Re: Pie-thon state 5 - and final

Clark C. Evans wrote:
> Wow.  I'm impressed you got anywhere near this far! Your work sounds
> very promising, a great way to validate Parrot's value proposition.

Thanks.

> On Sat, Jul 24, 2004 at 12:24:48PM +0200, Leopold Toetsch wrote:
> | 
> | >>> False=42

> But that's not a bug.  If one assignes "42" to False, then this is what
> False means, 42, nothing more and nothing less. Yes, I know you know this.

Well. There are (AFAIK) only 2 instances of the bool object, these 
shouldn't be assignable. I think that doing "(True,False) = (0,1)" and 
then importing some library would break things horribly.

> If you could, would you set your goal slightly higher than
> just the Python tests?  I'd love to see Parrot do Stackless Python!

What I know of stackless isn't too much. But Parrot is using CPS 
(continuation passing style) for all subroutine and method calls, 
including coroutines aka generators. So I think that *is* stackless Python.

> *bings*
> 
> Clark

leo

• Pie-thon state 5 - and final by Leopold Toetsch
• RE: Pie-thon state 5 - and final by Tim Howell
• RE: Pie-thon state 5 - and final by Dan Sugalski
• Re: Pie-thon state 5 - and final by Clark C. Evans
• Re: Pie-thon state 5 - and final by Leopold Toetsch
• Re: Pie-thon state 5 - and final by ssmith
• Re: Pie-thon state 5 - and final by Dan Sugalski