Hello,
python-compiler is a project to port Python2's stdlib "compiler"
package (https://docs.python.org/2.7/library/compiler.html) to Python3.
Initial porting work and support of CPython3.5 constructs/bytecode was
done me. Around the Christmas time last year, there was a patch from
som
Hi folks, I've no idea if you could be interested in this beastie
https://github.com/nvbn/py-backwards but if you don't know about it, you can't
be :)
Kindest regards.
Mark Lawrence.
--
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
On Thursday, June 16, 2016 at 8:34:46 PM UTC+12, Yubin Ruan wrote:
> print "A test case" + \
>"str_1[%s] " + \
>"str_2[%s] " % (str_1, str_2)
Try this:
print \
(
"A test case"
"str_1[%s] "
"str_2[%s] "
%
(str_1, str_2)
)
Python takes this
"Yubin Ruan" wrote in message
news:930753e3-4c9c-45e9-9117-d340c033a...@googlegroups.com...
Hi, everyone, I have some problem understand the rule which the python
compiler use to parsing the multiline string.
Consider this snippet:
str_1 = "foo"
str_2 = "
Yubin Ruan writes:
> Hi, everyone, I have some problem understand the rule which the python
> compiler use to parsing the multiline string.
>
> Consider this snippet:
>
> str_1 = "foo"
> str_2 = "bar"
>
> print "A test case" + \
>
Yubin Ruan wrote:
> Hi, everyone, I have some problem understand the rule which the python
> compiler use to parsing the multiline string.
>
> Consider this snippet:
>
> str_1 = "foo"
> str_2 = "bar"
>
> print "A test case" + \
>
Hi, everyone, I have some problem understand the rule which the python compiler
use to parsing the multiline string.
Consider this snippet:
str_1 = "foo"
str_2 = "bar"
print "A test case" + \
"str_1[%s] " + \
"str_2[%s] " % (
Terry Reedy, 22.04.2011 05:48:
On 4/21/2011 8:25 PM, Paul Rubin wrote:
Matt Chaput writes:
I'm looking for some code that will take a Snowball program and
compile it into a Python script. Or, less ideally, a Snowball
interpreter written in Python.
(http://snowball.tartarus.org/)
Anyone heard
On the slim chance that (a) somebody worked on something like this but
never uploaded it to PyPI, and (b) the person who did (a) or heard about
it is reading this list ;) --
I'm looking for some code that will take a Snowball program and compile
it into a Python script. Or, less ideally, a
On Friday, April 22, 2011 8:05:37 AM UTC+10, Matt Chaput wrote:
I'm looking for some code that will take a Snowball program and compile
it into a Python script. Or, less ideally, a Snowball interpreter
written in Python.
(http://snowball.tartarus.org/)
If anyone has done such things
A third (more-than-) possible solution: google(python snowball);
the first page of results has at least 3 hits referring to Python
wrappers for Snowball.
There are quite a few wrappers for the C-compiled snowball stemmers, but
I'm looking for a pure-Python solution. It doesn't seem like there
Matt Chaput m...@whoosh.ca writes:
I'm looking for some code that will take a Snowball program and
compile it into a Python script. Or, less ideally, a Snowball
interpreter written in Python.
(http://snowball.tartarus.org/)
Anyone heard of such a thing?
I never saw snowball before, it
On 4/21/2011 8:25 PM, Paul Rubin wrote:
Matt Chaputm...@whoosh.ca writes:
I'm looking for some code that will take a Snowball program and
compile it into a Python script. Or, less ideally, a Snowball
interpreter written in Python.
(http://snowball.tartarus.org/)
Anyone heard of such a thing?
On 2008-10-20, oyster [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I don't remember its name very clear, it may be 'jingle' or
not this program runs on windows and can compile a python
program into exe file without gcc it has no webspace but is
announced on the author's blog when I find it some times ago.
I
I don't remember its name very clear, it may be 'jingle' or not this
program runs on windows and can compile a python program into exe file
without gcc
it has no webspace but is announced on the author's blog when I find it
some times ago.
I can't find the link now. I there anybody else know
On Oct 20, 3:46 pm, oyster [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I don't remember its name very clear, it may be 'jingle' or not
this program runs on windows and can compile a python program into exe
file without gcc
I haven't heard of 'jingle' but there are a number of tools for
achieving this:
I don't remember its name very clear, it may be 'jingle' or not
this program runs on windows and can compile a python program into exe
file without gcc
it has no webspace but is announced on the author's blog when I find
it some times ago.
I can't find the link now. I there anybody else know it
On 14/02/2008, Steven D'Aprano [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wed, 13 Feb 2008 22:13:51 +, I V wrote:
On Mon, 11 Feb 2008 14:07:49 -0800, Erik Max Francis wrote:
experience. The notion of impetus -- where an object throw moves in a
straight line until it runs out of impetus, then
On Thu, 14 Feb 2008 10:35:09 +0200, Dotan Cohen wrote:
If they asked an archer to fire an arrow through a distant window, he'd
aim slightly above it. You can't spend dozens of hours every week
shooting arrows at targets without learning to compensate for gravity.
You are forgetting two
On 14/02/2008, Steven D'Aprano [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Thu, 14 Feb 2008 10:35:09 +0200, Dotan Cohen wrote:
If they asked an archer to fire an arrow through a distant window, he'd
aim slightly above it. You can't spend dozens of hours every week
shooting arrows at targets without
On 13/02/2008, Erik Max Francis [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
And the rest of us just use SI. (And if you bring up the
_kilogram-force_, I'll just cry.)
Don't cry, I just want to say that I've hated the kilogram-force
almost as much as I've hated the electron-volt. Who is the lazy who
comes up
And the rest of us just use SI. (And if you bring up the
_kilogram-force_, I'll just cry.)
SI = Super Incredible?
Awesome name for Force/Mass / NewItemOfClothing2050!
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Dotan Cohen wrote:
On 13/02/2008, Erik Max Francis [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
And the rest of us just use SI. (And if you bring up the
_kilogram-force_, I'll just cry.)
Don't cry, I just want to say that I've hated the kilogram-force
almost as much as I've hated the electron-volt. Who is
On 13/02/2008, Jeroen Ruigrok van der Werven [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
-On [20080212 22:15], Dotan Cohen ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
Note that Google will give a calculator result for 1 kilogram in
pounds, but not for 1 kilogram in inches. I wonder why not? After
all, both are conversions of
Jeroen Ruigrok van der Werven wrote:
-On [20080212 22:15], Dotan Cohen ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
Note that Google will give a calculator result for 1 kilogram in
pounds, but not for 1 kilogram in inches. I wonder why not? After
all, both are conversions of incompatible measurements, ie, they
On 2008-02-13, Jeff Schwab [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Eh? Last I checked both pound and kilogram are units of mass, so where is
the incompatibility?
I've never heard of pound as a unit of mass. At least where I went to
school (Boston, MA), pound is the English unit of force, slug is the
Grant Edwards wrote:
On 2008-02-13, Jeff Schwab [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Eh? Last I checked both pound and kilogram are units of mass, so where is
the incompatibility?
I've never heard of pound as a unit of mass. At least where I went to
school (Boston, MA), pound is the English unit of
On 2008-02-13, Jeff Schwab [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Grant Edwards wrote:
On 2008-02-13, Jeff Schwab [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Eh? Last I checked both pound and kilogram are units of mass, so where is
the incompatibility?
I've never heard of pound as a unit of mass. At least where I went to
-On [20080213 20:16], Jeff Schwab ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
So what is the mass of a slug, anyway? (I assume this is slug as in
bullet, not slimy, creeping thing.)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slug_(mass) would be my guess.
--
Jeroen Ruigrok van der Werven asmodai(-at-)in-nomine.org /
-On [20080213 18:46], Jeff Schwab ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
I've never heard of pound as a unit of mass.
Then please correct/fix:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pound_(mass)
Me being mainland European I know not this silly system called imperial.
[Yes, partially in good jest...]
--
Jeroen
On Mon, 11 Feb 2008 14:07:49 -0800, Erik Max Francis wrote:
experience. The notion of impetus -- where an object throw moves in a
straight line until it runs out of impetus, then falls straight down --
is clearly contrary to everyday experience of watching two people throw
a ball back and
I V wrote:
On Mon, 11 Feb 2008 14:07:49 -0800, Erik Max Francis wrote:
experience. The notion of impetus -- where an object throw moves in a
straight line until it runs out of impetus, then falls straight down --
is clearly contrary to everyday experience of watching two people throw
a ball
Grant Edwards wrote:
A slug is 14.593903 kg according to the trysty old Unix units
program. Hmm, I always thought a slug weighed exactly 32 lbs,
but I see it's 32.174049. Learn something new every day...
It's defined so that 1 slug times the acceleration due to gravity is a
pound. The
On Wed, 13 Feb 2008 22:13:51 +, I V wrote:
On Mon, 11 Feb 2008 14:07:49 -0800, Erik Max Francis wrote:
experience. The notion of impetus -- where an object throw moves in a
straight line until it runs out of impetus, then falls straight down --
is clearly contrary to everyday experience
Jeff Schwab wrote:
Erik Max Francis wrote:
Jeff Schwab wrote:
Erik Max Francis wrote:
Robert Bossy wrote:
I'm pretty sure we can still hear educated people say that free fall
speed depends on the weight of the object without realizing it's a
double mistake.
Robert Bossy wrote:
In my mind, the second mistake was the confusion between weight and mass.
I see. If so, then that sounds like another terminology gotcha. The
distinction between weight and mass is all but irrelevant for everyday
activities, since the acceleration due to gravity is so
Dennis Lee Bieber wrote:
On Tue, 12 Feb 2008 00:18:38 -0800, Erik Max Francis [EMAIL PROTECTED]
declaimed the following in comp.lang.python:
equivalence for everyday usage and make no requirement of using the
proper units for mass (kg) vs. weight (N) for, say, buying things at
Erik Max Francis wrote:
My point was, and still is, that if this question without further
context is posed to a generally educated laymen, the supposedly wrong
answer that was given is actually _correct_.
Except that they probably don't understand exactly how and
why it's correct. E.g. they
On 12/02/2008, Erik Max Francis [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Dennis Lee Bieber wrote:
On Tue, 12 Feb 2008 00:18:38 -0800, Erik Max Francis [EMAIL PROTECTED]
declaimed the following in comp.lang.python:
equivalence for everyday usage and make no requirement of using the
proper units
On 2008-02-12, Jeff Schwab [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Forgive the cliché, but there's already too much road rage on the
information superhighway. I've had limited access to Usenet for the
last couple of years, and coming back, I find myself shocked at how many
people seem to be mean and
-On [20080212 22:15], Dotan Cohen ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
Note that Google will give a calculator result for 1 kilogram in
pounds, but not for 1 kilogram in inches. I wonder why not? After
all, both are conversions of incompatible measurements, ie, they
measure different things.
Eh? Last I
greg wrote:
Erik Max Francis wrote:
My point was, and still is, that if this question without further
context is posed to a generally educated laymen, the supposedly wrong
answer that was given is actually _correct_.
Except that they probably don't understand exactly how and
why it's
Dennis Lee Bieber wrote:
On Tue, 12 Feb 2008 00:18:38 -0800, Erik Max Francis [EMAIL PROTECTED]
declaimed the following in comp.lang.python:
equivalence for everyday usage and make no requirement of using the
proper units for mass (kg) vs. weight (N) for, say, buying things at
Ah,
Jeroen Ruigrok van der Werven wrote:
-On [20080212 22:15], Dotan Cohen ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
Note that Google will give a calculator result for 1 kilogram in
pounds, but not for 1 kilogram in inches. I wonder why not? After
all, both are conversions of incompatible measurements, ie, they
On 11/02/2008, Grant Edwards [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 2008-02-11, Steve Holden [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Well the history of physics for at least two hundred years has
been a migration away from the intuitive.
Starting at least as far back as Newtonian mechanics. I once
read a very
Jeff Schwab wrote:
Erik Max Francis wrote:
Robert Bossy wrote:
I'm pretty sure we can still hear educated people say that free fall
speed depends on the weight of the object without realizing it's a
double mistake.
Well, you have to qualify it better than this, because what you've
Grant Edwards wrote:
On 2008-02-09, Thomas Dybdahl Ahle [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Quantum mechanics are closely related to philosophy.
I've never understood that claim. You can philosophize about
anything: biology, math, weather, the stars, the moon, and so
on. I don't see how QM is any
Steven D'Aprano wrote:
On Mon, 11 Feb 2008 19:54:30 +1300, greg wrote:
Until DeBroglie formulated
its hypothesis of dual nature of matter (and light): wave and particle
at the same time.
Really it's neither waves nor particles, but something else for which
there isn't a good word in
Erik Max Francis wrote:
Robert Bossy wrote:
Grant Edwards wrote:
After repeated attempts at the tasks set for them in the
experiments, the subjects would learn strategies that would
work in a Newtonian world, but the initial intuitive reactions
were very non-Newtonian (regardless of how
Erik Max Francis wrote:
Jeff Schwab wrote:
Erik Max Francis wrote:
Robert Bossy wrote:
I'm pretty sure we can still hear educated people say that free fall
speed depends on the weight of the object without realizing it's a
double mistake.
Well, you have to qualify it better than this,
On 09/02/2008, Ron Provost [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The division between philosophy and science can be fine indeed. Philosophy
and science are the two rigorous methods of inquiry into the fundamental
nature of things (other methods include religion and superstition). Because
of it's
On 09/02/2008, Ron Provost [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The division between philosophy and science can be fine indeed. Philosophy
and science are the two rigorous methods of inquiry into the fundamental
nature of things (other methods include religion and superstition). Because
of it's
In article
[EMAIL PROTECTED],
[EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Feb 8, 2:53?pm, Lou Pecora [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
In article [EMAIL PROTECTED],
?Grant Edwards [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 2008-02-08, Dennis Lee Bieber [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
? ? ? A Parsec is a
greg wrote:
Gabriel Genellina wrote:
Before the famous Michelson-Morley experiment (end of s. XIX), some
physicists would have said light propagates over ether, some kind of
matter that fills the whole space but has no measurable mass, but the
experiment failed to show any evidence of
Steve Holden wrote:
Well the history of physics for at least two hundred years has been a
migration away from the intuitive. In strict linguistic terms the word
subatomic is a fine oxymoron. I suspect it's really turtles all the
way down.
Well, hard to say that's been a monotonic pattern.
Robert Bossy wrote:
Grant Edwards wrote:
After repeated attempts at the tasks set for them in the
experiments, the subjects would learn strategies that would
work in a Newtonian world, but the initial intuitive reactions
were very non-Newtonian (regardless of how educated they were
in
Jeff Schwab wrote:
Erik Max Francis wrote:
Grant Edwards wrote:
On 2008-02-12, Jeff Schwab [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Fair enough!
Dear me, what's Usenet coming to these days...
I know, really. Sheesh! Jeff, I won't stand for that! Argue with
me! :-)
OK, uh... You're a
Erik Max Francis wrote:
Grant Edwards wrote:
On 2008-02-12, Jeff Schwab [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Fair enough!
Dear me, what's Usenet coming to these days...
I know, really. Sheesh! Jeff, I won't stand for that! Argue with me!
:-)
OK, uh... You're a poopy-head.
Forgive the
Grant Edwards wrote:
On 2008-02-12, Jeff Schwab [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Fair enough!
Dear me, what's Usenet coming to these days...
I know, really. Sheesh! Jeff, I won't stand for that! Argue with me! :-)
--
Erik Max Francis [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.alcyone.com/max/
San Jose,
Grant Edwards wrote:
On 2008-02-10, [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
? ? ? A Parsec is a fixed value (which, admittedly, presumes
the culture developed a 360degree circle broken into degrees
= minutes = seconds... or, at least, some units compatible
with the concept of an arc
On 2008-02-10, [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
? ? ? A Parsec is a fixed value (which, admittedly, presumes
the culture developed a 360degree circle broken into degrees
= minutes = seconds... or, at least, some units compatible
with the concept of an arc second, like 400 grads of,
On 2008-02-12, Jeff Schwab [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Erik Max Francis wrote:
Jeff Schwab wrote:
So what's the double mistake? My understanding was (1) the misuse
(ok, vernacular use) of the term free fall, and (2) the association
of weight with free-fall velocity (If I tie an elephant's
Jeff Schwab wrote:
So what's the double mistake? My understanding was (1) the misuse
(ok, vernacular use) of the term free fall, and (2) the association of
weight with free-fall velocity (If I tie an elephant's tail to a
mouse's, and drop them both into free fall, will the mouse slow the
On Feb 12, 7:16 am, Jeff Schwab [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Erik Max Francis wrote:
Jeff Schwab wrote:
Erik Max Francis wrote:
Grant Edwards wrote:
On 2008-02-12, Jeff Schwab [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Fair enough!
Dear me, what's Usenet coming to these days...
I know, really.
On Mon, 11 Feb 2008 19:54:30 +1300, greg wrote:
Until DeBroglie formulated
its hypothesis of dual nature of matter (and light): wave and particle
at the same time.
Really it's neither waves nor particles, but something else for which
there isn't a good word in everyday English.
Erik Max Francis wrote:
Jeff Schwab wrote:
So what's the double mistake? My understanding was (1) the misuse
(ok, vernacular use) of the term free fall, and (2) the association
of weight with free-fall velocity (If I tie an elephant's tail to a
mouse's, and drop them both into free
The division between philosophy and science can be fine indeed. Philosophy and
science are the two rigorous methods of inquiry into the fundamental nature of
things (other methods include religion and superstition). Because of it's
process, science limits itself to those questions which can
On 2008-02-11, Steve Holden [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Well the history of physics for at least two hundred years has
been a migration away from the intuitive.
Starting at least as far back as Newtonian mechanics. I once
read a very interesting article about some experiments that
showed that
Grant Edwards wrote:
On 2008-02-11, Steve Holden [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Well the history of physics for at least two hundred years has
been a migration away from the intuitive.
Starting at least as far back as Newtonian mechanics. I once
read a very interesting article about
En Mon, 11 Feb 2008 14:05:27 -0200, Grant Edwards [EMAIL PROTECTED]
escribi�:
On 2008-02-11, Steve Holden [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Well the history of physics for at least two hundred years has
been a migration away from the intuitive.
Starting at least as far back as Newtonian mechanics.
Erik Max Francis wrote:
Jeff Schwab wrote:
Erik Max Francis wrote:
Grant Edwards wrote:
On 2008-02-12, Jeff Schwab [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Fair enough!
Dear me, what's Usenet coming to these days...
I know, really. Sheesh! Jeff, I won't stand for that! Argue with
me! :-)
OK,
not a Python COMPILER?
It would be very nice to be able to output Linux, MAC or Windows
binaries of compiled (not bytecompiled) code. It would run faster, it
will be smaller in size (I think) and it will be easy to distribute to
people not having python installed. Yes, I know about py2exe
Steven D'Aprano wrote:
On Sat, 09 Feb 2008 01:11:09 +, Marc 'BlackJack' Rintsch wrote:
On Fri, 08 Feb 2008 05:12:29 -0800, Ryszard Szopa wrote:
Expressing simple loops as C for loops...
You mean simple loops like ``for i in xrange(1000):``? How should the
compiler know what object is
On 2008-02-09, Doug Morse [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Or just the old particle/wave dichotomy... particles
travel, waves propagate (that is, the wave form -- crest/dip
-- changes position, but the material of the medium it is in
just jiggles in place).
So, showing of my physics
On Feb 10, 7:29 am, Stefan Behnel [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Steven D'Aprano wrote:
On Sat, 09 Feb 2008 01:11:09 +, Marc 'BlackJack' Rintsch wrote:
On Fri, 08 Feb 2008 05:12:29 -0800, Ryszard Szopa wrote:
Expressing simple loops as C for loops...
You mean simple loops like ``for i in
Gabriel Genellina wrote:
Before the famous Michelson-Morley experiment (end of s. XIX), some
physicists would have said light propagates over ether, some kind of
matter that fills the whole space but has no measurable mass, but the
experiment failed to show any evidence of it existence.
Steven D'Aprano wrote:
On Wed, 06 Feb 2008 10:14:10 -0600, Reedick, Andrew wrote:
'c' is also the speed of light.
'c' is the speed of light _in_a_vacuum_.
True.
And since nothing can travel faster than light...
Nothing can travel faster than the speed of light _in_a_vacuum_. There
are
On Sat, 2008-02-09 at 14:56 +0100, Martin P. Hellwig wrote:
Propagate, travel, what's the difference?
Unfortunately, I didn't study any of this but I sure do remember the
answer one drunk physic said to me in a bar when I ask him the question:
Does light travel or propagate?
He
On 2008-02-09, Thomas Dybdahl Ahle [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Sat, 2008-02-09 at 14:56 +0100, Martin P. Hellwig wrote:
Propagate, travel, what's the difference?
Unfortunately, I didn't study any of this but I sure do remember the
answer one drunk physic said to me in a bar when I ask
So, showing of my physics ignorance: I presume then that this means that
light, say from the sun, is actually sending particles to the earth, since the
space between is mostly vacuum? Or is there enough material in the
near-vacuum of space for propogation to occur?
On Sat, 09 Feb 2008 12:25:51
Grant Edwards wrote:
On 2008-02-09, Thomas Dybdahl Ahle [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Sat, 2008-02-09 at 14:56 +0100, Martin P. Hellwig wrote:
Propagate, travel, what's the difference?
Unfortunately, I didn't study any of this but I sure do remember the
answer one drunk physic said to me in a
On Feb 8, 2:53�pm, Lou Pecora [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
In article [EMAIL PROTECTED],
�Grant Edwards [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 2008-02-08, Dennis Lee Bieber [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
� � � A Parsec is a fixed value (which, admittedly, presumes the culture
developed a 360degree circle
En Sat, 09 Feb 2008 19:01:31 -0200, Doug Morse [EMAIL PROTECTED] escribi�:
So, showing of my physics ignorance: I presume then that this means that
light, say from the sun, is actually sending particles to the earth,
since the
space between is mostly vacuum? Or is there enough material in
Santiago Romero [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Why not a Python COMPILER?
Check out CLPython it has a Python compiler, though I highly doubt it is
what you are thinking of.
From http://common-lisp.net/project/clpython/manual.html
Sometimes, the generated Python
a hypothetical Python compiler that achieves native
compilation by compiling to Common Lisp and using the CL's compiler to
produce native code. Upon encountering the expression such as:
a + b
the compiler could do little else except translate it to something
like:
(python:add a b)
In order
On 2008-02-07, Jeroen Ruigrok van der Werven [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
-On [20080207 22:09], Reedick, Andrew ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
Errr... didn't one of the novels explain it away by describing the
kessel run as a region of space warped by black holes or other objects?
Bragging rights for
Ryszard Szopa [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
The main determinant of Python's performance isn't the interpreter
overhead, but the amount of work that must be done at run-time and
cannot be moved to compile-time or optimized away.
Well, I am still not convinced that Python is intrinsically
On 2008-02-08, Dennis Lee Bieber [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
A Parsec is a fixed value (which, admittedly, presumes the culture
developed a 360degree circle broken into degrees = minutes =
seconds... or, at least, some units compatible with the concept of an
arc second, like 400 grads of,
In article [EMAIL PROTECTED],
Grant Edwards [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 2008-02-08, Dennis Lee Bieber [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
A Parsec is a fixed value (which, admittedly, presumes the culture
developed a 360degree circle broken into degrees = minutes =
seconds... or, at least,
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:python-
[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Grant Edwards
Sent: Friday, February 08, 2008 12:46 PM
To: python-list@python.org
Subject: Re: Why not a Python compiler?
On 2008-02-08, Arnaud Delobelle [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote
: Re: Why not a Python compiler?
I wonder if George Lucas intended it as a joke or if he thought a
parsec was a unit of time.
The latter because it was corrected in the novelization.
Errr... didn't one of the novels explain it away by describing the
kessel run as a region of space warped
On 8 Feb, 08:16, Arnaud Delobelle [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
[snip more interesting considerations about compiling python]
Please get back on topic. This discussion is about parsecs and
wookies now.
Yes, it's like the lower-value parts of Wikipedia have spilled out
onto Usenet. ;-)
But I
Grant Edwards wrote:
On 2008-02-08, Arnaud Delobelle [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
the compiler could do little else except translate it to something
like:
(python:add a b)
[snip more interesting considerations about compiling python]
Please get back on topic. This discussion is about
On 2008-02-08, Arnaud Delobelle [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
the compiler could do little else except translate it to something
like:
(python:add a b)
[snip more interesting considerations about compiling python]
Please get back on topic. This discussion is about parsecs and
wookies now.
Grant Edwards wrote:
On 2008-02-08, Arnaud Delobelle [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
the compiler could do little else except translate it to something
like:
(python:add a b)
[snip more interesting considerations about compiling python]
Please get back on topic. This discussion is about
On Fri, 08 Feb 2008 17:45:36 +, Grant Edwards wrote:
On 2008-02-08, Arnaud Delobelle [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Please get back on topic. This discussion is about parsecs and
wookies now.
What's a wookie a unit of?
The degree of confusion among the jury when using the Chewbacca
On Fri, 08 Feb 2008 05:12:29 -0800, Ryszard Szopa wrote:
Expressing simple loops as C for loops...
You mean simple loops like ``for i in xrange(1000):``? How should the
compiler know what object is bound to the name `xrange` when that loop is
executed?
Ciao,
Marc 'BlackJack' Rintsch
On Sat, 09 Feb 2008 01:11:09 +, Marc 'BlackJack' Rintsch wrote:
On Fri, 08 Feb 2008 05:12:29 -0800, Ryszard Szopa wrote:
Expressing simple loops as C for loops...
You mean simple loops like ``for i in xrange(1000):``? How should the
compiler know what object is bound to the name
On 8 feb, 22:15, Marc 'BlackJack' Rintsch [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Fri, 08 Feb 2008 17:45:36 +, Grant Edwards wrote:
On 2008-02-08, Arnaud Delobelle [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Please get back on topic. This discussion is about parsecs and
wookies now.
What's a wookie a unit of?
Luis M. González wrote:
On 8 feb, 22:15, Marc 'BlackJack' Rintsch [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Fri, 08 Feb 2008 17:45:36 +, Grant Edwards wrote:
On 2008-02-08, Arnaud Delobelle [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Please get back on topic. This discussion is about parsecs and
wookies now.
What's a
1 - 100 of 172 matches
Mail list logo
