease the build of Unix * Ada was made in order to ease the build of Air Traffic Control Systems. * and so on... On the other hand, Python's language features are, in a way, orthogonal to those of the underlying language in which Python *may* be implemented (take a look at PyPy: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PyPy). I mean, I really don't care how Python mappings are implemented in C. What I care about is that I think in terms of (key, value) mappings, regardless of how lookups, insertions, deletions, and so are made internally. In C, I would have to resort to implement a hash table or so. Let's summarize: Python is a *new* language. C was the option to make it happen, there are others. Manuel. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I'm just learning about Python now and it sounds interesting. But I just read (on the Wiki page) that mainstream Python was written in C. That's what I was searching for: Python was written in what other language? See, my concern was something like: OK, if Python is so hot, then, hopefully someone is writing it in assembly language for each MPU chip out there. Otherwise, if, say, they've written it in C#, then it looks like the REAL, generally useful language to learn is C# and Python is akin to Visual Basic or something: a specialty languagewhereas REAL WORLD programmers who want to be generally useful go and learn C#. So I was suspecting the Python compiler or interpreter is written in a REAL language like C#. So, Wiki says it's written in C! It's almost as if it were an intentional trick...write your own, new language in an OLD, real world language that is passe. Compile it into executable modules of course, so it is a real, working compiler, alright. But the SOURCE is some old, high level language which no one wants to use anymore! So now you've got a hot new language package and no one can say well, it is written in, the SOURCE code is written in, a REAL language. No, it's not! The source is some outdated language and compiler and no one is going to prefer learning THAT to learning your hot new language! I'm not dissing Python, here. Just noting that, if it is written in C, that throws a curve at me in trying to balance the value of learning Python vs. some other major language. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Python Written in C?
On Jul 20, 11:08 pm, Dan Upton [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Sun, Jul 20, 2008 at 11:51 PM, Mensanator [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Jul 20, 10:05�pm, Stephen Johnson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Carry bits? Who worries about carry bits when you have unlimited precision arithmetic? You want cool? THIS is cool: j = ((invert(xyz[1]-xyz[0],xyz[1]**(k-1))*(xyz[1]**(k-1)-prev_gen[2])) % xyz[1]**(k-1))/xyz[1]**(k-2) You call that cool. I call it unreadable. Ok, but not in the sense that something like Scheme is unreadable as this is nothing but algebra (albeit complicaed). Scheme doesn't *have* to be unreadable... any more unreadable than any other language when poorly documented/formatted, anyway. When I needed to whip up a variation on Ulam's Spiral recently, I went and got the Scheme version I wrote 4 years ago when I briefly toyed with Scheme and thought I'd just translate the plotting part to Python. Couldn't make any sense of it and ended up doing the Python version with Turtle Graphics. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Python Written in C?
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I'm just learning about Python now and it sounds interesting. But I just read (on the Wiki page) that mainstream Python was written in C. That's what I was searching for: Python was written in what other language? See, my concern was something like: OK, if Python is so hot, then, hopefully someone is writing it in assembly language for each MPU chip out there. ... No one writes compilers in assembly language. Most people don't even write assemblers in assembly language. So I was suspecting the Python compiler or interpreter is written in a REAL language like C#. So, Wiki says it's written in C! It's almost as if it were an intentional trick...write your own, new language in an OLD, real world language that is passe. You seem to believe that, because YOU are just learning about Python, that necessarily means that Python itself is new. That is incorrect. Python was originally conceived and developed in 1990. Anders Hejlsberg, who designed C#, was still at Borland at that time, and had not even created Delphi yet. C++ was still many years away from becoming an ISO standard. I'm not dissing Python, here. Just noting that, if it is written in C, that throws a curve at me in trying to balance the value of learning Python vs. some other major language. I would say you have a very strange criteria for deciding whether a language is worth learning. -- Tim Roberts, [EMAIL PROTECTED] Providenza Boekelheide, Inc. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Python Written in C?
Grant Edwards wrote: On 2008-07-21, Dan Upton [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: REAL WORLD programmers who want to be generally useful go and learn C#. No: Real programmers first eat a quiche and then return to their Pascal programming. Bah, new-fangled languages like Pascal... Real programmers write Fortran. Using punch-cards and paper-tape. Real programmers can edit their programs with a pointy stick and some home-made sticky-tape. Bah. Butterflies! http://xkcd.com/378/ -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
