[9fans] Python cleverness - Plan9

This is a discussion on [9fans] Python cleverness - Plan9 ; There are 1300 cases in Python of different type signatures for calls to the same function. I think this is some new, powerful, programming model, where you call things with structures that could be the same but really aren't. I ...

+ Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 3 of 3

Thread: [9fans] Python cleverness

  1. [9fans] Python cleverness

    There are 1300 cases in Python of different type signatures for calls
    to the same function.

    I think this is some new, powerful, programming model, where you call
    things with structures that could be the same but really aren't. I
    guess the idea is that the common elements of the structure are all
    the same, and declared first, so really, everything should just work
    out fine, even though the structures are all different. Everything's
    fine, don't worry, lie back and think of England.

    (Warning! cultural reference ahead! See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pollyanna)
    I think we can call it Pollyanna-morphism.
    (now, for those of you who got it, you have to admit that's a pretty
    good joke:-)

    I also expect that, were I to go to the Python community, and mention
    that this might be an issue with type-safe linking, that I would not
    get an enthusiastic reception. It's just too embedded in the code, and
    it's so clear that it is intended to work this way, that I doubt it is
    an accident of some sort.

    Therefore, I'm going to try to see if I can make 8l issue a warning
    only for incompatible type signatures. I already tried just not
    incrementing nerror in the diag call, but this still is not giving me
    an 8.out; clearly I'm missing something.

    But, if I can get this, we should have dynamic modules in Python, and
    I get to check that box, since python and dynamic modules have become
    very important to supercomputer applications writers. There, I said
    that without grimacing :-)

    ron

  2. Re: [9fans] Python cleverness

    Has there been any progress on this? I'd really like to see Python
    2.4* or 2.5 on Plan 9 since a lot of the Python code I deal with on a
    regular basis these days requires a more recent version than we have
    out there on Plan 9.

    jas


    On Jan 17, 2007, at 3:09 PM, ron minnich wrote:
    >
    > But, if I can get this, we should have dynamic modules in Python, and
    > I get to check that box, since python and dynamic modules have become
    > very important to supercomputer applications writers. There, I said
    > that without grimacing :-)




  3. Re: [9fans] Python cleverness

    hola,

    there are more recent python ports, one on sources:
    /n/sources/contrib/uriel/ports/python2.4p9.tgz
    and I think there is another more updated somewhere on mordor.

    On 3/17/07, Jeff Sickel wrote:
    > Has there been any progress on this? I'd really like to see Python
    > 2.4* or 2.5 on Plan 9 since a lot of the Python code I deal with on a
    > regular basis these days requires a more recent version than we have
    > out there on Plan 9.
    >
    > jas
    >
    >
    > On Jan 17, 2007, at 3:09 PM, ron minnich wrote:
    > >
    > > But, if I can get this, we should have dynamic modules in Python, and
    > > I get to check that box, since python and dynamic modules have become
    > > very important to supercomputer applications writers. There, I said
    > > that without grimacing :-)

    >
    >
    >



    --
    Federico G. Benavento

+ Reply to Thread