[gentoo-user] package.keywords syntax?

[gentoo-user] package.keywords syntax?

[Helmut Jarausch]

Hi,

I have 
ACCEPT_KEYWORDS="~amd64"

in /etc/make.conf
and I want to keep it.

Is it possible to revoke this for whole bunch
of packages like
kde-base/*

I've tried the following line in /etc/portage/package.keywords

kde-base/* -~amd64

but it doesn't help.

Many thanks for a hint,

Helmut Jarausch

Lehrstuhl fuer Numerische Mathematik
RWTH - Aachen University
D 52056 Aachen, Germany

Re: [gentoo-user] package.keywords syntax?

[Neil Bothwick]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 437 bytes --]

On Tue, 28 Oct 2008 18:07:35 +0100 (CET), Helmut Jarausch wrote:

> Is it possible to revoke this for whole bunch
> of packages like
> kde-base/*
> 
> I've tried the following line in /etc/portage/package.keywords
> 
> kde-base/* -~amd64

If you are trying to prevent KDE4 installing, it is better to put

kde-base/kde-meta:4.1 in /etc/portage/package.mask


-- 
Neil Bothwick

Modesty Becomes You. Try It More Often.

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 197 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] package.keywords syntax?

[Andrey Vul]

On Tue, Oct 28, 2008 at 1:07 PM, Helmut Jarausch
<jarausch@igpm.rwth-aachen.de> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I have
> ACCEPT_KEYWORDS="~amd64"
>
> in /etc/make.conf
> and I want to keep it.
>
> Is it possible to revoke this for whole bunch
> of packages like
> kde-base/*
>
> I've tried the following line in /etc/portage/package.keywords
>
> kde-base/* -~amd64
>
> but it doesn't help.
>
That looks like it'll only work in paludis. You're going to have to
use shell scripting and output a BFList to package.keywords .
Try $eix -C kde-base --only-names | sed -r 's/$/ -~amd64/' | sudo tee
-a /etc/portage/package.keywords



-- 
Andrey Vul

A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text.
Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing?
A: Top-posting.
Q: What is the most annoying thing in e-mail?

Re: [gentoo-user] package.keywords syntax?

[Ricardo Saffi Marques]

Andrey Vul wrote:
> That looks like it'll only work in paludis. You're going to have to
> use shell scripting and output a BFList to package.keywords .
> Try $eix -C kde-base --only-names | sed -r 's/$/ -~amd64/' | sudo tee
> -a /etc/portage/package.keywords

Don't you guys like (or maybe even know) "autounmask"?

[15:34:56] saffi@quasar ~ $ eix autounmask
* app-portage/autounmask
     Available versions:  0.15 0.21
     Homepage:            http://download.mpsna.de/opensource/autounmask/
     Description:         autounmask - Unmasking packages the easy way

Best regards,

Saffi

-- 
Ricardo Saffi Marques
http://www.las.ic.unicamp.br/~saffi/
======================================================
Laboratory of System Administration and Security - LAS
Institute of Computing - IC
P.O. Box: 6176
University of Campinas - UNICAMP
13083-852, Campinas, SP, Brazil
======================================================

Re: [gentoo-user] package.keywords syntax?

[Neil Bothwick]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 260 bytes --]

On Tue, 28 Oct 2008 15:39:14 -0200, Ricardo Saffi Marques wrote:

> Don't you guys like (or maybe even know) "autounmask"?

Yes, but it unmasks, not masks.


-- 
Neil Bothwick

Yoda of the Borg am I. Futile, resistance is. Be assimilated, you will.

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 197 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] package.keywords syntax?

[Andrey Vul]

On Tue, Oct 28, 2008 at 1:39 PM, Ricardo Saffi Marques
<saffi@las.ic.unicamp.br> wrote:
> Andrey Vul wrote:
>> That looks like it'll only work in paludis. You're going to have to
>> use shell scripting and output a BFList to package.keywords .
>> Try $eix -C kde-base --only-names | sed -r 's/$/ -~amd64/' | sudo tee
>> -a /etc/portage/package.keywords
>
> Don't you guys like (or maybe even know) "autounmask"?
You're giving the exact opposite of what was requested in the question.
The relevant part of the question was "Is it possible to *revoke* [the
~amd64 for kde]"

If it was *unmasking*, then yes, I would have mentioned autounmask.
But the OP asked about revoking (unmasks), not unmasking.
If you want to make an automask script that does the work for you, go ahead.

-- 
Andrey Vul

A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text.
Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing?
A: Top-posting.
Q: What is the most annoying thing in e-mail?

Re: [gentoo-user] package.keywords syntax?

[Alan McKinnon]

On Tuesday 28 October 2008 22:29:39 Andrey Vul wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 28, 2008 at 1:39 PM, Ricardo Saffi Marques
>
> <saffi@las.ic.unicamp.br> wrote:
> > Andrey Vul wrote:
> >> That looks like it'll only work in paludis. You're going to have to
> >> use shell scripting and output a BFList to package.keywords .
> >> Try $eix -C kde-base --only-names | sed -r 's/$/ -~amd64/' | sudo tee
> >> -a /etc/portage/package.keywords
> >
> > Don't you guys like (or maybe even know) "autounmask"?
>
> You're giving the exact opposite of what was requested in the question.
> The relevant part of the question was "Is it possible to *revoke* [the
> ~amd64 for kde]"
>
> If it was *unmasking*, then yes, I would have mentioned autounmask.
> But the OP asked about revoking (unmasks), not unmasking.
> If you want to make an automask script that does the work for you, go
> ahead.

Run autounmask, it creates a new file in /etc/portage/package.unmask/

Run a quick awk on it to get it into shape

Move file to /etc/portage/package.mask/

Problem solved in a neat elegant insightful way.

-- 
alan dot mckinnon at gmail dot com

Re: [gentoo-user] package.keywords syntax?

[Jorge Peixoto de Morais Neto]

> Run autounmask, it creates a new file in /etc/portage/package.unmask/
>
> Run a quick awk on it to get it into shape
>
> Move file to /etc/portage/package.mask/
>
> Problem solved in a neat elegant insightful way.

awk? I assumed it was an obsolete language included for compatibility.
People should use Python, Perl, or sed's "s" command. Am I wrong?

-- 
Software is like sex: it is better when it is free - Linus Torvalds

Re: [gentoo-user] package.keywords syntax?

[Robert Bridge]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 616 bytes --]

On Tue, 28 Oct 2008 19:34:31 -0200
"Jorge Peixoto de Morais Neto" <please.no.spam.here@gmail.com> wrote:

> > Run autounmask, it creates a new file
> > in /etc/portage/package.unmask/
> >
> > Run a quick awk on it to get it into shape
> >
> > Move file to /etc/portage/package.mask/
> >
> > Problem solved in a neat elegant insightful way.
> 
> awk? I assumed it was an obsolete language included for compatibility.
> People should use Python, Perl, or sed's "s" command. Am I wrong?

Yes. You are wrong.

Awk is a useful tool, if you know it. It's just less people bother
learning it these days.

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 197 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] package.keywords syntax?

[Alan McKinnon]

On Tuesday 28 October 2008 23:34:31 Jorge Peixoto de Morais Neto wrote:
> > Run autounmask, it creates a new file in /etc/portage/package.unmask/
> >
> > Run a quick awk on it to get it into shape
> >
> > Move file to /etc/portage/package.mask/
> >
> > Problem solved in a neat elegant insightful way.
>
> awk? I assumed it was an obsolete language included for compatibility.
> People should use Python, Perl, or sed's "s" command. Am I wrong?

Yes. You are indeed wrong.

Python and Perl are humungous interpreters that rival Java for size. Perl is 
in a class of it's own for syntax bloat.

sed is neat but has nowhere near the functionality of awk.

For example, I recently needed to scan a massive text file of 89000+ lines and 
count the number of character on each line and print it out with the line 
number. A bash script took 20 seconds to run. A C script took less than half 
a second. An awk script was marginally *quicker*. Granted, most of that time 
is spent writing to the console, but the text processing must then also be on 
par with C.

awk is not obsolete, it's just been around for a while. It's no more obsoleted 
by perl, python and sed than ls is obsoleted by the existence of gui file 
managers

-- 
alan dot mckinnon at gmail dot com

Re: [gentoo-user] package.keywords syntax?

[Jorge Peixoto de Morais Neto]

>> awk? I assumed it was an obsolete language included for compatibility.
>> People should use Python, Perl, or sed's "s" command. Am I wrong?
>
> Yes. You are indeed wrong.
>
> Python and Perl are humungous interpreters that rival Java for size. Perl is
> in a class of it's own for syntax bloat.
>
> sed is neat but has nowhere near the functionality of awk.
>
> For example, I recently needed to scan a massive text file of 89000+ lines and
> count the number of character on each line and print it out with the line
> number. A bash script took 20 seconds to run. A C script took less than half
> a second. An awk script was marginally *quicker*. Granted, most of that time
> is spent writing to the console, but the text processing must then also be on
> par with C.
>
> awk is not obsolete, it's just been around for a while. It's no more obsoleted
> by perl, python and sed than ls is obsoleted by the existence of gui file
> managers
Nice. I might learn it in the future (there are some urgent duties I
must to before, and then I want to learn C* and Python**. Then I may
study awk)

* Before you ask "what, you don't know C?", I mean to really know C,
that is, read a rigorous book such as "C: A Reference Manual" and be
able to write portable programs with well-defined behavior. Speaking
of well-defined behavior, do you know what happens when you cast a
float to an int, and the float is too big to fit into the int?
** I know basic Python, but I think Python is nice enough for a person
to *really* know it.

-- 
Software is like sex: it is better when it is free - Linus Torvalds

Re: [gentoo-user] package.keywords syntax?

[Alan McKinnon]

On Wednesday 29 October 2008 00:17:50 Jorge Peixoto de Morais Neto wrote:
> * Before you ask "what, you don't know C?", 

A sysadmin doesn't need to know C. It helps to be able to read it of course.

A sysadmin ought to know grep, sed and awk rather well and be quite fluent in 
either perl or python, simply becuase those are tools they will use every day

> I mean to really know C, 
> that is, read a rigorous book such as "C: A Reference Manual" and be
> able to write portable programs with well-defined behavior. Speaking
> of well-defined behavior, do you know what happens when you cast a
> float to an int, and the float is too big to fit into the int?

Did oyu try it yourself and see?

> ** I know basic Python, but I think Python is nice enough for a person
> to *really* know it.

Agreed. It's a very nice language and has some nice side effects on your 
thinking. Like realising that the "new" keyword is an OOP language is always 
completely redundant. Or how many brain cycles you use parsing { and }.

Many people like to bitch about Python's enforcement of coding style. But we 
all agree that indentation is good. We disagree sometimes how exactly to do 
it. Python assumes that you start using the style you like and simply 
enforces that you carry on with it (which you were going to do anyway....)

That appeals to me - cut to the chase, toss out the irrelevant crap and 
concentrate on what's left - the important stuff

-- 
alan dot mckinnon at gmail dot com

Re: [gentoo-user] package.keywords syntax?

[Jorge Peixoto de Morais Neto]

>> I mean to really know C,
>> that is, read a rigorous book such as "C: A Reference Manual" and be
>> able to write portable programs with well-defined behavior. Speaking
>> of well-defined behavior, do you know what happens when you cast a
>> float to an int, and the float is too big to fit into the int?
>
> Did oyu try it yourself and see?
The point is that the behavior in this situation is "undefined". It
might do anything. Programming in C is different than programming in
Python.
In Python, you must know the basic behavior of a statement/functions.
If an error occurs, it raises an exception. If you do not catch the
exception, the program exits (and you can arrange for cleanup actions
to be performed before the program exits).
In C, you must know exactly what the statement/function does, and you
*must* handle the possibility of errors. If an error occurs and you do
not handle it, the program may crash, or it may go on and behave
erratically (such as deleting user files, or giving results subtly
wrong, or leaking memory, or...)
-- 
Software is like sex: it is better when it is free - Linus Torvalds

Re: [gentoo-user] package.keywords syntax?

[Alan McKinnon]

On Wednesday 29 October 2008 00:55:42 Jorge Peixoto de Morais Neto wrote:
> >> I mean to really know C,
> >> that is, read a rigorous book such as "C: A Reference Manual" and be
> >> able to write portable programs with well-defined behavior. Speaking
> >> of well-defined behavior, do you know what happens when you cast a
> >> float to an int, and the float is too big to fit into the int?
> >
> > Did oyu try it yourself and see?
>
> The point is that the behavior in this situation is "undefined". It
> might do anything. Programming in C is different than programming in
> Python.

Most likely the compiler will try to treat the float as an int and use the 
first 4 bytes of the float, ignoring the rest.

This is insane though. I cannot think of any reason why one would ever want to 
treat the first 32 bits of a float as an int. It's not like you are casting a 
long to an int which can make sense - just discard the high bits.

I reckon the standard would say this is undefined. Most compiler would bomb 
out with a compile error but give you an obscure flag to proceed anyway. If 
you want to commit suicide, C is quite happy to pass you the pills as long s 
you ask nicely

-- 
alan dot mckinnon at gmail dot com

Re: [gentoo-user] package.keywords syntax?

[Andrey Vul]

On Wed, Oct 29, 2008 at 3:16 AM, Alan McKinnon <alan.mckinnon@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Wednesday 29 October 2008 00:55:42 Jorge Peixoto de Morais Neto wrote:
>> >> I mean to really know C,
>> >> that is, read a rigorous book such as "C: A Reference Manual" and be
>> >> able to write portable programs with well-defined behavior. Speaking
>> >> of well-defined behavior, do you know what happens when you cast a
>> >> float to an int, and the float is too big to fit into the int?
>> >
>> > Did oyu try it yourself and see?
>>
>> The point is that the behavior in this situation is "undefined". It
>> might do anything. Programming in C is different than programming in
>> Python.
>
> Most likely the compiler will try to treat the float as an int and use the
> first 4 bytes of the float, ignoring the rest.
Float is 4 bytes; the questions should be reworded s/float/double/g

But somehow, SSE version or fisttp (or whatever) doesn't set CF/OF on
overflow, the returned int is simply (1 << 31) ^ (1 << 31 - 1)
> This is insane though. I cannot think of any reason why one would ever want to
> treat the first 32 bits of a float as an int. It's not like you are casting a
> long to an int which can make sense - just discard the high bits.

> I reckon the standard would say this is undefined. Most compiler would bomb
> out with a compile error but give you an obscure flag to proceed anyway. If
> you want to commit suicide, C is quite happy to pass you the pills as long s
> you ask nicely
gcc does this without errors
Code [x86/64 only]:
#include <stdio.h>
#include <math.h>
#include <stdint.h>
int main() {
        double f = 1.5e99;
        int i = (int)f;
        uint16_t z;
        asm("pushf; popw %0;" : "=r"(z));
        printf("%d %d %d\n", i, (z & (1 << 11)), (z & 1) );
        return 0;
}


In short, your mileage shall vary, so sayeth the standard.
> --

-- 
Andrey Vul

A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text.
Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing?
A: Top-posting.
Q: What is the most annoying thing in e-mail?

Re: [gentoo-user] package.keywords syntax?

[Jorge Peixoto de Morais Neto]

>> >> I mean to really know C,
>> >> that is, read a rigorous book such as "C: A Reference Manual" and be
>> >> able to write portable programs with well-defined behavior. Speaking
>> >> of well-defined behavior, do you know what happens when you cast a
>> >> float to an int, and the float is too big to fit into the int?
>> >
>> > Did oyu try it yourself and see?
>>
>> The point is that the behavior in this situation is "undefined". It
>> might do anything. Programming in C is different than programming in
>> Python.
>
> Most likely the compiler will try to treat the float as an int and use the
> first 4 bytes of the float, ignoring the rest.
No, you misunderstood C. C, despite being lower level than (say) Java,
does not view variables as typeless bit patterns. It views them as
integers, real numbers, etc.
So if you perform
float real_number = 0.5;
int integer = real_number;
The value of "integer" will be 0; if C were to actually interpret the
bit pattern of real_number as an integer, you would get 1056964608
(0x3f000000) - at least on my machine. That is not what C does,
though.

The real problem is when you type
float real_number = 4e10;
int integer = real_number;
If your integer can only hold values up to 2^31 - 1 , the behavior of
the above code is undefined.
In a language like Python, everything either behaves as you intended,
of throws an exception.
This is why I say "In C, you must completely understand the behavior
of every statement or function, and you *must* handle the possibility
of errors".

-- 
Software is like sex: it is better when it is free - Linus Torvalds

Re: [gentoo-user] package.keywords syntax?

[Dirk Uys]

On Wed, Oct 29, 2008 at 10:13 PM, Jorge Peixoto de Morais Neto
<please.no.spam.here@gmail.com> wrote:
> The real problem is when you type
> float real_number = 4e10;
> int integer = real_number;
> If your integer can only hold values up to 2^31 - 1 , the behavior of
> the above code is undefined.
> In a language like Python, everything either behaves as you intended,
> of throws an exception.
> This is why I say "In C, you must completely understand the behavior
> of every statement or function, and you *must* handle the possibility
> of errors".

The line:
int integer = real_number;
will produce a warning. (or an error if you are smart enough to
compile with -Werror)

But, if you know that the real number will be small enough and you
don't mind getting the floor of the float, you may wish to ignore the
error. Like mr McKinnon said, c will allow you to do wrong things.

Depending on what you are doing, the babysitting of python, may or may
not be a problem.

One thing I would like to know (not knowing python that well), is when
you make an error in python, when will the exception be thrown? At the
start of run-time, or when the guilty code is encountered? And what if
that code is in a codebranch that gets executed 0.0005% of the time?

Regards
Dirk

Re: [gentoo-user] package.keywords syntax?

[Dirk Uys]

To back myself up:

<file name="why_no.py">
#!/usr/bin/python

import random

for i in range(1,10000):
        if random.random() < 0.001:
                print "rare"
                if malformed < beast:
                        print "kick me in the ..."
        else:
                print "whatever"
</file>

Regards
Dirk

Re: [gentoo-user] package.keywords syntax?

[Jorge Peixoto de Morais Neto]

> To back myself up:
>
> <file name="why_no.py">
> #!/usr/bin/python
>
> import random
>
> for i in range(1,10000):
>        if random.random() < 0.001:
>                print "rare"
>                if malformed < beast:
>                        print "kick me in the ..."
>        else:
>                print "whatever"
> </file>
This kind of error is not a syntax error; this kind of error is indeed
only discovered at runtime. However, syntax errors are discovered at
byte-compile time. byte-compile happens automatically when you load a
module, but you can perform it yourself easily, and this is
recommended in certain situations.

For this kind of error (try to reference an undefined variable), there
are tools like pychecker.

-- 
Software is like sex: it is better when it is free - Linus Torvalds

Re: [gentoo-user] package.keywords syntax?

[Albert Hopkins]

On Thu, 2008-10-30 at 16:54 -0200, Jorge Peixoto de Morais Neto wrote:
> > To back myself up:
> >
> > <file name="why_no.py">
> > #!/usr/bin/python
> >
> > import random
> >
> > for i in range(1,10000):
> >        if random.random() < 0.001:
> >                print "rare"
> >                if malformed < beast:
> >                        print "kick me in the ..."
> >        else:
> >                print "whatever"
> > </file>
> This kind of error is not a syntax error; this kind of error is indeed
> only discovered at runtime. However, syntax errors are discovered at
> byte-compile time. byte-compile happens automatically when you load a
> module, but you can perform it yourself easily, and this is
> recommended in certain situations.
> 
> For this kind of error (try to reference an undefined variable), there
> are tools like pychecker.
> 

I'm coming into this thread kinda late, so feel free to ignore...

... but Jorge is right.  This is easily picked up by a lint tool... and
good python programmers use them ;-).  Some python-aware editors even
have this functionality built in.

Using the above example:

        $ pylint who_no.py
        ...
        C:  1: Missing docstring
        C:  5: Comma not followed by a space
        for i in range(1,10000):
                        ^^
        E:  8: Undefined variable 'malformed'
        E:  8: Undefined variable 'beast'

Re: [gentoo-user] package.keywords syntax?

[Jorge Peixoto de Morais Neto]

>> The real problem is when you type
>> float real_number = 4e10;
>> int integer = real_number;
>> If your integer can only hold values up to 2^31 - 1 , the behavior of
>> the above code is undefined.
>> In a language like Python, everything either behaves as you intended,
>> of throws an exception.
>> This is why I say "In C, you must completely understand the behavior
>> of every statement or function, and you *must* handle the possibility
>> of errors".
>
> The line:
> int integer = real_number;
> will produce a warning. (or an error if you are smart enough to
> compile with -Werror)
It seems you did not get the point. To attribute a floating point
number to an integer variable is perfectly valid, depending on the
specific program.  The compiler normally does not even warn about
this, as this is perfectly valid (from my testing, the compiler only
warns if you are using gcc 4.3, and specify -Wconversion, an option
that is not included in -Wall and not even in -Wextra).

So erase this *wrong idea* that attributing floating-point value to an
integer variable is invalid or even just unwise. There is nothing
generally wrong with it.

The point is: in certain situations, the behavior is well-defined and
unsurprising. What happens, though, if (for example) the value of the
floating-point variable is too big for the int?
In a forgiving language, you would either have a sensible behavior
(such as the int receiving a INT_MAX value) or an error. In C the
behavior is *undefined*.

Got the point? In C, you *must* know what you are doing, and *must*
handle the possibility of errors. If not, your program is not even
garanteed to crash; it can, after an error, go on working
(erratically), possibly damaging user data or yielding subtly wrong
results without any warning.

-- 
Software is like sex: it is better when it is free - Linus Torvalds

Re: [gentoo-user] package.keywords syntax?

[Dirk Uys]

On Thu, Oct 30, 2008 at 9:12 PM, Jorge Peixoto de Morais Neto
<please.no.spam.here@gmail.com> wrote:
> It seems you did not get the point. To attribute a floating point
> number to an integer variable is perfectly valid, depending on the
> specific program.  The compiler normally does not even warn about
> this, as this is perfectly valid (from my testing, the compiler only
> warns if you are using gcc 4.3, and specify -Wconversion, an option
> that is not included in -Wall and not even in -Wextra).

Yes, you are right. I was doing what some people would like to call
speaking out of my ass :) C++ compiled with gcc does give you a
warning with -Wall. I just assumed that C did the same, its been some
time since I coded pure C.

Regards
Dirk

Re: [gentoo-user] package.keywords syntax?

[Dirk Uys]

On Thu, Oct 30, 2008 at 9:11 PM, Albert Hopkins <marduk@letterboxes.org> wrote:
>
> I'm coming into this thread kinda late, so feel free to ignore...
>
> ... but Jorge is right.  This is easily picked up by a lint tool... and
> good python programmers use them ;-).  Some python-aware editors even
> have this functionality built in.
>
> Using the above example:
>
>        $ pylint who_no.py
>        ...
>        C:  1: Missing docstring
>        C:  5: Comma not followed by a space
>        for i in range(1,10000):
>                        ^^
>        E:  8: Undefined variable 'malformed'
>        E:  8: Undefined variable 'beast'
>

Thanks, that sounds like a utility i may use in the future.

I don't like having to use a separate tool to make sure I didn't
perhaps make a typo while typing some variables name, but I find
python useful enough to oversee that.

Regards
Dirk

[gentoo-user] OT: Python (was: package.keywords syntax?)

[Matthias Bethke]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 596 bytes --]

Hi Albert,
on Thu, Oct 30, 2008 at 03:11:04PM -0400, you wrote:
> ... but Jorge is right.  This is easily picked up by a lint tool... and
> good python programmers use them ;-).  Some python-aware editors even
> have this functionality built in.

Whow...I've been out of Python long enough to totally forget that you
*needed* to do this. In Perl, the "use strict" you find at the top of
every well-written script does it at compile time.

cheers,
	Matthias
-- 
I prefer encrypted and signed messages. KeyID: FAC37665
Fingerprint: 8C16 3F0A A6FC DF0D 19B0  8DEF 48D9 1700 FAC3 7665

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 197 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] OT: Python (was: package.keywords syntax?)

[Heiko Wundram]

Am Friday 31 October 2008 10:54:23 schrieb Matthias Bethke:
> Hi Albert,
>
> on Thu, Oct 30, 2008 at 03:11:04PM -0400, you wrote:
> > ... but Jorge is right.  This is easily picked up by a lint tool... and
> > good python programmers use them ;-).  Some python-aware editors even
> > have this functionality built in.
>
> Whow...I've been out of Python long enough to totally forget that you
> *needed* to do this. In Perl, the "use strict" you find at the top of
> every well-written script does it at compile time.

<sarcasm>
Yeah, let's continue to bash Python, which is such a badly broken language 
nobody wants to use it productively, because other languages offer so much 
better functionality to test for programmer error at compile time. Perl is a 
brilliant example to mention in this context.
</sarcasm>

Seriously: dynamic typing is a blessing, (only!) when combined with strict 
typing (where Perl doesn't [really] have the latter, even when use strict is 
in effect). Having to declare variables before use mostly is irrelevant (I'm 
not talking about _defining_ variables before use), because it's no common 
source of bugs.

At least that's my 5 cents.

-- 
Heiko Wundram
hackerkey://v4sw7CHJLSUY$hw5ln5pr7FOP$ck2ma9u7FL$w3DVWXm0l7GL$i65e6t3EMRSXb7ADORen5a26s5MSr2p-6.62/-6.56g5AORZ