Python evolution: Unease
dave at pythonapocrypha.com
Tue Jan 4 23:16:15 CET 2005
Roman Suzi wrote:
>>The term "generic programming" is too... er... generic. :)
> Nope. It is not generic. It has it's definition made by the co-author
> of STL - A.Stepanov. And the Boost C++ library (many of us know it as
> Boost Python) standardise on the approach, AFAIK.
Ok, "too broad" then; Python already supports at least some aspects of generic
programming (at least, in the sense that I think you mean it), so it'd be good
to spell out what specific features you're referring to.
> Python could have honest support of concepts. Everything else will be
> available with them.
"Concepts" is a pretty generic term too! ;-) Do you mean concepts as defined
> And BTW, are we really disputing?
No, not at all - I'm just trying to better understand what you mean. Words like
"generic" and "concepts" don't yet have a widely recognized, strict definition
in the context of programming. If somebody has assigned some specific definition
to them, that's great, it's just not universal yet so references and additional
explanations are helpful.
More information about the Python-list