Re: C interpreter in Lisp/scheme/python
In article icqj46lnoaqkdr5igvqi9so62i30cac...@4ax.com, gneun...@comcast.net says... I don't think it's accurate to say that [some] experts really scorn newbies, but I do agree that newbies are occasionally mistreated. One thing newbies have to realize is that on Usenet you are quite likely to be talking to people who were there at the beginning and, of necessity, are largely self educated in whatever the subject matter might be. Many - I'd even say most - are happy to clarify understanding and help with complicated problems, but there is a general expectation that newbies have some basic research skills and that they have tried to solve their problem before asking for help. Unfortunately, there is a small percentage of people who think Usenet and other online forums are for answering homework questions or for digging out of a jam at work. Getting help depends a lot on how the question is asked: strident pleas for quick help or demands for an answer are immediate red flags, but so are questions that begin with X is crap, why can't I do ... and even seemingly polite questions that are vague or unfocused (possibly indicating little or no thought behind them) or posts which are directed to a large number of groups (such as this thread we're in now). And, of course, in the language forums, drawing comparisons to non-subject languages is generally considered rude except when done to illustrate a relevant discussion point. Introducing irrelevant comparisons, deliberately proselytizing X in a Y group or doing a lot of complaining about the subject language is bound to attract disdain. As the Internet has grown, the absolute number of people in that small percentage has grown as well. A newbie can simply be unlucky enough to ask a question at the wrong time. If there has been a recent rash of problem posts then experts may accidentally respond negatively to a legitimate question. Of course, there are cross-cultural issues too. Many of the technical groups are English-language. English, even when polite, can seem harsh and/or abrupt to non-native speakers. On the whole, moderated groups are more conducive to helping newbies because the moderator(s) filter obvious red flag posts. And, finally, newbies themselves should realize that experts are donating time to answer questions and do get frustrated answering the same questions over and over. They should not be offended by cold responses that direct them to FAQs or that just give links to study material. Newbies who need hand-holding or warm welcoming responses filled with detail should go find a tutor. ... you have the bad professors who are freaks (probably they have a lot of problems at home, their wives screwing all the males on the block, daughters drug addicts etc) and want to take their hatred out on you, Unquestionably, there are experts who need their dosages adjusted. But the same can be said for some percentage of other users too. OTOH, newbies often aren't in the position to know who is an expert ... obviously, anyone able to correctly answer their question knows more about that specific issue. That doesn't necessarily qualify the responder as an expert. Some people get defensive at the edges of their comfort zones. Just some thoughts. YMMV. George Yes I agree, you expressed the thought better than I did. Then let's not go on with this thread any further and let the newsgroups carry on programming language support and discussions. Thanks -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: C interpreter in Lisp/scheme/python
In article 16a7e301-2e85-47eb-971e-79acc4e07...@b35g2000yqi. googlegroups.com, gnuist...@gmail.com says... This makes some sense. He replied on the newsgroup in a lengthy post that there are sufficient resources out there giving hint that no one need help me out. Then I was called lazy in one email and tersely given JUST the last name of an author who has many books each many 100s pages, when I asked for a relevant book, as if i am a scholar in the field, although he did spend lots of words on irrelevant and unbeneficial things which diminished my enthusiasm. Now, I find out from you that he has/had a business concern or interest in a company that is writing/wrote lisp interpreter in C. Correct me if I am making an error. I dont want to think deprecatingly of any good soul but this is what i experienced. No, you're not making a bad judgement. He's not the only one who treats newcomers with disrespect and scorn. Unfortunately many so-called experts in the field look down on newbies and mistreat them (in any programming language forum), forgetting in the process that they were also at a certain time newbies until someone gentle and nice enough teachers took the trouble to educate them. On the other hand there are less neurotic experts out there who are glad to help out someone learning. It's like in some universities, you have the bad professors who are freaks (probably they have a lot of problems at home, their wives screwing all the males on the block, daughters drug addicts etc) and want to take their hatred out on you, and you have the good and mentally stable professors who actually deserve their title. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: C interpreter in Lisp/scheme/python
On Fri, 23 Jul 2010 15:10:16 +0200, francogrex fra...@grex.org wrote: Unfortunately many so-called experts in the field look down on newbies and mistreat them (in any programming language forum), forgetting in the process that they were also at a certain time newbies until some gentle and nice enough teachers took the trouble to educate them. I don't think it's accurate to say that [some] experts really scorn newbies, but I do agree that newbies are occasionally mistreated. One thing newbies have to realize is that on Usenet you are quite likely to be talking to people who were there at the beginning and, of necessity, are largely self educated in whatever the subject matter might be. Many - I'd even say most - are happy to clarify understanding and help with complicated problems, but there is a general expectation that newbies have some basic research skills and that they have tried to solve their problem before asking for help. Unfortunately, there is a small percentage of people who think Usenet and other online forums are for answering homework questions or for digging out of a jam at work. Getting help depends a lot on how the question is asked: strident pleas for quick help or demands for an answer are immediate red flags, but so are questions that begin with X is crap, why can't I do ... and even seemingly polite questions that are vague or unfocused (possibly indicating little or no thought behind them) or posts which are directed to a large number of groups (such as this thread we're in now). And, of course, in the language forums, drawing comparisons to non-subject languages is generally considered rude except when done to illustrate a relevant discussion point. Introducing irrelevant comparisons, deliberately proselytizing X in a Y group or doing a lot of complaining about the subject language is bound to attract disdain. As the Internet has grown, the absolute number of people in that small percentage has grown as well. A newbie can simply be unlucky enough to ask a question at the wrong time. If there has been a recent rash of problem posts then experts may accidentally respond negatively to a legitimate question. Of course, there are cross-cultural issues too. Many of the technical groups are English-language. English, even when polite, can seem harsh and/or abrupt to non-native speakers. On the whole, moderated groups are more conducive to helping newbies because the moderator(s) filter obvious red flag posts. And, finally, newbies themselves should realize that experts are donating time to answer questions and do get frustrated answering the same questions over and over. They should not be offended by cold responses that direct them to FAQs or that just give links to study material. Newbies who need hand-holding or warm welcoming responses filled with detail should go find a tutor. ... you have the bad professors who are freaks (probably they have a lot of problems at home, their wives screwing all the males on the block, daughters drug addicts etc) and want to take their hatred out on you, Unquestionably, there are experts who need their dosages adjusted. But the same can be said for some percentage of other users too. OTOH, newbies often aren't in the position to know who is an expert ... obviously, anyone able to correctly answer their question knows more about that specific issue. That doesn't necessarily qualify the responder as an expert. Some people get defensive at the edges of their comfort zones. Just some thoughts. YMMV. George -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: C interpreter in Lisp/scheme/python
On Wed, Jul 14, 2010 at 11:17 PM, bolega gnuist...@gmail.com wrote: This makes some sense. He replied on the newsgroup in a lengthy post that there are sufficient resources out there giving hint that no one need help me out. I have no record of such a post. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: C interpreter in Lisp/scheme/python
On 2010-07-15, bolega gnuist...@gmail.com wrote: This makes some sense. He replied on the newsgroup in a lengthy post that there are sufficient resources out there giving hint that no one need help me out. Then I was called lazy in one email and tersely given JUST the last name of an author who has many books each many 100s pages, when I asked for a relevant book, as if i am a scholar in the field, although he did spend lots of words on irrelevant and unbeneficial things which diminished my enthusiasm. If you found those irrelevant and unbeneficial, then while I agree that he may have been wasting his time, he would have been wasting it even worse trying to walk you through the technical material when you're clearly not currently at a stage where you are ready to learn anyway. Now, I find out from you that he has/had a business concern or interest in a company that is writing/wrote lisp interpreter in C. Correct me if I am making an error. I dont want to think deprecatingly of any good soul but this is what i experienced. If you are trying to imply that he was acting in some unethical way, you have further cemented the notion that trying to talk to you is a waste of anyone's time. *plonk* -s -- Copyright 2010, all wrongs reversed. Peter Seebach / usenet-nos...@seebs.net http://www.seebs.net/log/ -- lawsuits, religion, and funny pictures http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fair_Game_(Scientology) -- get educated! -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: C interpreter in Lisp/scheme/python
On Jun 20, 9:31 pm, Richard Fateman fate...@cs.berkeley.edu wrote: Define Macro wrote: On Jun 13, 7:07 pm, bolega gnuist...@gmail.com wrote: I am trying to compare LISP/Scheme/Python for their expressiveness. For this, I propose a vanilla C interpreter. I have seen a book which writes C interpreter in C. The criteria would be the small size and high readability of the code. Are there already answers anywhere ? Sure. Lots of texts on compilers provide exercises which, in one way or another suggest how to write an interpreter and perhaps a compiler too for some language. Anyone taking a course on compilers is likely to have followed such exercises in order to pass the course. Some instructors are enlightened enough to allow students to pick the implementation language. Ask any such instructor. Beware, he does not tell the readers the financial details. This is what he wrote to me by email. quote I would be willing to meet with you here in Berkeley to educate you on these matters at a consulting rate of $850 per hour, with a minimum of 8 hours. RJF /quote I think you will find that many people use a packaged parser-generator which eliminates much of the choice-of-language difference. Do you like Bison, Yacc, Antlr, or one of the many parser generators in Lisp, python, etc. My own experience is that in comparing Lisp to C, students end up with smaller and better interpreters and compilers, faster. I don't know about python vs C for sure, but I suspect python wins. As for python vs Lisp, I don't know. RJF -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: C interpreter in Lisp/scheme/python
On Tue, Jul 13, 2010 at 11:01 PM, bolega gnuist...@gmail.com wrote: On Jun 20, 9:31 pm, Richard Fateman fate...@cs.berkeley.edu wrote: Define Macro wrote: On Jun 13, 7:07 pm, bolega gnuist...@gmail.com wrote: I am trying to compare LISP/Scheme/Python for their expressiveness. For this, I propose a vanilla C interpreter. I have seen a book which writes C interpreter in C. The criteria would be the small size and high readability of the code. Are there already answers anywhere ? Sure. Lots of texts on compilers provide exercises which, in one way or another suggest how to write an interpreter and perhaps a compiler too for some language. Anyone taking a course on compilers is likely to have followed such exercises in order to pass the course. Some instructors are enlightened enough to allow students to pick the implementation language. Ask any such instructor. Beware, he does not tell the readers the financial details. This is what he wrote to me by email. quote I would be willing to meet with you here in Berkeley to educate you on these matters at a consulting rate of $850 per hour, with a minimum of 8 hours. RJF /quote He's Berkeley's former CS chair and was implementing lisp before common lisp was a twinkle in anybody's eye. His time is valuable. Geremy Condra -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: C interpreter in Lisp/scheme/python
bolega gnuist...@gmail.com writes: I am trying to compare LISP/Scheme/Python for their expressiveness... Are there already answers anywhere ? How would a gury approach such a project ? These two articles http://page.mi.fu-berlin.de/~prechelt/Biblio/jccpprt_computer2000.pdf http://www.haskell.org/papers/NSWC/jfp.ps about language comparisons (Python is in the first but not the second) might be of interest. If you want to know how to implement C, there is a pretty good book by Hanson and Fraser about LCC, called A Retargetable C Compiler. Basically a code walkthrough of a small C compiler written in C. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: C interpreter in Lisp/scheme/python
On Jul 13, 11:18 pm, geremy condra debat...@gmail.com wrote: On Tue, Jul 13, 2010 at 11:01 PM, bolega gnuist...@gmail.com wrote: On Jun 20, 9:31 pm, Richard Fateman fate...@cs.berkeley.edu wrote: Define Macro wrote: On Jun 13, 7:07 pm, bolega gnuist...@gmail.com wrote: I am trying to compare LISP/Scheme/Python for their expressiveness. For this, I propose a vanilla C interpreter. I have seen a book which writes C interpreter in C. The criteria would be the small size and high readability of the code. Are there already answers anywhere ? Sure. Lots of texts on compilers provide exercises which, in one way or another suggest how to write an interpreter and perhaps a compiler too for some language. Anyone taking a course on compilers is likely to have followed such exercises in order to pass the course. Some instructors are enlightened enough to allow students to pick the implementation language. Ask any such instructor. Beware, he does not tell the readers the financial details. This is what he wrote to me by email. quote I would be willing to meet with you here in Berkeley to educate you on these matters at a consulting rate of $850 per hour, with a minimum of 8 hours. RJF /quote He's Berkeley's former CS chair and was implementing lisp before common lisp was a twinkle in anybody's eye. His time is valuable. Geremy Condra This makes some sense. He replied on the newsgroup in a lengthy post that there are sufficient resources out there giving hint that no one need help me out. Then I was called lazy in one email and tersely given JUST the last name of an author who has many books each many 100s pages, when I asked for a relevant book, as if i am a scholar in the field, although he did spend lots of words on irrelevant and unbeneficial things which diminished my enthusiasm. Now, I find out from you that he has/had a business concern or interest in a company that is writing/wrote lisp interpreter in C. Correct me if I am making an error. I dont want to think deprecatingly of any good soul but this is what i experienced. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: C interpreter in Lisp/scheme/python
On Jul 13, 11:35 pm, Paul Rubin no.em...@nospam.invalid wrote: bolega gnuist...@gmail.com writes: I am trying to compare LISP/Scheme/Python for their expressiveness... Are there already answers anywhere ? How would a gury approach such a project ? These two articles http://page.mi.fu-berlin.de/~prechelt/Biblio/jccpprt_computer2000.pdf http://www.haskell.org/papers/NSWC/jfp.ps about language comparisons (Python is in the first but not the second) might be of interest. If you want to know how to implement C, there is a pretty good book by Hanson and Fraser about LCC, called A Retargetable C Compiler. Basically a code walkthrough of a small C compiler written in C. I have decided to limit my goal to tyni LISP interpreter in C because its a smaller and simpler language. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: C interpreter in Lisp/scheme/python
On Wed, Jul 14, 2010 at 10:17 PM, bolega gnuist...@gmail.com wrote: On Jul 13, 11:18 pm, geremy condra debat...@gmail.com wrote: On Tue, Jul 13, 2010 at 11:01 PM, bolega gnuist...@gmail.com wrote: On Jun 20, 9:31 pm, Richard Fateman fate...@cs.berkeley.edu wrote: Define Macro wrote: On Jun 13, 7:07 pm, bolega gnuist...@gmail.com wrote: I am trying to compare LISP/Scheme/Python for their expressiveness. For this, I propose a vanilla C interpreter. I have seen a book which writes C interpreter in C. The criteria would be the small size and high readability of the code. Are there already answers anywhere ? Sure. Lots of texts on compilers provide exercises which, in one way or another suggest how to write an interpreter and perhaps a compiler too for some language. Anyone taking a course on compilers is likely to have followed such exercises in order to pass the course. Some instructors are enlightened enough to allow students to pick the implementation language. Ask any such instructor. Beware, he does not tell the readers the financial details. This is what he wrote to me by email. quote I would be willing to meet with you here in Berkeley to educate you on these matters at a consulting rate of $850 per hour, with a minimum of 8 hours. RJF /quote He's Berkeley's former CS chair and was implementing lisp before common lisp was a twinkle in anybody's eye. His time is valuable. Geremy Condra This makes some sense. He replied on the newsgroup in a lengthy post that there are sufficient resources out there giving hint that no one need help me out. No one does. Your problem is yours to solve. Then I was called lazy in one email and tersely given JUST the last name of an author who has many books each many 100s pages, when I asked for a relevant book, as if i am a scholar in the field, although he did spend lots of words on irrelevant and unbeneficial things which diminished my enthusiasm. Yes, you've failed to take advantage of the resources which have been made available to you, preferring to have other people solve your problem. Sounds like a pretty good working definition of laziness. Now, I find out from you that he has/had a business concern or interest in a company that is writing/wrote lisp interpreter in C. Correct me if I am making an error. You're making an error. Given that there are probably only a handful of people on earth more qualified to teach you anything you'd want to know about this I'd say he's made you an exceptional offer. Expect no better help elsewhere. Geremy Condra -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: C interpreter in Lisp/scheme/python
On 7 July, 17:38, Rivka Miller rivkaumil...@gmail.com wrote: Although C comes with a regex library, C does not come with a regexp library Anyone know what the first initial of L. Peter Deutsch stand for ? Laurence according to wikipedia (search time 2s) -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: C interpreter in Lisp/scheme/python
On 8 July, 08:08, Nick Keighley nick_keighley_nos...@hotmail.com wrote: On 7 July, 17:38, Rivka Miller rivkaumil...@gmail.com wrote: Anyone know what the first initial of L. Peter Deutsch stand for ? Laurence according to wikipedia (search time 2s) oops! He was born Laurence but changed it legally to L. including the dot -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: C interpreter in Lisp/scheme/python
Nick Keighley nick_keighley_nos...@hotmail.com writes: On 8 July, 08:08, Nick Keighley nick_keighley_nos...@hotmail.com wrote: On 7 July, 17:38, Rivka Miller rivkaumil...@gmail.com wrote: Anyone know what the first initial of L. Peter Deutsch stand for ? Laurence according to wikipedia (search time 2s) oops! He was born Laurence but changed it legally to L. including the dot Too bad, Laurence is a nice name. -- __Pascal Bourguignon__ http://www.informatimago.com/ -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: C interpreter in Lisp/scheme/python
On 14 June, 00:07, bolega gnuist...@gmail.com wrote: I am trying to compare LISP/Scheme/Python for their expressiveness. For this, I propose a vanilla C interpreter. I have seen a book which writes C interpreter in C. The criteria would be the small size and high readability of the code. Are there already answers anywhere ? How would a gury approach such a project ? Bolega Probably you want to look at this thread http://groups.google.co.uk/group/comp.lang.lisp/browse_frm/thread/7b1ab36f5d5cce0a/54afe11153025e27?hl=enlnk=gstq=minim#54afe11153025e27 where I specified a toy language Minim (much simpler than C) and the goal was to construct an interpreter for it. Similar problem. Many solutions were given in different languages. The thread is very long. One thing you might look at is whether some sort of lexer/parser is supported in any of your targets. Qi supports a compiler-compiler Qi- YACC that allows you to write in BNF which makes this kind of project much easier. See http://www.lambdassociates.org/Book/page404.htm for an overview Mark -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: C interpreter in Lisp/scheme/python
On Thu, 08 Jul 2010 10:39:45 +0200, p...@informatimago.com (Pascal J. Bourguignon) wrote: Nick Keighley nick_keighley_nos...@hotmail.com writes: Nick Keighley nick_keighley_nos...@hotmail.com wrote: Rivka Miller rivkaumil...@gmail.com wrote: Anyone know what the first initial of L. Peter Deutsch stand for ? Laurence according to wikipedia (search time 2s) oops! He was born Laurence but changed it legally to L. including the dot Too bad, Laurence is a nice name. He probably hates the nickname Larry. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: C interpreter in Lisp/scheme/python
Tim Rentsch t...@alumni.caltech.edu wrote: nanothermite911fbibustards nanothermite911fbibusta...@gmail.com How to make Lisp go faster than C Didier Verna Asking whether Lisp is faster than C is like asking why it's colder in the mountains than it is in the summer. YM warmer. HTH; HAND. Richard -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: C interpreter in Lisp/scheme/python
On Jun 14, 1:07 am, bolega gnuist...@gmail.com wrote: I am trying to compare LISP/Scheme/Python for their expressiveness. For this, I propose a vanilla C interpreter. I have seen a book which writes C interpreter in C. The criteria would be the small size and high readability of the code. Are there already answers anywhere ? How would a gury approach such a project ? Bolega This look like a huge project for an evaluation of expressiveness which result is obvious. Lisp (including Scheme) is more expressive than Python, for many definitions of expressiveness (see for instance http://www.ccs.neu.edu/scheme/pubs/scp91-felleisen.ps.gz if you like academic papers). However, who cares? What matters in everyday life are other things, like the availability of libraries, tools, easy of maintenance, etc. In your proposed project the choice of the parsing library would matter a lot. Writing languages is a domain where Lisp is traditionally strong, so you may find good libraries to help you with the task. My guess is that it would take more or less the same amount of effort both in Python and in Lisp. The place where Lisp has an advantage is writing an *embedded* language: then thanks to macros you could write a *compiled* sublanguage. Doing the same in Python is essentially impossible. Michele Simionato -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: C interpreter in Lisp/scheme/python
On Jun 13, 4:07 pm, bolega gnuist...@gmail.com wrote: I am trying to compare LISP/Scheme/Python for their expressiveness. For this, I propose a vanilla C interpreter. I have seen a book which writes C interpreter in C. The criteria would be the small size and high readability of the code. Are there already answers anywhere ? How would a gury approach such a project ? Bolega You should probably narrow down your project to one. For example, write a LISt Processor Meta Circular Evaluator in C. You can take Paul Graham's rendition as a start and forget about garbage collection. Start with getchar()/putchar() for I/O. Although C comes with a regex library, you probably do not need a regex or parser at all for this. This is the beauty of LISP which is why McCarthy was able to bypass the several man years of effort involved in FORmula TRANslator. Even as a young boy like L. Peter Deutsch was able to write it in assembly for one of the PDP's. You will have go implement an associative array or a symbol-value table probably as a stack or linked list. You will have to decide how you implement the trees, as cons cells or some other method. Dynamic scoping is easy to implement and that is what elisp has. I am not aware of any book that provides implementation of LISP in C and explains it at the same time. This is the extent of help I can provide, someone else can probably help you more. Anyone know what the first initial of L. Peter Deutsch stand for ? Rivka -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: C interpreter in Lisp/scheme/python
On 20 June, 03:48, Tim Rentsch t...@alumni.caltech.edu wrote: nanothermite911fbibustards nanothermite911fbibusta...@gmail.com writes: Asking whether Lisp is faster than C is like asking why it's colder in the mountains than it is in the summer. original Karl Valentin would be colder outside than nighttime but yours is in his sense. Wolfgang -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: C interpreter in Lisp/scheme/python
On Jun 13, 7:07 pm, bolega gnuist...@gmail.com wrote: I am trying to compare LISP/Scheme/Python for their expressiveness. For this, I propose a vanilla C interpreter. I have seen a book which writes C interpreter in C. The criteria would be the small size and high readability of the code. Are there already answers anywhere ? How would a gury approach such a project ? Bolega Maybe instead of full C, you should try something simplified, like Tiny-C (http://primepuzzle.com/tc/) or Arena, or maybe even Pike (some minimal variant thereof). -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: C interpreter in Lisp/scheme/python
nanothermite911fbibustards nanothermite911fbibusta...@gmail.com writes: Probably doesn't meet your intent, but this is a really impressive bit of (whacky) art: Lisp runs faster than C. Once you get more time away from screwing Palestinians, and other false-flags, you will find ideas like these How to make Lisp go faster than C Didier Verna [snip] Asking whether Lisp is faster than C is like asking why it's colder in the mountains than it is in the summer. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: C interpreter in Lisp/scheme/python
In article e1aa09cd-3bcd-4e9b-8f4c-e307a1424...@a2g2000prd.googlegroups.com, bolega gnuist...@gmail.com wrote: I am trying to compare LISP/Scheme/Python for their expressiveness. For this, I propose a vanilla C interpreter. I have seen a book which writes C interpreter in C. The criteria would be the small size and high readability of the code. Are there already answers anywhere ? How would a gury approach such a project ? He would have his 10 year LISP sink in, meditate for 10 days and start from scratch with a typical LISP approach. He would have his 10 year Algol68 sink in, meditate for 10 days and start from scratch with a typical Algol68 approach. (Scheme is not different enough from LISP, to make this interesting. Hey Scheme *is* a dialect of LISP.) He would have his 10 year Python sink in, meditate for 10 days and start from scratch with a typical Python approach. Maybe he would code one to throw away. The outcome would be extremely interesting, but ... Bolega Groetjes Albert -- -- Albert van der Horst, UTRECHT,THE NETHERLANDS Economic growth -- being exponential -- ultimately falters. alb...@spearc.xs4all.nl =n http://home.hccnet.nl/a.w.m.van.der.horst -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: C interpreter in Lisp/scheme/python
answering the OP - didn't show up on c.l.py On Sun, Jun 13, 2010 at 4:07 PM, bolega gnuist...@gmail.com wrote: I am trying to compare LISP/Scheme/Python for their expressiveness. Scheme is actually a lisp, isn't it ? For this, I propose a vanilla C interpreter. I have seen a book which writes C interpreter in C. The criteria would be the small size and high readability of the code. Readability is partly function of the reader, so I fail to see how you define any objective metrics here. Also, small size and high readability can easily conflict with each other. I pretty often rewrite (my own) one-liners to as many lines as necessary to make the code more readable / maintainable. How would a gury approach such a project ? Can't tell. Maybe you should ask one ? -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: C interpreter in Lisp/scheme/python
On Jun 13, 7:07 pm, bolega gnuist...@gmail.com wrote: I am trying to compare LISP/Scheme/Python for their expressiveness. For this, I propose a vanilla C interpreter. I have seen a book which writes C interpreter in C. The criteria would be the small size and high readability of the code. Are there already answers anywhere ? How would a gury approach such a project ? Bolega Holy cow has this gone off topic! To OP - start writing a C context free grammar of a subset of C (arithmetic expressions IMHO are the historical root of C and a good place to start in any case), start writing a parser of a subset of your subset grammar (in a lisp of your chioce - Scheme and CL for instance are going to be pretty much equivalent in this task), and really the rest will be obvious... I'd go that far before posting on the topic again... -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: C interpreter in Lisp/scheme/python
On Sun, Jun 13, 2010 at 4:07 PM, bolega gnuist...@gmail.com wrote: I am trying to compare LISP/Scheme/Python for their expressiveness. Try the programming languages shootout. For this, I propose a vanilla C interpreter. I have seen a book which writes C interpreter in C. Good luck. The criteria would be the small size and high readability of the code. Are there already answers anywhere ? Try the C language standard. How would a gury approach such a project ? They would probably skip it, recognizing that undertaking this project with the goal of comparing two languages was fraught with methodological difficulties and likely to be a complete waste of time. Assuming that by virtue of a wetware bug they did decide to take it on, they would probably start by writing the code and then post their take on the results rather than posting first and waiting in breathless anticipation for the inevitably snarky replies of their inferiors. Geremy Condra -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: C interpreter in Lisp/scheme/python
On 2010-06-13 16:07:54 -0700, bolega gnuist...@gmail.com said: I am trying to compare LISP/Scheme/Python for their expressiveness. For this, I propose a vanilla C interpreter. I have seen a book which writes C interpreter in C. The criteria would be the small size and high readability of the code. Are there already answers anywhere ? How would a gury approach such a project ? Bolega you could read scheme 9 from empty space. you can find it here http://www.t3x.org/ -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: C interpreter in Lisp/scheme/python
On Jun 13, 7:07 pm, bolega gnuist...@gmail.com wrote: I am trying to compare LISP/Scheme/Python for their expressiveness. For this, I propose a vanilla C interpreter. I have seen a book which writes C interpreter in C. The criteria would be the small size and high readability of the code. Are there already answers anywhere ? How would a gury approach such a project ? Probably doesn't meet your intent, but this is a really impressive bit of (whacky) art: http://www.ioccc.org/1996/august.hint and find the code at http://www.ioccc.org/years-spoiler.html under 1996. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: C interpreter in Lisp/scheme/python
On Jun 13, 4:07 pm, bolega gnuist...@gmail.com wrote: I am trying to compare LISP/Scheme/Python for their expressiveness. For this, I propose a vanilla C interpreter. I have seen a book which writes C interpreter in C. The criteria would be the small size and high readability of the code. Are there already answers anywhere ? How would a gury approach such a project ? Bolega Take a look at this When I first got a summer job at MIT’s Project MAC almost 30 years ago, I was delighted to be able to work with the DEC PDP-10 computer, which was more fun to program in assembly language than any other computer, bar none, because of its rich yet tractable set of instructions for performing bit tests, bit masking, field manipulation, and operations on integers. Though the PDP-10 has not been manufactured for quite some years, there remains a thriving cult of enthusiasts who keep old PDP-10 hardware running and who run old PDP-10 software— entire operating systems and their applications—by using personal computers to simulate the PDP-10 instruction set. They even write new software; there is now at least one Web site whose pages are served up by a simulated PDP-10. (Come on, stop laughing—it’s no sillier than keeping antique cars running.) I also enjoyed, in that summer of 1972, reading a brand-new MIT research memo called HAKMEM, a bizarre and eclectic potpourri of technical trivia.1 The subject matter ranged from electrical circuits to number theory, but what intrigued me most was its small catalog of ingenious little programming tricks. Each such gem would typically describe some plausible yet unusual operation on integers or bit strings (such as counting the 1-bits in a word) that could easily be programmed using either a longish fixed sequence of machine instructions or a loop, and then show how the same thing might be done much more cleverly, using just four or three or two carefully chosen instructions whose interactions are not at all obvious until explained or fathomed. For me, devouring these little programming nuggets was like eating peanuts, or rather bonbons—I just couldn’t stop—and there was a certain richness to them, a certain intellectual depth, elegance, even poetry. “Surely,” I thought, “there must be more of these,” and indeed over the years I collected, and in some cases discovered, a few more. “There ought to be a book of them.” I was genuinely thrilled when I saw Hank Warren’s manuscript. He has systematically collected these little programming tricks, organized them thematically, and explained them clearly. While some of them may be described in terms of machine instructions, this is not a book only for assembly language programmers. The subject matter is basic structural relationships among integers and bit strings in a computer and efficient techniques for performing useful operations on them. These techniques are just as useful in the C or Java programming languages as they are in assembly language. Many books on algorithms and data structures teach complicated techniques for sorting and searching, for maintaining hash tables and binary trees, for dealing with records and pointers. They overlook what can be done with very tiny pieces of data—bits and arrays of bits. It is amazing what can be done with just binary addition and subtraction and maybe some bitwise operations; the fact that the carry chain allows a single bit to affect all the bits to its left makes addition a peculiarly powerful data manipulation operation in ways that are not widely appreciated. Yes, there ought to be a book about these techniques. Now it is in your hands, and it’s terrific. If you write optimizing compilers or high- performance code, you must read this book. You otherwise might not use this bag of tricks every single day—but if you find yourself stuck in some situation where you apparently need to loop over the bits in a word, or to perform some operation on integers and it just seems harder to code than it ought, or you really need the inner loop of some integer or bit-fiddly computation to run twice as fast, then this is the place to look. Or maybe you’ll just find yourself reading it straight through out of sheer pleasure. source http://www.hackersdelight.org./foreword.pdf === Standard Disclaimer, nothing personal http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lX18zUp6WPY http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XQapkVCx1HI http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tXJ-k-iOg0M Hey Racist and INcompetent FBI Bustards, where is the ANTHRAX Mailer ? Where are the 4 blackboxes ? Where are the Pentagon Videos ? Why did you release the 5 dancing Israelis compromising the whole 911 investigation ? If the Dubai Police can catch Mossad Murderers and put the videos and Iranian Police can why cant you put the Pentagon Videos ? If Iran police can put the AMERICAN TERRORIST, Riggi and puting on INTERNATIONAL MEDIA a day after catching him without TORTURE, why cant you put the INNOCENT patsies on the MEDIA. Why did you have to LIE
Re: C interpreter in Lisp/scheme/python
Probably doesn't meet your intent, but this is a really impressive bit of (whacky) art: Lisp runs faster than C. Once you get more time away from screwing Palestinians, and other false-flags, you will find ideas like these How to make Lisp go faster than C Didier Verna Abstract Contrary to popular belief, Lisp code can be very ef- cient today: it can run as fast as equivalent C code or even faster in some cases. In this paper, we explain how to tune Lisp code for performance by introducing the proper type declarations, using the appropriate data structures and compiler information. We also explain how e ciency is achieved by the compilers. These techniques are applied to simple image process- ing algorithms in order to demonstrate the announced performance on pixel access and arithmetic operations in both languages. === Standard Disclaimer, nothing personal http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lX18zUp6WPY http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XQapkVCx1HI http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tXJ-k-iOg0M Hey Racist and INcompetent FBI Bustards, where is the ANTHRAX Mailer ? Where are the 4 blackboxes ? Where are the Pentagon Videos ? Why did you release the 5 dancing Israelis compromising the whole 911 investigation ? If the Dubai Police can catch Mossad Murderers and put the videos and Iranian Police can why cant you put the Pentagon Videos ? If Iran police can put the AMERICAN TERRORIST, Riggi and puting on INTERNATIONAL MEDIA a day after catching him without TORTURE, why cant you put the INNOCENT patsies on the MEDIA. Why did you have to LIE about Dr Afiya Siddiqui and torture that Innocent little mother of 3 and smashing the skull of her one child ? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DhMcii8smxk http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0SZ2lxDJmdg There are CRIMINAL cases against CIA CRIMINAL Bustards in Italian courts. FBI bustards paid a penalty of $5.8 million to Steven Hatfill, but only because he was a white. They got away with MURDER of thousands of Non-whites in all parts of the world. Daily 911 news : http://911blogger.com http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tRfhUezbKLw http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x7kGZ3XPEm4 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lX18zUp6WPY -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
