On Thu, 03 Apr 2008 05:12:28 GMT
Tim Roberts [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Yes, indeed. In response to a challenge posted on one of the x86 assembler
newsgroups about two years ago, one intrepid Russian programmer produced a
generic Sudoku solver in a 65-byte executable. Yes, that's 65 BYTES --
John J. Lee wrote:
How did programmers manage back then in 32k?
Some of the answers, in no particular sequence, are:
Tight, small operating systems that did the minimum.
Assembler.
Sequential Processing:
- small tasks with multiple passes on tape
( like the concept of Unix pipes )
in 340625 20080402 094139 Hendrik van Rooyen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
John J. Lee wrote:
How did programmers manage back then in 32k?
Some of the answers, in no particular sequence, are:
Tight, small operating systems that did the minimum.
Apart from the GUI stuff, mainframe operating systems
Hendrik van Rooyen [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Some of the other veterans may want to add to this list.
Overlays, lots and lots of them, in multiple levels intricately
arranged.
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (John J. Lee) wrote:
How did programmers manage back then in 32k? Less software
development, more jigsaw puzzle.
Yes, indeed. In response to a challenge posted on one of the x86 assembler
newsgroups about two years ago, one intrepid Russian programmer produced a
generic
En Mon, 31 Mar 2008 16:17:39 -0300, Terry Reedy [EMAIL PROTECTED]
escribió:
Bjoern Schliessmann [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote
in message news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
| However, I'm quite sure that when Unicode has arrived almost
| everywhere, some languages will start considering such characters
|
On Tue, Apr 1, 2008 at 6:03 AM, Gabriel Genellina
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
En Mon, 31 Mar 2008 16:17:39 -0300, Terry Reedy [EMAIL PROTECTED]
escribió:
Bjoern Schliessmann [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote
in message news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
| However, I'm quite sure that when Unicode has
Hallöchen!
Jorge Vargas writes:
On Tue, Apr 1, 2008 at 6:03 AM, Gabriel Genellina
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
[...]
I think it should be easy to add support for ≠≤≥ and even λ,
only the tokenizer has to be changed.
show me a keyboard that has those symbols and I'm all up for it.
For = I
Torsten Bronger [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
However, I'm slightly disappointed with the UTF-8 support in some
mail clients involved in this thread, so Unicode surely has not
arrived yet.
Want URL:http://www.cafepress.com/nucleartacos.26721820.
--
\ bash awk grep perl sed, df du, du-du
En Tue, 01 Apr 2008 04:15:57 -0300, Jorge Vargas [EMAIL PROTECTED]
escribió:
as for the original question, the point of going unicode is not to
make code unicode, but to make code's output unicode. thin of print
calls and templates and comments the world's complexity in languages.
sadly
On Tue, Apr 1, 2008 at 12:04 PM, Gabriel Genellina [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
En Tue, 01 Apr 2008 04:15:57 -0300, Jorge Vargas [EMAIL PROTECTED]
escribió:
as for the original question, the point of going unicode is not to
make code unicode, but to make code's output unicode. thin of print
Torsten Bronger wrote:
Hallöchen!
Jorge Vargas writes:
On Tue, Apr 1, 2008 at 6:03 AM, Gabriel Genellina
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
[...]
I think it should be easy to add support for ≠≤≥ and even λ,
only the tokenizer has to be changed.
show me a keyboard that has those symbols and
Gabriel Genellina [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
[...]
There was a version of APL for the Sinclair QL which replaced the
standard APL symbols with keywords.
Wow, APL on 8 bits?
Now there is (or perhaps there was) J, a reincarnation of APL by
Iverson himself that uses ASCII characters only.
The
On Mar 30, 7:59 pm, Gabriel Genellina [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
En Sun, 30 Mar 2008 11:10:20 -0300, MRAB [EMAIL PROTECTED]
escribió:
On Mar 30, 6:35 am, Gabriel Genellina [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
En Sun, 30 Mar 2008 02:11:33 -0300, hdante [EMAIL PROTECTED] escribió:
BTW, my opinion
Hallöchen!
Bjoern Schliessmann writes:
Torsten Bronger wrote:
Emacs is generally not regarded as being convenient, however, it
has very strong input methods. I type \gtrless and get ?, or
\forall and get ?.
Doesn't KNode support UTF-8?
I wonder where the point of this is. :) Why use
Torsten Bronger [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
However, I'm quite sure that when Unicode has arrived almost
everywhere, some languages will start considering such characters in
their core syntax. Python 3.0 allows for Unicode letters in
identifiers, and there's still room for improvement.
I
Torsten Bronger wrote:
Doesn't KNode support UTF-8?
Well, it should, but automatic encoding detection doesn't always
seem to work (or does it even have one?). I'm looking for a
different (faster) newsreader anyway.
Who wants to minimize the number of keypresses? We're not Perl
after all.
Bjoern Schliessmann [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote
in message news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
| However, I'm quite sure that when Unicode has arrived almost
| everywhere, some languages will start considering such characters
| in their core syntax.
|
| This should be the time when there are widespread
On Mar 29, 12:41 pm, Steven D'Aprano [EMAIL PROTECTED]
cybersource.com.au wrote:
Given that = is a comparison operator, not an assignment, why do you
jump to the conclusion that != is an assignment? Why don't you argue that
x = y means assign the value of xy to x?
Yes, you are right, that
On Mar 29, 6:34 pm, Lie [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
You're forcing your argument too much, both != and are NOT standard
mathematics operators -- the standard not-equal operator is -- and
I can assure you that both != and won't be comprehensible to non-
programmers.
What I meant was that both
On Mar 29, 9:48 pm, Dan Bishop [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
MOST of Python's operators are based on C's. Consider, for example,
the bitwise operators | ^~ and the compound assignment
operators += -= etc.
The exceptions are ** (from Fortran), //, and the logical operators.
Borrowing parts
En Sun, 30 Mar 2008 05:08:34 -0300, [EMAIL PROTECTED] escribió:
On Mar 29, 12:41 pm, Steven D'Aprano [EMAIL PROTECTED]
cybersource.com.au wrote:
Since you jump to an invalid conclusion about !=, the rest of your
argument fails.
No, you said = could be confusing, but we're talking about
Lie wrote:
Ah yes, that is also used (I completely forgot about that one, my
math's aren't that sharp anymore) and I think it's used more
frequently than .
Where did you read that (I mean, which country)? I've never seen
this sign in any german or english book on
On Sun, 30 Mar 2008 01:13:04 -0700, dewitters wrote:
On Mar 29, 6:34 pm, Lie [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
You're forcing your argument too much, both != and are NOT standard
mathematics operators -- the standard not-equal operator is -- and I
can assure you that both != and won't be
Hallöchen!
Bjoern Schliessmann writes:
Lie wrote:
Ah yes, that is also used (I completely forgot about that one, my
math's aren't that sharp anymore) and I think it's used more
frequently than .
Where did you read that (I mean, which country)? I've never seen
this sign in any german or
On Sat, 29 Mar 2008 22:11:33 -0700, hdante wrote:
BTW, my opinion is that it's already time that programmer editors
have input methods advanced enough for generating this:
if x ≠ 0:
∀y ∈ s:
if y ≥ 0: f1(y)
else: f2(y)
;-)
Back in the 1990s, Apple's Hypercard
hdante:
it's already time that programmer editors
have input methods advanced enough for generating this:
if x ≠ 0:
∀y ∈ s:
if y ≥ 0: f1(y)
else: f2(y)
Take a look at Fortress language, by Sun. A free (slow) interpreter is
already available.
(Mathematica too allows you
On Mar 30, 2:35 am, Gabriel Genellina [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
En Sun, 30 Mar 2008 02:11:33 -0300, hdante [EMAIL PROTECTED] escribió:
BTW, my opinion is that it's already time that programmer editors
have input methods advanced enough for generating this:
if x ≠ 0:
∀y ∈ s:
hdante wrote:
BTW, my opinion is that it's already time that programmer editors
have input methods advanced enough for generating this:
Could you please list some that do, and are also convenient?
Regards,
Björn
--
BOFH excuse #288:
Hard drive sleeping. Let it wake up on it's own...
--
Torsten Bronger wrote:
Maybe he means ?.
Haven't seen this either, nor do I think it's the same than .
From afar, it looks more like . But this does more look like
South Park style shut eyes than an operator. :)
Regards,
Björn
--
BOFH excuse #407:
Route flapping at the NAP.
--
Hallöchen!
Bjoern Schliessmann writes:
hdante wrote:
BTW, my opinion is that it's already time that programmer editors
have input methods advanced enough for generating this:
Could you please list some that do, and are also convenient?
Define convenient. Emacs is generally not regarded
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I don't know if this is the right place to discuss the death of in
Python 3.0, or if there have been any meaningful discussions posted
before (hard to search google with '' keyword), but why would anyone
prefer the comparison operator != over ???
I've written an
On Mar 30, 6:35 am, Gabriel Genellina [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
En Sun, 30 Mar 2008 02:11:33 -0300, hdante [EMAIL PROTECTED] escribió:
BTW, my opinion is that it's already time that programmer editors
have input methods advanced enough for generating this:
if x ≠ 0:
∀y ∈ s:
On Mar 30, 5:40 am, Torsten Bronger [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Hallöchen!
Bjoern Schliessmann writes:
Lie wrote:
Ah yes, that is also used (I completely forgot about that one, my
math's aren't that sharp anymore) and I think it's used more
frequently than .
Where did you read that (I
On Mar 30, 7:48 pm, Bjoern Schliessmann usenet-
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Torsten Bronger wrote:
Maybe he means ?.
Haven't seen this either, nor do I think it's the same than .
From afar, it looks more like .
Actually I meant an X-like symbol that is made not by crossing but by
. I retracted
On Mar 30, 5:25 pm, Bjoern Schliessmann usenet-
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Lie wrote:
Ah yes, that is also used (I completely forgot about that one, my
math's aren't that sharp anymore) and I think it's used more
frequently than .
Where did you read that (I mean, which country)? I've never
On Mar 30, 12:11 pm, hdante [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
(snip)
BTW, my opinion is that it's already time that programmer editors
have input methods advanced enough for generating this:
if x ≠ 0:
∀y ∈ s:
if y ≥ 0: f1(y)
else: f2(y)
That would be a nightmare.
Programming
En Sun, 30 Mar 2008 11:10:20 -0300, MRAB [EMAIL PROTECTED]
escribió:
On Mar 30, 6:35 am, Gabriel Genellina [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
En Sun, 30 Mar 2008 02:11:33 -0300, hdante [EMAIL PROTECTED] escribió:
BTW, my opinion is that it's already time that programmer editors
have input methods
On Mar 29, 12:34 pm, Lie [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Mar 29, 5:55 pm, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I don't know if this is the right place to discuss the death of in
Python 3.0, or if there have been any meaningful discussions posted
before (hard to search google with '' keyword), but why
On Mar 30, 9:45 am, Bjoern Schliessmann usenet-
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
hdante wrote:
BTW, my opinion is that it's already time that programmer editors
have input methods advanced enough for generating this:
Could you please list some that do, and are also convenient?
AFAICT there's
Hallöchen!
hdante writes:
On Mar 30, 9:45 am, Bjoern Schliessmann usenet-
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
hdante wrote:
BTW, my opinion is that it's already time that programmer
editors have input methods advanced enough for generating this:
Could you please list some that do, and are also
On Mar 30, 3:14 pm, Lie [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Mar 30, 12:11 pm, hdante [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
(snip)
BTW, my opinion is that it's already time that programmer editors
have input methods advanced enough for generating this:
if x ≠ 0:
∀y ∈ s:
if y ≥ 0: f1(y)
On Mar 30, 6:08 pm, Torsten Bronger [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Hallöchen!
hdante writes:
On Mar 30, 9:45 am, Bjoern Schliessmann usenet-
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
hdante wrote:
BTW, my opinion is that it's already time that programmer
editors have input methods advanced enough for
Torsten Bronger wrote:
Emacs is generally not regarded as being convenient, however, it
has very strong input methods. I type \gtrless and get ?,
or \forall and get ?.
I wonder where the point of this is. :) Why use fancy unicode chars
if they're not better to read (apart from not being
I don't know if this is the right place to discuss the death of in
Python 3.0, or if there have been any meaningful discussions posted
before (hard to search google with '' keyword), but why would anyone
prefer the comparison operator != over ???
I've written an article about it to try and save
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I don't know if this is the right place to discuss the death of in
Python 3.0, or if there have been any meaningful discussions posted
before (hard to search google with '' keyword), but why would anyone
prefer the comparison operator != over ???
I doubt anyone
On Sat, 29 Mar 2008 04:08:16 -0700, Paul Rubin wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I don't know if this is the right place to discuss the death of in
Python 3.0, or if there have been any meaningful discussions posted
before (hard to search google with '' keyword), but why would anyone
prefer
Steven D'Aprano [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
reserve for greater than or less than but not equal to which is
subtly different. (Think about unordered values, where x != y does not
imply that x y or x y, e.g. IEEE NaNs.)
Heh, good point.
The scary choice is /= which can be interpreted as
-On [20080329 13:01], Paul Rubin (http://phr.cx@NOSPAM.invalid) wrote:
Yes, what I mean is that some languages (e.g. Ada, Haskell) use /= for
nonequality.
/= is understandable given how it looks like a digraph for ≠ (U+2260) and I
am guessing that was the intent.
--
Jeroen Ruigrok van der
On Mar 29, 5:55 pm, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I don't know if this is the right place to discuss the death of in
Python 3.0, or if there have been any meaningful discussions posted
before (hard to search google with '' keyword), but why would anyone
prefer the comparison operator != over ???
Lie [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
You're forcing your argument too much, both != and are NOT standard
mathematics operators -- the standard not-equal operator is -- and
I can assure you that both != and won't be comprehensible to non-
programmers.
My maths may be a bit rusty, but I always
On Mar 30, 1:24 am, Duncan Booth [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Lie [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
You're forcing your argument too much, both != and are NOT standard
mathematics operators -- the standard not-equal operator is -- and
I can assure you that both != and won't be comprehensible to non-
to me it seems simple.
C uses !=
why does C use != because its kind of hard to type the equal with a
slash
so if python is supposed to be a simple and easy to use language, use the
simple and easy to understand, standard 'not-equal' operator... Idk, maybe
there's more to it but simple is
On Mar 29, 6:55 am, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
why would anyone
Questions that begin with the words why would anyone are almost
always betray an arrogance about their own beliefs and an ignorance
(or feigning ignorance) of human nature.
Wiser folks know better than to phrase this question so
On Mar 29, 6:08 am, Paul Rubin http://[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I don't know if this is the right place to discuss the death of in
Python 3.0, or if there have been any meaningful discussions posted
before (hard to search google with '' keyword), but why would
En Sat, 29 Mar 2008 16:24:01 -0300, Michael Wieher
[EMAIL PROTECTED] escribió:
to me it seems simple.
C uses !=
why does C use != because its kind of hard to type the equal with a
slash
In C, ! by itself is the logical not, so !(a==b) is the same as (a!=b)
and that's rather
On Sat, 29 Mar 2008 12:49:05 -0700, Carl Banks wrote:
Please set it straight in 3.0, and if not, convince me with a good
reason of doing so, so that I can live with it and don't have to spend
the rest of my life in 2.x ;).
1. It's not going to change in Python 3.0.
2. It's a silly thing
In article [EMAIL PROTECTED],
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I don't know if this is the right place to discuss the death of in
Python 3.0, or if there have been any meaningful discussions posted
before (hard to search google with '' keyword), but why would anyone
prefer the comparison operator !=
On Mar 29, 7:55 am, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I don't know if this is the right place to discuss the death of in
Python 3.0, or if there have been any meaningful discussions posted
before (hard to search google with '' keyword), but why would anyone
prefer the comparison operator != over ???
On Mar 29, 9:23 pm, Steven D'Aprano [EMAIL PROTECTED]
cybersource.com.au wrote:
On Sat, 29 Mar 2008 12:49:05 -0700, Carl Banks wrote:
Please set it straight in 3.0, and if not, convince me with a good
reason of doing so, so that I can live with it and don't have to spend
the rest of my life
En Sun, 30 Mar 2008 02:11:33 -0300, hdante [EMAIL PROTECTED] escribió:
BTW, my opinion is that it's already time that programmer editors
have input methods advanced enough for generating this:
if x ≠ 0:
∀y ∈ s:
if y ≥ 0: f1(y)
else: f2(y)
Fine if you have the right
61 matches
Mail list logo
