Terminology: "reference" versus "pointer"
rosuav at gmail.com
Sun Sep 13 02:19:14 CEST 2015
On Sun, Sep 13, 2015 at 9:39 AM, Rustom Mody <rustompmody at gmail.com> wrote:
> To which we have Chris saying CPython ≠ Python
> Which reminds me of another definition
> Fig-Leaf: A device for converting poor porn into high art
> Even in languages like C with an ISO standard adhering to the standard is
> academic (gcc's switch is --pedantic) and it is in practice major
> implementations like gcc and MSC that define and push the standard.
> In python, CPython is the standard and other implementations can lay claim to
> being 'python' to the extent that they adhere to the standard.
> Or have I missed some ISO-ization?
ISO hasn't standardized Python, but the Python developers do
distinguish between the language and the various implementations. Yes,
CPython does push forward ahead of the others, and thus sometimes
another Python will replicate CPython behaviour rather than seeking an
official language pronouncement; but other times, the PyPy or Jython
or Brython folks come to python-dev with a question. As a general
rule, most PEPs are about the language, not the implementation, so you
can eyeball those to see what you'd need to implement to write a
Python from scratch.
CPython does not intrinsically define the standard. Some languages are
done this way (Pike, for instance), but Python is not.
More information about the Python-list