On 01/-10/-28163 02:59 PM, Octavian Rasnita wrote:
From: geremy condradebat...@gmail.com
On Wed, Jan 19, 2011 at 2:31 AM, Octavian Rasnitaorasn...@gmail.com wrote:
snip
Would it be hard to introduce the possibility of adding encryption of the
bytecode similar to what the Zend encoder does
Octavian Rasnita, 19.01.2011 07:10:
aren't the Pyton bytecode-compiled files considered secure enough?
Can they be easily decompiled?
Yes.
Stefan
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
From: Stefan Behnel stefan...@behnel.de
Octavian Rasnita, 19.01.2011 07:10:
aren't the Pyton bytecode-compiled files considered secure enough?
Can they be easily decompiled?
Yes.
Stefan
Would it be hard to introduce the possibility of adding encryption of the
bytecode similar to what
Octavian Rasnita, 19.01.2011 11:31:
From: Stefan Behnel
Octavian Rasnita, 19.01.2011 07:10:
aren't the Pyton bytecode-compiled files considered secure enough?
Can they be easily decompiled?
Yes.
FYI, just take a look at the 'dis' module. There are also decompilers
available. IIRC, one is
On Wed, Jan 19, 2011 at 2:31 AM, Octavian Rasnita orasn...@gmail.com wrote:
From: Stefan Behnel stefan...@behnel.de
Octavian Rasnita, 19.01.2011 07:10:
aren't the Pyton bytecode-compiled files considered secure enough?
Can they be easily decompiled?
Yes.
Stefan
Would it be hard to
On 2011-01-19, geremy condra debat...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Jan 19, 2011 at 2:31 AM, Octavian Rasnita orasn...@gmail.com wrote:
Would it be hard to introduce the possibility of adding encryption of the
bytecode similar to what the Zend encoder does for PHP or Filter::Crypto for
Perl?
The
On 20 January 2011 06:16, Grant Edwards invalid@invalid.invalid wrote:
On 2011-01-19, geremy condra debat...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Jan 19, 2011 at 2:31 AM, Octavian Rasnita orasn...@gmail.com
wrote:
Would it be hard to introduce the possibility of adding encryption of
the
bytecode
From: geremy condra debat...@gmail.com
On Wed, Jan 19, 2011 at 2:31 AM, Octavian Rasnita orasn...@gmail.com wrote:
From: Stefan Behnel stefan...@behnel.de
Octavian Rasnita, 19.01.2011 07:10:
aren't the Pyton bytecode-compiled files considered secure enough?
Can they be easily decompiled?
Tim Harig, 18.01.2011 12:37:
On 2011-01-18, Stefan Behnel wrote:
Tim Harig, 17.01.2011 20:41:
I prefer a single language as opposed to a creolization of two.
With the possible exception of Lisp, I find it hard to think of a language
that's still alive and not the creolisation of (at least)
On 2011-01-18, Steven D'Aprano steve+comp.lang.pyt...@pearwood.info wrote:
On Mon, 17 Jan 2011 19:41:54 +, Tim Harig wrote:
One of the arguments for Python has always made is that you can optimize
it by writing the most important parts in C. Perhaps that is a crutch
that has held the
On 2011-01-18, Stefan Behnel stefan...@behnel.de wrote:
Tim Harig, 17.01.2011 20:41:
One of the arguments for Python has always made is that you can optimize
it by writing the most important parts in C. Perhaps that is a crutch
that has held the communty back from seeking higher performance
Tim Harig wrote:
You still don't see many
companies doing large scale internal development using Python and you
definately don't see any doing external developement using a language
that gives the customers full access to the source code.
What you refered as full access to the source code
On 2011-01-18, Rui Maciel rui.mac...@gmail.com wrote:
Tim Harig wrote:
You still don't see many
companies doing large scale internal development using Python and you
definately don't see any doing external developement using a language
that gives the customers full access to the source code.
On Mon, Jan 17, 2011 at 4:02 PM, Tim Harig user...@ilthio.net wrote:
Go is not an ideal language for high-performance code. Despite the
occasional claims of others, Go is consistently outperformed by C,
C++, and Java on a wide variety of benchmarks. Some claim that Ada and
Haskell do as well,
On 1/18/2011 10:30 AM, Tim Harig wrote:
Whether or not you actually agree with that economic reality is
irrelevant. Those who fund commerical projects do; and, any developement
tool which violates the security of the source is going to find itself
climbing an uphill battle in trying to gain
On 2011-01-18, geremy condra debat...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Jan 17, 2011 at 4:02 PM, Tim Harig user...@ilthio.net wrote:
I really question that you get Java anywhere even close to C performance.
Google reports they get within the same order of magnitude as C for
their long-lived server
On Tue, Jan 18, 2011 at 11:05 AM, Tim Harig user...@ilthio.net wrote:
Even assuming that PyPy does actually manage to reach within a magnitude
of C with the extra effort required to leverage two languages, why
would I bother when I can do it with one? PyPy and similar methods
where great when
On 2011-01-18, Terry Reedy tjre...@udel.edu wrote:
On 1/18/2011 10:30 AM, Tim Harig wrote:
Whether or not you actually agree with that economic reality is
irrelevant. Those who fund commerical projects do; and, any developement
tool which violates the security of the source is going to find
On 2011-01-18, geremy condra debat...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Jan 18, 2011 at 11:05 AM, Tim Harig user...@ilthio.net wrote:
Even assuming that PyPy does actually manage to reach within a magnitude
of C with the extra effort required to leverage two languages, why
would I bother when I can do
Cobra seems to similar to python. Or it at least compares itself to python.
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Anyone have thoughts on Cobra?
On Jan 18, 2011 4:20 PM, Zach taylo...@gmail.com wrote:
Cobra seems to similar to python. Or it at least compares itself to
python.
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
From: Tim Harig user...@ilthio.net
On 2011-01-18, Terry Reedy tjre...@udel.edu wrote:
On 1/18/2011 10:30 AM, Tim Harig wrote:
Whether or not you actually agree with that economic reality is
irrelevant. Those who fund commerical projects do; and, any
developement
tool which violates the
On 2011-01-16, geremy condra debat...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sun, Jan 16, 2011 at 3:03 AM, Tim Harig user...@ilthio.net wrote:
On 2011-01-16, Steven D'Aprano steve+comp.lang.pyt...@pearwood.info wrote:
If the author thinks that Go is a tried and true (his words, not mine)
language where
On Mon, 17 Jan 2011 09:12:04 +, Tim Harig wrote:
Python has been widely used by people like us that happen to like the
language and found ways to use it in our workplaces; but, most of the
time it is an unofficial use that the company. You still don't see many
companies doing large scale
On Mon, Jan 17, 2011 at 1:12 AM, Tim Harig user...@ilthio.net wrote:
On 2011-01-16, geremy condra debat...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sun, Jan 16, 2011 at 3:03 AM, Tim Harig user...@ilthio.net wrote:
snip
Personally, I think the time is ripe for a language that bridges the
gap between ease of use
On 2011-01-17, Steven D'Aprano steve+comp.lang.pyt...@pearwood.info wrote:
On Mon, 17 Jan 2011 09:12:04 +, Tim Harig wrote:
Python has been widely used by people like us that happen to like the
language and found ways to use it in our workplaces; but, most of the
time it is an unofficial
On 2011-01-17, Chris Rebert c...@rebertia.com wrote:
On Mon, Jan 17, 2011 at 1:12 AM, Tim Harig user...@ilthio.net wrote:
On 2011-01-16, geremy condra debat...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sun, Jan 16, 2011 at 3:03 AM, Tim Harig user...@ilthio.net wrote:
snip
Personally, I think the time is ripe for a
Tim Harig, 17.01.2011 13:25:
If I didn't think Python was a good language, I wouldn't be here.
Nevertheless, it isn't a good fit for many pieces of software where a
systems language is better suited. Reasons include ease of distribution
without an interpeter, non-necessity of distributing
On Mon, Jan 17, 2011 at 1:12 AM, Tim Harig user...@ilthio.net wrote:
On 2011-01-16, geremy condra debat...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sun, Jan 16, 2011 at 3:03 AM, Tim Harig user...@ilthio.net wrote:
On 2011-01-16, Steven D'Aprano steve+comp.lang.pyt...@pearwood.info wrote:
If the author thinks that
In comp.lang.python, you wrote:
Tim Harig, 17.01.2011 13:25:
If I didn't think Python was a good language, I wouldn't be here.
Nevertheless, it isn't a good fit for many pieces of software where a
systems language is better suited. Reasons include ease of distribution
without an interpeter,
On 2011-01-17, geremy condra debat...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Jan 17, 2011 at 1:12 AM, Tim Harig user...@ilthio.net wrote:
On 2011-01-16, geremy condra debat...@gmail.com wrote:
I wouldn't say Go is narrowly targeted. It's a systems language that can
compete in the same domain with scripting
On Mon, Jan 17, 2011 at 1:07 PM, Tim Harig user...@ilthio.net wrote:
On 2011-01-17, geremy condra debat...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Jan 17, 2011 at 1:12 AM, Tim Harig user...@ilthio.net wrote:
On 2011-01-16, geremy condra debat...@gmail.com wrote:
I wouldn't say Go is narrowly targeted. It's
On 2011-01-17, geremy condra debat...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Jan 17, 2011 at 1:07 PM, Tim Harig user...@ilthio.net wrote:
On 2011-01-17, geremy condra debat...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Jan 17, 2011 at 1:12 AM, Tim Harig user...@ilthio.net wrote:
On 2011-01-16, geremy condra
On Mon, 17 Jan 2011 19:41:54 +, Tim Harig wrote:
One of the arguments for Python has always made is that you can optimize
it by writing the most important parts in C. Perhaps that is a crutch
that has held the communty back from seeking higher performance
solutions in the language
Tim Harig, 17.01.2011 20:41:
In comp.lang.python, I wrote:
Tim Harig, 17.01.2011 13:25:
If I didn't think Python was a good language, I wouldn't be here.
Nevertheless, it isn't a good fit for many pieces of software where a
systems language is better suited. Reasons include ease of
On 2011-01-16, Paul Rubin no.email@nospam.invalid wrote:
Tim Harig user...@ilthio.net writes:
Those who are concerned about performance should check out Go.
Garbage collection, duck typing, and compiles to a native binary.
It creates a great middle ground between C++ and Python. Any C and/or
On Sun, 16 Jan 2011 09:47:35 +, Tim Harig wrote:
One of the things that gives me hope
for Go is that it is backed by Google so I expect that it may gain some
rather rapid adoption. It has made enough of a wake to grab one of
Eweek's 18 top languages for 2011.
If the author thinks that
On 2011-01-16, Steven D'Aprano steve+comp.lang.pyt...@pearwood.info wrote:
On Sun, 16 Jan 2011 09:47:35 +, Tim Harig wrote:
One of the things that gives me hope
for Go is that it is backed by Google so I expect that it may gain some
rather rapid adoption. It has made enough of a wake to
On Jan 16, 5:03 am, Tim Harig user...@ilthio.net wrote:
Personally, I think the time is ripe for a language that bridges the
gap between ease of use dynamic languages with the performance and
distribution capabilities of a full systems level language.
Bravo!
This is after
all the promise
On Sun, Jan 16, 2011 at 3:03 AM, Tim Harig user...@ilthio.net wrote:
On 2011-01-16, Steven D'Aprano steve+comp.lang.pyt...@pearwood.info wrote:
If the author thinks that Go is a tried and true (his words, not mine)
language where programmers can go to look for work, I think he's
fooling
40 matches
Mail list logo
