Hi,
I just downloaded "Monad" the MSH shell, watched Jeffery Snover's vision behind Monad and played with the app.
After looking at the MSH shell briefly, the big question that popped
into my head is what's the big picture game plan for IronPython and
Monad?
Both IronPython and MSH have interp
I think it has to do with syntax, and the
DSL tools push. MSH in particular is geared toward one-liner pipelines,
whereas Python is a little heavy-weight in that regard. MSH is also
intended to be somewhat familiar to those from the *sh world.
Remember one of the selling points of .NE
On the other hand, it's useful to avoid
context switches to get things done. For example, we recently tossed NAnt out of
our build/deploy environment and replaced it with Ruby+Rake. In NAnt, the
context switch from "scripting a task" to "writing a task" was really severe -
you had to pull
Python is capable of functional programming that would make
most APLers happy: see David Mertz's articles at http://www-128.ibm.com/developerworks/linux/library/l-prog.html and
http://www-128.ibm.com/developerworks/linux/library/l-prog2.html,
although Ruby was there earlier with closures, acc
I haven't used Ruby, but my experience with Python would say the syntaxes are
very different. In particular, I don't know of syntax in Python that says:
* "Take a stream, apply lambda to each element, and send the output to a
stream."
* "Attach the output of this stream to the input of this o
It's capable of functional programming, somewhat, but it is highly
discouraged, from what I hear lambda, reduce, map and most other
higher order functions will be deprecated in Python 3.
On 7/25/05, Hank Fay <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Python is capable of functional programming that would ma
Hi Martin,
I read the announcement and, with this
description:
http://conferences.oreillynet.com/cs/os2005/view/e_sess/6862
I assume you'll get version 1.0 ready for the
conference. Is that right?
Luis
___
users-ironpython.com mailing list
users-
On 7/25/05, Keith J. Farmer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> [...]
> In the Unix world, tradition has us parsing stdin and sending stuff to
> stdout (an attempt to be lenient) whereas MSH abandons the custom parsing
> in favor of streams of objects (an attempt to be precise). Formatting
> and parsing
It's pretty cool. I'm not entirely warmed up to the language part of MSH, but
then it's been a while since I was big on batch files, but it's very powerful.
A buddy and I have been talking the last hour or so about how to extend the
power by allowing multiple named output streams. This could a
(We've secretely replaced Keith's AP English training with a demented chimp..
Let's see if anyone notices.)
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] on behalf of Keith J. Farmer
Sent: Mon 7/25/2005 2:02 PM
To: Discussion of IronPython
Subject: RE: [IronPython] Pondering Monad/MSH
Hi all - sorry to cross-post to the IP list, but I know there
are some folks who follow both projects and might want a head's
up -- please post any replies to the pythondotnet list unless it
really is pertinent to IP per se.
I'm about to wrap up development on Python for .NET and make a
1.0 rel
Unfortunately, no. We will not have version 1.0 for the
conference.
The plan is still
the same as it was about a month ago when we outlined the roadmap towards the
0.8 release.
Martin
From:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
Luis M. GonzalezSent: Monday, July 2
I recall, way-back-when, that 2-week
release cycles were planned. What are things looking like now?
-
Keith J. Farmer
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
From:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Martin Maly
Sent: Monday, 25 July 2005 20:50
To: Discussion
of Iron
13 matches
Mail list logo
