Guido wins FSF Award
peter at engcorp.com
Sun Feb 24 21:02:35 CET 2002
Hans Nowak wrote:
> Magnus Lie Hetland wrote:
> > In article <8867.813T2365T9245607threeseas at earthlink.net>, Timothy Rue wrote:
> > [...]
> > >Certainly everyone does understand in reading and responding to post here,
> > >they actually make use of all nine action. It's physics, but they may
> > >think it's me and that somehow their reactions will cause a dismissal
> > >of.... well physics.
> > >
> > >Lets see now:
> > [...]
> > No, no! This isn't simple enough. The *real* truth (and it's physics,
> > so you can't contradict me) is that there is only one true action:
> > DS - Do Stuff
> > Now deal with it and go somewhere else with your false theory.
> Do you also have a model with zero actions? This one seems kind of
> difficult to me.
Yes. Look at the way computers store floating point numbers. The
left-most one is assumed, so never stored. Likewise with the
zero-instruction VIC (ZIVIC) one just assumes the DS instruction
before all parameters. I posted a script written in ZIVIC a
few weeks ago, using parameters drawn from running the dictionary
compiler over the Python docs to extract the basic structure of
the language. The result was quite straight-forward and readable
to most of us here, with one possible exception...
I'll post another sample here:
# ZIVIC code: assumes DS instruction prior to all parameters
file = open('somefile.txt')
length = len(file.readlines())
print 'Lines in file:', length
As this is the first working implementation based on the VIC
concepts, I trust this will put to rest all the negativism
expressed here about the viability of the concept. Clearly it
works, and I suggest we all go back to using it...
More information about the Python-list