- E04 - Leadership! Google, Guido van Rossum, PSF
ilias at lazaridis.com
Mon Jan 2 06:03:17 EST 2006
Alex Martelli wrote:
> Ilias Lazaridis <ilias at lazaridis.com> wrote:
note: Anton Vredegoor wrote:
>>>>only hire people with long backstabbing histories.
>>>Such as...? Guido van Rossum? Greg Stein? Vint Cerf? Ben Goodger?
>>The employees you've mentioned should have most possibly the basic
>>google employment requirement: BS or MS... .
> ... "or equivalent" (I do believe all I named have at least a Bachelor
> degree, but with the undisputable results they've shown afterwards, I
> think they'd all meet the "or equivalent" clause anyway).
" * BS or MS in Computer Science or equivalent (PhD a plus). "
This referes to an _academic_ degree.
Very few companies make an explicit statement about non-academic applicants.
It seems Google does not.
>>I assume that Mr. Vredegoor uses the term "backstabbing" incorrect. Most
>>possibly he meand just something like "back reaching".
>>Possibly he can confirm.
> Let's wait for him to confirm or deny; I thought he did mean what he
yes, I've become curious.
>>btw: I don't understand exactly what Mr. Vredegoor means by "having
>>worked for the man".
>>Possibly he can clarify concisely.
> By all means, let's hope he does. In the jargon of the American
> underclass, "to work for The Man" meant working for law enforcement
> agencies, and somehow it got widened to "working for ``the system''",
> i.e., in a "socially respectable" job. Maybe in Dutch it means
> something different.
"socially respectable" would fit.
but let's await his comments.
>>Mr. Martinelli, you seem to know python.
> Sorry, that's a brand of sparking apple cider. I get my name mispelled
> that way often enough, since I moved to the US, to have become quite
> sensitive about it!-) In MY name, there is no "in"...
Mr. Martelli, I apologize for naming you like an soft-drink.
Python vs jamLang follows:
>>May you can showcase how to overcome some of the limitations
>>(limitations in context of the evaluation template):
> re: #LIMITATION: automated get/set methods via var-name not available
> see the 'property' built-in.
Can you (or some reader) sent (or fill in) the relevant code?
> re: LIMITATION: InstanceVarName not available
> since any object at a given time may be bound to any number of names,
> from 0 upwards, and none of them has any privileged relation with the
> object, this will never be solved. If you think an object should have a
> name with some privileged relation to it, I strongly suggest you switch
> to another language.
=> the limitation "InstanceVarName not available" is true.
(I will change the evaluation-template and move this step to the "Expert
Reflective Data Access").
> "prints Class Definition (methods, fields), without code
> LIMITATION: no direct access on object-model-level"
> not sure what you mean, but maybe see the 'inspect' module.
=> Clas Definition is not accessible via MetaClasses
(possible workaround: inspect module)
> "#LIMITATION: attribute is not available systemwide in every object
> #LIMITATION: attribute is not on object-model-level
> #LIMITATION: Operation is not Object Oriented
> If you think that the syntax x(y,z) is "not Object Oriented", then again
> I strongly suggest that you switch to other languages (avoiding other
> powerful object oriented languages such as Dylan, Lisp, or O'CAML, which
> also allow usage of function-call notation for THEIR OO power); in other
> words, if you think the mere presence of a syntax like 'y.x(z)' makes
> any difference wrt accessing a functionality versus 'x(y, z)', you're
> clearly evaluating things at a totally inappropriate level.
I assure you: the level is totally appropriate.
> The notation you choose, setattr(Object, "meta", "Some meta
I did not choose it.
Someone has posted it.
> information"), is, at any rate, absolutely semantically identical to
> Object.meta = "Some meta information" -- they will both succeed or both
> fail, and when they both succeed they will have identical effects; thus,
> that point about "not Object Oriented" seems to fall somewhere between
> embarassingly wrong, and crazy-level weird.
=> Object.meta = "Some meta information"
=> can be used instead of setattr(Object, "meta", "Some metainformation")
> It IS true that in Python you cannot set arbitrary attributes on
=> #LIMITATION: Cannot add arbitrary attributes to arbitrary objects.
> arbitrary objects. The workaround is to use a dict, indexed by the id
> of the object you want to "set arbitrary attributes on"; this has the
> helpful consequence that separate namespaces are used, so your arbitrary
> setting of metadata cannot interfere with the `true' attributes of the
> object in question.
=> possible workaround: use dict.
> I'm unable to understand what you're trying to do in the "extend talker
> code" box following that one.
Someone has posted this code, to solve "Applying metadata (or
attributes, as you prefere) to Class, Object, ...".
I understand that the poster has send code which does not work.
see the ruby result as a reference:
If you (or any reader) like, please provide the concrete code to solve
the open limitations (the simple ones, like e.g. get/set).
Thank you for taking the time to answer.
More information about the Python-list