«

Hi Rhodri...

> You do realise that what id() returns is implementation-dependent, don't
> you? In particular, what IronPython returns isn't an address.

I'm pretty sure I wrote "standard Python" install in one of my replies.

Yeah here it is in a reply to Miki...

"Hmm, I was hoping to stay inside a standard Python install."



--
73...

Bazza, G0LCU...

Team AMIGA...

http://homepages.tesco.net/wisecracker/

http://main.aminet.net/search?readme=wisecracker

http://mikeos.berlios.de/

On Mon, 18 Apr 2011 07:21:18 +0100, wisecracker wrote:

> Hi Rhodri...
>
>> You do realise that what id() returns is implementation-dependent,
>> don't you? In particular, what IronPython returns isn't an address.
>
> I'm pretty sure I wrote "standard Python" install in one of my replies.

IronPython *is* standard Python. As are Jython, PyPy and CPython.


--
Steven

Steven D'Aprano wrote:
>> > I'm pretty sure I wrote "standard Python" install in one of my replies.
> IronPython*is* standard Python. As are Jython, PyPy and CPython.
>

This brings up a question I have had for a while; when is PSF going
to forward PythonX on over to a formal standards committee like ansi or iso?

On 2011-04-18, harrismh777 <> wrote:
> Steven D'Aprano wrote:
>>> > I'm pretty sure I wrote "standard Python" install in one of my replies.
>> IronPython*is* standard Python. As are Jython, PyPy and CPython.
>>
>
> This brings up a question I have had for a while; when is PSF going
> to forward PythonX on over to a formal standards committee like ansi or iso?

Oh please no. Anything but that.

Seriously.

--
Grant Edwards grant.b.edwards Yow! Hmmm ... an arrogant
at bouquet with a subtle
gmail.com suggestion of POLYVINYL
CHLORIDE ...