Stackless goes Limbo

[James J. Besemer]

Aahz wrote:

> >Aahz wrote:
> >>
> >> Ewww!  Where did you get the idea that awk is a precursor of Python?
> >
> > JB:
> >Look up "precursor" in the dictionary and you'll see it's an accurate
> >statement.
>
> www.dictionary.com provides definitions that agree with my reaction.

1. You are in error (or intellectually dishonest) to claim that "definitions"
(plural) support your reaction, as only one of the three comes even close.

2. You should have surmised that definition #2 (merely "a predecessor" without any
other relationship) is the meaning I intended.  For me and others I know, AWK once
was our preferred (the only) utility language and it is now has largely been
replaced by Python.  Thus, for some people anyway, AWK clearly is a precursor to
Python.

Since your own reference included an innocent, neutral definition, you are out of
line to complain, even if you originally were ignorant of the alternative meaning
before looking it up.

3. For your information, my Oxford American Dictionary ONLY includes neutral
"predecessor" meanings for precursor, without the additional nuance in
dictionary.com's first definition.  To be honest, I originally thought "precursor"
might be too strong a word so I looked it up before using it.   I go to these
great lengths and I STILL wasn't sufficiently humble and deferential for this
group.

4. Actually, this all makes me wonder if your web source is accurate in the first
place?  I've come to place a lot of trust in my well worn OAD.  Shit.  Now I'll be
pouring over different dictionaries all evening.

5. Furthermore, one could argue that even the first definition is not wholly
inaccurate, that AWK in some way "indicated" that Python was "something to come."

After all, AWK was one of the original "toolbox" or "utility" languages and one
could argue that AWK's guarded success "indicated" that other utility languages
eventually "were to come."

Or I could say that AWK curiously is one of the few languages I know of other than
Python that has exactly 2 scopes (local and global) instead of a more general
scheme (since remedied in Python).  Who knows?  Maybe AWK is where the BDFL got
the idea from in the first place.  (Just kidding!)

6. In any case, let me be perfectly clear: I certainly and specifically did not
mean to imply any "heritage" or ancestry between the two languages, only that AWK
came earlier in time.

7. That being said, AWK was and is a great little language.  I still use it
occasionally because it's simpler than Python for some little things.  And I still
have some AWK code from long ago that still serves useful purposes.  And who
knows?  If Kernighan and co. had kept adding to AWK there might never have been a
point to Python.

8. I really gotta say -- some of you guys really need to lighten up and/or get a
life.  There is, was and always will be a world aside from Python.

--jb

--
James J. Besemer  503-280-0838 voice
http://cascade-sys.com  503-280-0375 fax
mailto:jb at cascade-sys.com