Velocity Reviews - Computer Hardware Reviews

Velocity Reviews > Newsgroups > Programming > Python > Python/Parrot still alive?

Reply
Thread Tools

Python/Parrot still alive?

 
 
Berlin Brown
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      02-08-2004
Is there going to be a python parrot release. I looking on the web and
seeing stuff, stilly pending. That would be cool to see application
servers, via python(I think that could only be with a virtual machine).
Could be wrong of course.

 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
=?ISO-8859-1?Q?=22Martin_v=2E_L=F6wis=22?=
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      02-08-2004
Berlin Brown wrote:
> Is there going to be a python parrot release. I looking on the web and
> seeing stuff, stilly pending. That would be cool to see application
> servers, via python(I think that could only be with a virtual machine).
> Could be wrong of course.


If you believe that application servers require Parrot because it
has a virtual machine, you are certainly wrong:
- Python does have a virtual machine even without Parrot.
- Applications servers do not fundamentally require virtual
machines.

Regards,
Martin

 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Paul Prescod
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      02-08-2004
Martin v. Lwis wrote:

> ...
>
> If you believe that application servers require Parrot because it
> has a virtual machine, you are certainly wrong:
> - Python does have a virtual machine even without Parrot.
> - Applications servers do not fundamentally require virtual
> machines.


It is interesting how interpreters have been rebranded as "virtual
machines." Python people still use the word "interpreter" and that is
probably not great from a marketing point of view.

Paul Prescod



 
Reply With Quote
 
=?ISO-8859-1?Q?=22Martin_v=2E_L=F6wis=22?=
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      02-08-2004
Paul Prescod wrote:
> It is interesting how interpreters have been rebranded as "virtual
> machines." Python people still use the word "interpreter" and that is
> probably not great from a marketing point of view.


I personally make a distinction between an interpreter and a virtual
machine. A virtual machine is one that has a "machine code", i.e. a
set of abstract instructions, operating on machine state. In Python,
the abstract set of instructions is the Python byte code, and the
abstract state is the collection of frame objects, etc.

Some interpreters don't have virtual machines, e.g. Tcl did not
have one until Tcl 8 or so. OTOH, not all virtual machines are
interpreted, e.g. MS .NET is always compiled to native code
("just in time" instead of being interpreted.

Regards,
Martin

 
Reply With Quote
 
Lothar Scholz
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      02-09-2004
"Martin v. Lwis" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message news:<c068ah$o0p$00$(E-Mail Removed)-online.com>...

> Some interpreters don't have virtual machines, e.g. Tcl did not
> have one until Tcl 8 or so. OTOH, not all virtual machines are


So Ruby is an interpreter and not a virutal machine ?
 
Reply With Quote
 
=?ISO-8859-1?Q?=22Martin_v=2E_L=F6wis=22?=
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      02-09-2004
Lothar Scholz wrote:
>>Some interpreters don't have virtual machines, e.g. Tcl did not
>>have one until Tcl 8 or so. OTOH, not all virtual machines are

>
>
> So Ruby is an interpreter and not a virutal machine ?


I don't know how Ruby is implemented.

On the language level, there are not interpreted or compiled
languages - there are only interpreters and compilers, and they
are on the level of language implementation. So your question
would be only valid for "Ruby 1.8.1" or some other specific
version. However, I could not answer the question for any Ruby
version.

Regards,
Martin

 
Reply With Quote
 
Peter Hansen
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      02-09-2004
Lothar Scholz wrote:
>
> "Martin v. Lwis" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message news:<c068ah$o0p$00$(E-Mail Removed)-online.com>...
>
> > Some interpreters don't have virtual machines, e.g. Tcl did not
> > have one until Tcl 8 or so. OTOH, not all virtual machines are

>
> So Ruby is an interpreter and not a virutal machine ?


Does Ruby have a "byte code" such as Python and Java have?
 
Reply With Quote
 
Lothar Scholz
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      02-10-2004
Peter Hansen <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message news:<(E-Mail Removed)>...
> Lothar Scholz wrote:
> >
> > "Martin v. Lwis" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message news:<c068ah$o0p$00$(E-Mail Removed)-online.com>...
> >
> > > Some interpreters don't have virtual machines, e.g. Tcl did not
> > > have one until Tcl 8 or so. OTOH, not all virtual machines are

> >
> > So Ruby is an interpreter and not a virutal machine ?

>
> Does Ruby have a "byte code" such as Python and Java have?


No. It keeps the parse tree in memory and traverse it during
evaluation. Same as all lisp interpreters(?!?!).
 
Reply With Quote
 
Jeremy Fincher
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      02-10-2004
http://www.velocityreviews.com/forums/(E-Mail Removed) (Lothar Scholz) wrote in message news:<(E-Mail Removed). com>...
> Peter Hansen <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message news:<(E-Mail Removed)>...
> > Lothar Scholz wrote:
> > >
> > > "Martin v. Lwis" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message news:<c068ah$o0p$00$(E-Mail Removed)-online.com>...
> > >
> > > > Some interpreters don't have virtual machines, e.g. Tcl did not
> > > > have one until Tcl 8 or so. OTOH, not all virtual machines are
> > >
> > > So Ruby is an interpreter and not a virutal machine ?

> >
> > Does Ruby have a "byte code" such as Python and Java have?

>
> No. It keeps the parse tree in memory and traverse it during
> evaluation. Same as all lisp interpreters(?!?!).


Definitely not the same as Lisp. In actuality, a Common Lisp
implementation that compiles to bytecode rather than native code is
uncommon; the majority of quality (i.e., complete) implementations
compile to native code.

Jeremy
 
Reply With Quote
 
Michael Hudson
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      02-10-2004
(E-Mail Removed) (Jeremy Fincher) writes:

> (E-Mail Removed) (Lothar Scholz) wrote in message news:<(E-Mail Removed). com>...
> > Peter Hansen <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message news:<(E-Mail Removed)>...
> > > Lothar Scholz wrote:
> > > >
> > > > "Martin v. Löwis" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message news:<c068ah$o0p$00$(E-Mail Removed)-online.com>...
> > > >
> > > > > Some interpreters don't have virtual machines, e.g. Tcl did not
> > > > > have one until Tcl 8 or so. OTOH, not all virtual machines are
> > > >
> > > > So Ruby is an interpreter and not a virutal machine ?
> > >
> > > Does Ruby have a "byte code" such as Python and Java have?

> >
> > No. It keeps the parse tree in memory and traverse it during
> > evaluation. Same as all lisp interpreters(?!?!).

>
> Definitely not the same as Lisp. In actuality, a Common Lisp
> implementation that compiles to bytecode rather than native code is
> uncommon; the majority of quality (i.e., complete) implementations
> compile to native code.


Well, yeah, but I think what happens to stuff you type into the repl
of e.g. CMUCL could be described as traversing the parse tree. CMUCL
has a bytecode compiler and a native compiler *as well*, but I think
you have to ask for them. SBCL (and some others: Corman, MCL)
compiles absolutely everything to native code, I think.

Cheers,
mwh

--
If i don't understand lisp, it would be wise to not bray about
how lisp is stupid or otherwise criticize, because my stupidity
would be archived and open for all in the know to see.
-- Xah, comp.lang.lisp
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
NZXT Nemesis still remains on top as a great gaming case! Silverstrand Front Page News 0 10-21-2005 01:27 PM
A little success but still problems =?Utf-8?B?TTc2?= Wireless Networking 14 01-18-2005 12:36 AM
windows socket failure - still having trouble =?Utf-8?B?Q01Dcm9uYW4=?= Wireless Networking 2 10-03-2004 01:10 AM
DHCP fails on wireless networks, Is KB313896 still an issue? =?Utf-8?B?Q2hyaXMgVGFuZ2Vy?= Wireless Networking 6 08-23-2004 02:55 PM
Mozilla: Can I still keep IE and outlook? Or still vulnerable to viruses? lbbss Computer Support 6 08-16-2004 11:55 PM



Advertisments