The Cost of Dynamism (was Re: Pyhon 2.x or 3.x, which is faster?)

[BartC]

On 24/03/2016 14:01, Chris Angelico wrote:

> I don't, until it's pointed out. At that point, someone who respects
> the language will at least pay *some* heed to the changed
> recommendations; what we're seeing here is that he continues to use C
> idioms and then complain that Python is slow. I don't expect him to
> magically know what Python idioms are, but when the thread has gone on
> this long and he's still showing the same style of code, that's when I
> start to agree with Ben that he's not paying heed to Pythonic vs
> non-Pythonic.

Have a look at the short thread 'Rotation' in comp.programming starting 
4-Jan-2016.

(Possible link: 
https://groups.google.com/forum/#!searchin/comp.programming/rotation/comp.programming/aQh4n2HGtaU/sSbcyjqfEQAJ)

Someone posts an algorithm in C++, I post a version in my language, 
someone else calls that a 'blub' solution and offers a much shorter 
version in /their/ language.

I point out that their solution just uses a built-in to do the work. It 
by-passes the question of the algorithm, which was the point of the 
thread. I also point out that I also gave a one-line version in my language.

What you're trying to say I guess is that such a one-liner would be 
Pythonic. And what I'm saying is that that would defeat the object of 
what I'm trying to do.

-- 
Bartc