In article hij24v$e7...@panix5.panix.com, Aahz a...@pythoncraft.com wrote:
In article 1b42700d-139a-4653-8669-d4ee2fc48...@r5g2000yqb.googlegroups.com,
ikuta liu ikut...@gmail.com wrote:
Is python not good enough? for google, enhance python performance is
the good way better then choose build Go
2010/1/25 Albert van der Horst alb...@spenarnc.xs4all.nl:
If Go was to compete with anything, they would have give it a name
that was Googleable. ;-)
If they want it Googleable, it will be. ;-)
--
Cheers,
Simon B.
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
On Mon, Jan 25, 2010 at 8:57 AM, Simon Brunning
si...@brunningonline.net wrote:
2010/1/25 Albert van der Horst alb...@spenarnc.xs4all.nl:
If Go was to compete with anything, they would have give it a name
that was Googleable. ;-)
If they want it Googleable, it will be. ;-)
On Jan 12, 7:09 am, ikuta liu ikut...@gmail.com wrote:
Go language try to merge low level, hight level and browser language.
Go uses := for assignment.
This means, to appease the self-righteous indignation of the math
professor who would claim = should mean equality...
...you gotta type a
Phlip wrote:
On Jan 12, 7:09 am, ikuta liu ikut...@gmail.com wrote:
Go language try to merge low level, hight level and browser language.
Go uses := for assignment.
This means, to appease the self-righteous indignation of the math
professor who would claim = should mean equality...
...you
On Mon, Jan 18, 2010 at 8:03 PM, Phlip phlip2...@gmail.com wrote:
This means, to appease the self-righteous indignation of the math
professor who would claim = should mean equality...
Much more likely, this is part of the stated goal of making go very
easy to analyse (to build tools and so
On Jan 18, 6:03 pm, Phlip phlip2...@gmail.com wrote:
On Jan 12, 7:09 am, ikuta liu ikut...@gmail.com wrote:
Go language try to merge low level, hight level and browser language.
Go uses := for assignment.
Except that it doesn't. := is a declaration.
s := foo
is short for
var s string =
On Jan 18, 5:59 am, Anh Hai Trinh anh.hai.tr...@gmail.com wrote:
Go uses := for assignment.
Except that it doesn't. := is a declaration.
Ah, and that's why Go is easy for cheap parsers to rip.
Tx all!
I was formerly too mortified to proceed - now I'm back in the Go camp.
They fixed the
On Mon, 18 Jan 2010 03:03:26 -0800, Phlip wrote:
On Jan 12, 7:09 am, ikuta liu ikut...@gmail.com wrote:
Go language try to merge low level, hight level and browser language.
Go uses := for assignment.
This means, to appease the self-righteous indignation of the math
professor who would
On Mon, 18 Jan 2010 07:37:36 -0800, Phlip wrote:
They fixed the hideous redundancy of Java without the ill-defined scope
issues of Python
Which ill-defined scope issues are you referring to?
--
Steven
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Phlip wrote:
On Jan 12, 7:09 am, ikuta liu ikut...@gmail.com wrote:
Go language try to merge low level, hight level and browser language.
Go uses := for assignment.
This means, to appease the self-righteous indignation of the math
professor who would claim = should mean equality...
...you
Paul Rubin, 17.01.2010 05:06:
David Cournapeau writes:
And certainly, one of the big reason for
the python success is easy interface with C. Maybe interfacing with C
is the real reason for holding back python implementations ?
The CPython/C API is not terrible but it's not all that easy
On 1/12/2010 9:09 PM, ikuta liu wrote:
I'm a little confused.
Is python not good enough?
for google, enhance python performance is the good way better then
choose build Go language?
Go language try to merge low level, hight level and browser language.
Those I'd like to see it on python..
Have
Blog blogtes...@gmail.com wrote:
Have you not heard about the Unladen Swallow project from google?
There's a new PEP coming up which will propose google's codebase to be
merged with Py3k, resulting in superior performance.
This kind of worries me for a number of reasons:
* unladen is _way_
Nobody wrote:
On Fri, 15 Jan 2010 12:34:17 -0800, John Nagle wrote:
Actually, no. It's quite possible to make a Python implementation that
runs fast. It's just that CPython, a naive interpreter, is too primitive
to do it. I was really hoping that Google would put somebody good at
John Nagle wrote:
Nobody wrote:
On Fri, 15 Jan 2010 12:34:17 -0800, John Nagle wrote:
Actually, no. It's quite possible to make a Python
implementation that
runs fast. It's just that CPython, a naive interpreter, is too
primitive
to do it. I was really hoping that Google would put
On Sun, Jan 17, 2010 at 4:17 AM, John Nagle na...@animats.com wrote:
Nobody wrote:
On Fri, 15 Jan 2010 12:34:17 -0800, John Nagle wrote:
Actually, no. It's quite possible to make a Python implementation
that
runs fast. It's just that CPython, a naive interpreter, is too primitive
to
David Cournapeau wrote:
On Sun, Jan 17, 2010 at 4:17 AM, John Nagle na...@animats.com wrote:
Nobody wrote:
On Fri, 15 Jan 2010 12:34:17 -0800, John Nagle wrote:
Actually, no. It's quite possible to make a Python implementation
that
runs fast. It's just that CPython, a naive interpreter,
On Sun, Jan 17, 2010 at 11:43 AM, John Nagle na...@animats.com wrote:
David Cournapeau wrote:
On Sun, Jan 17, 2010 at 4:17 AM, John Nagle na...@animats.com wrote:
Nobody wrote:
On Fri, 15 Jan 2010 12:34:17 -0800, John Nagle wrote:
Actually, no. It's quite possible to make a Python
David Cournapeau courn...@gmail.com writes:
And certainly, one of the big reason for
the python success is easy interface with C. Maybe interfacing with C
is the real reason for holding back python implementations ?
The CPython/C API is not terrible but it's not all that easy to use.
For
On 1/16/2010 10:08 PM, David Cournapeau wrote:
Compilation with global type inference may be a good way to speed up
python, but it is not the only way. Your claim about lookups does seem
to contradict how the various efficient implementations of dynamic
languages work. For example, the V8
Terry Reedy wrote:
On 1/12/2010 10:17 AM, Krister Svanlund wrote:
Their goal of
making Go very fast to compile by machines somewhat conflicts with
Python's goal of being fast to read by humans.
Actually, no. It's quite possible to make a Python implementation that
runs fast. It's just
On Fri, 15 Jan 2010 12:34:17 -0800, John Nagle wrote:
Actually, no. It's quite possible to make a Python implementation that
runs fast. It's just that CPython, a naive interpreter, is too primitive
to do it. I was really hoping that Google would put somebody good at
compilers in charge
On Saturday 16 January 2010 08:01 AM, Nobody wrote:
On Fri, 15 Jan 2010 12:34:17 -0800, John Nagle wrote:
Actually, no. It's quite possible to make a Python implementation that
runs fast. It's just that CPython, a naive interpreter, is too primitive
to do it. I was really hoping
On Jan 13, 12:55 am, a...@pythoncraft.com (Aahz) wrote:
In article 1b42700d-139a-4653-8669-d4ee2fc48...@r5g2000yqb.googlegroups.com,
ikuta liu ikut...@gmail.com wrote:
Is python not good enough? for google, enhance python performance is
the good way better then choose build Go language
...@gmail.com wrote:
Is python not good enough? for google, enhance python performance is
the good way better then choose build Go language?
It is not at all clear that -- despite some comments to the contrary --
the Go developers are intending to compete with Python. =A0Go seems much
more intended
-d4ee2fc48...@r5g2000yqb.googlegroups.=
com,
ikuta liu =A0ikut...@gmail.com wrote:
Is python not good enough? for google, enhance python performance is
the good way better then choose build Go language?
It is not at all clear that -- despite some comments to the contrary --
the Go developers
tanix, 13.01.2010 10:06:
Well, as soon as they restore the braces to identify the code
blocks and provide the functionality of advanced statically
type languages, such as threads, async processing, all synchronization
primitives, garbage collection, events and GUI, i'd be willing
to switch to
On Jan 13, 9:06 am, ta...@mongo.net (tanix) wrote:
Well, as soon as they restore the braces to identify the code
blocks and provide the functionality of advanced statically
type languages, such as threads, async processing, all synchronization
primitives, garbage collection, events and GUI,
On 1月13日, 上午7時55分, a...@pythoncraft.com (Aahz) wrote:
In article 1b42700d-139a-4653-8669-d4ee2fc48...@r5g2000yqb.googlegroups.com,
ikuta liu ikut...@gmail.com wrote:
Is python not good enough? for google, enhance python performance is
the good way better then choose build Go language
In article mailman.901.1263452854.28905.python-l...@python.org, Dennis Lee
Bieber wlfr...@ix.netcom.com wrote:
On Wed, 13 Jan 2010 00:53:19 -0800 (PST), johan.san...@gmail.com
johan.san...@gmail.com declaimed the following in
gmane.comp.python.general:
GoPython i think would be neat.
I'm a little confused.
Is python not good enough?
for google, enhance python performance is the good way better then
choose build Go language?
Go language try to merge low level, hight level and browser language.
Those I'd like to see it on python..
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo
ikuta liu, 12.01.2010 16:09:
I'm a little confused.
Is python not good enough?
for google, enhance python performance is the good way better then
choose build Go language?
Go language try to merge low level, hight level and browser language.
Those I'd like to see it on python..
I think
a little confused.
Is python not good enough?
for google, enhance python performance is the good way better then
choose build Go language?
Go language try to merge low level, hight level and browser language.
Those I'd like to see it on python..
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo
[please don't top-post]
Krister Svanlund wrote:
On Tue, Jan 12, 2010 at 4:09 PM, ikuta liu ikut...@gmail.com wrote:
I'm a little confused.
Is python not good enough?
for google, enhance python performance is the good way better then
choose build Go language?
Go language try to merge low level
On 1/12/2010 10:17 AM, Krister Svanlund wrote:
Every language has it uses and Google obviously thought that it would
take more resources to get Python to the level they need it than to
start using Go.
'Google' does not think.
Go builds on previous works by the main developers. I doubt that
In article 1b42700d-139a-4653-8669-d4ee2fc48...@r5g2000yqb.googlegroups.com,
ikuta liu ikut...@gmail.com wrote:
Is python not good enough? for google, enhance python performance is
the good way better then choose build Go language?
It is not at all clear that -- despite some comments
37 matches
Mail list logo
