Re: Python has landed?

Not sure I understand the logic on the “good fit” front.

The biggest challenge for most RPGers making the switch is generally the OO aspect. That’s is why PHP has worked for many - because you can write procedurally while exploiting objects written by others. Admittedly I have not (yet) studied Python in depth, but everything I have seen to date tells me that it is even more strongly OO than Java.

I’m interested as to why you two think it works better than (say) Java.


Jon Paris

www.partner400.com
www.SystemiDeveloper.com

On Jul 6, 2015, at 11:33 AM, John Yeung <gallium.arsenide@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

On Mon, Jul 6, 2015 at 9:54 AM, Justin Dearing <zippy1981@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Syntax wise I think python is a very good fit for people used to CL and
RPG.

I think so too. I think Python is a better fit than Ruby or PHP, even
though both of those alternatives are similar to Python in style,
power, and performance (from a big-picture view of the entire
programming language landscape). Which is one reason I've been such an
advocate for Python on the i.

How optimized is the NumPy support? [...] Are the NumPy binaries IBM is releasing
equally optomized for the OBMi CPUs?

Where did you get the idea that IBM is releasing NumPy binaries for i?
Maybe I have not read carefully enough; do you have a link?

John Y.
--
This is the Midrange Systems Technical Discussion (MIDRANGE-L) mailing list
To post a message email: MIDRANGE-L@xxxxxxxxxxxx
To subscribe, unsubscribe, or change list options,
visit: http://lists.midrange.com/mailman/listinfo/midrange-l
or email: MIDRANGE-L-request@xxxxxxxxxxxx
Before posting, please take a moment to review the archives
at http://archive.midrange.com/midrange-l.