D
Deep_Feelings
So you have chosen programming language "x" so shall you tell us why
you did so , and what negatives or positives it has ?
you did so , and what negatives or positives it has ?
why did you choose the programming language(s)you currently use?
M
MRAB
Deep_Feelings said:
I've heard of "C" and "D", but not "x", unless you mean XPL (X
Programming Language) or PLAN-X.
M
Mensanator
language must have
- unlimited precision integers
- easy to program
- IDE not required
- reasonable speed
- math library needs to include number theoretic functions
like GCD, LCM, Modular Inverse, etc.
- not fucking retarded like F#
That leaves Python (along with gympy, the Python wrapper for
the GMP library, which could be used with C or C++ if it weren't
for the ease of use issue) as the obvious choice.
As for negatives, the GMP library doesn't factor.
As for positives, you can call a factoring program from Python
and capture the output (and have it correct the bug in the factoring
program without having to fix the factoring program).
S
Stefan Behnel
Deep_Feelings said:
Java, pays a living.
*duck*
Stefan
P
Paul Rubin
Mensanator said:
Have you looked at Haskell?
Maybe with some MIRACL bindings...
A
Aahz
Where do you get the duck programming language?
N
Nobody
Given his comment about F#, I have a suspicion that he might be
dogmatically opposed to functional languages generally.
G
greg
Deep_Feelings said:
This summarises my reasons for choosing Python
fairly well:
http://www1.american.edu/cas/econ/faculty/isaac/choose_python.pdf
C
Chris Rebert
+1 PDF Of The Week
- Chris
C
Che M
As a hobbyist--and not a real programmer*--I think I chose Python
(I don't really recall now) because of things like:
- There is a good community, including tutor list, etc.
- I wanted something that would run cross-platform (so no Visual
Basic).
- Preferred something free (so no REALBasic).
- I wanted a high level language.
- It seemed easiest to read and learn. I like mandatory indents, for
example.
- There are a lot of libraries for it with good support.
- I liked the Zen of Python philosophy (to the extent I understood
it).
- Some high profile entities were using it, so it must have something
going for it.
- It was new enough to be a possible improvement over older languages
while old enough to be established.
- Who can't like a computer language named Python?
Drawbacks:
- AFAIK, running multiple Python apps all show up in the Windows task
manager as
"python.exe" (common to all non-compiled languages?) instead of the
app's name.
- Distributing as an executable is not as straightforward as I might
hope.
- I wish Python 3 wouldn't break my 2.5 code.
- If it could be quicker (compiled), that would be better. (But
haven't tried
psyco or Shed Skin, etc.)
- I've found understanding web programming hard, but that might be
just the
nature of web programming and not a Python thing.
- I wish wxPython had a more complete rich text editor (but overall it
is great).
CM
M
Mensanator
That's the factoring program (factor.exe from
the MIRACL package) I made reference to.
I don't know how to fix the bug nor how to bind
it to Python.
What I do (or did at one time) know is how figure
out how to recompile it, change the output to be
database compatible, consistent messages rather
than such useless messages as "this number is prime".
The Python program, as it captures the StdOut,
can watch for the bug. The bug is that factor.exe
occasionally gets stuck on a composite while deep
into the factoring process. Sometimes, however,
this getting stuck can be resolved if you send the
composite back to the beginning and start over.
The factor.exe program isn't smart enough to try
this, it simply returns COMPOSITE amongst the
PRIME_FACTORS. The calling Python program can then
collect the unfactored composites and call factor.exe
again with each of them sending them back to the
start of the factoring. If they successfully factor
on the second pass, Python then appends them to
the factors from the first pass to achieve a complete
factorization that factor.exe can produce in theory
but not in practice.
M
Mensanator
Not dogmatically opposed, I installed it because
I actually wanted to try functional progrsmming.
My mistake was listening to that Harrop dude who
didn't bother to explain that F# is part of a
government program that provides jobs for retards.
To wit: F# has a rational data type, that's cool.
But wait, F# has TWO rational data types. Huh?
Well, after they made the first, some jackass
came up with a second type that stores data more
efficiently.
And, of course, the second type doesn't have the
same functionality as the first, so you need both.
And of the myriad data type converion methods, guess
which possible conversion methods are conspicuous
by their absense? That's right, type1 <==> type2
rational conversions don't exist.
At that point, I decided I wasn't going to put up
crap like that and threw it away.
P
Paul Moore
2009/7/15 Scott David Daniels said:It shares a type system with Python, of course.
No, it just has a type system with all the same operations as Python,
which all do the same things.
Paul.