Python from Wise Guy's Viewpoint
Joachim Durchholz
joachim.durchholz at web.de
Mon Oct 20 10:20:59 EDT 2003
More information about the Python-list mailing list
Mon Oct 20 10:20:59 EDT 2003
- Previous message (by thread): Python from Wise Guy's Viewpoint
- Next message (by thread): Python from Wise Guy's Viewpoint
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
james anderson wrote: > Joachim Durchholz wrote: > > how about formulating some examples in some language which is adequate to > express them? perhaps somewhat more concretely than the allusions in your > earlier message, in which you suggest some problem domains and some > amorphously difficult decisions, but despite several rereadings, never > concretly indicate what does not "work". > > what does "different directions" mean? "glue code"? "asymmetry"? a "base > class"? a "module"? an "orthogonal extension"? > > what is the distinction between "dynamic dispatch" and "parametric polymorphism". > > if not in the context of clos, then, well, in english. Sorry - this would go beyond the scope of a newsgroup discussion. It would take me several hours to get this all sorted out, written down, and worded so that it's generally understandable. And, frankly, I already have spent too much time on this thread. I do intend to writ it all up and publish it on a WWW site - in my copious spare time... :-( Let me assure you that all these nebulous terms are due to time constraints, not due to fuzzy reasoning. Sorry if this all sounds like a lame excuse (actually it is). And sorry to leave you with lots of fuzzy allusions and no concrete data. Others may be willing to fill in more details. >>I'd really like to see a Lisp dialect that valued reliability over raw >>expressive power. But I fear this isn't very high on the agenda of the >>Lisp community. Besides, it would be difficult to do that - Lisp offers >>no protection against peeking at internals and setting up all that >>unsafe-but-powerful stuff. > > what are "internals", what is "protection"? No way to define an opaque type. AFAIK, modern Lisps allow user-defined types, but they offer no way to protect them against inspecting their internals. I'd prefer to have at least a grain of information hiding... Regards, Jo
- Previous message (by thread): Python from Wise Guy's Viewpoint
- Next message (by thread): Python from Wise Guy's Viewpoint
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
More information about the Python-list mailing list