| [reply] |
> > Python also has a powerful implementation of LISP-style lists
Of course this is BS
Python "lists" are exactly like Perl "arrays" , ie an implementation as a vector of pointers. °
But Lisp lists are linked lists, like emulated in Higher Order Perl. I.e. every element has additional to a value a pointer (link) to its successor element. This makes referencing a higher index very expensive because you have to traverse the whole list, but has other advantages (splitting is trivial).
So these "lists" are fundamentally different data structures only sharing similar names!
But ...
... I wonder why you guys spend time arguing against the PerlTrump who combines kindergarten knowledge with a ridiculously huge ego ? ? ?
Just compose one "hall of shame" thread listing and linking his worst 20- 100 nonsense statements
and keep referencing it in your replies.
The regulars know him already and the newbees will quickly grasp his abysmal wisdom from this master thread.
Why wasting energy?
See also:
°) Python (well numpy) has indeed an "array" class as a wrapper around C arrays only allowing elements of same type and size, something we could emulate with pack and substr
| [reply] |
Now, may I gently remind you all ... in this case, I do absolutely know what I am talking about, because I have done this.
I shall forcefully remind you that your Perl is atrocious and if you hadn't posted a semi-competent piece of code today, first I can remember, I would say your Perl is non-existent. Yet you have frequently expressed your belief that you are an expert in Perl and all kinds of programming tasks for which none of us here has ever seen a hint of evidence. The 800lb salt crystals being taken with your fresh claims of expertise are well deserved.
| [reply] |
I! See! That! Python! And! R! Are! Very! Different! But! You're! Still! Missing! The! Point! | [reply] |