On 05/31/2016 08:58 PM, Nick Coghlan wrote:
> On 31 May 2016 3:12 pm, "Glenn Linderman" <v+python at g.nevcal.com> wrote:
>>
>> On 5/31/2016 12:55 PM, rndblnch wrote:
>>>
>>> Guido van Rossum <gvanrossum <at> gmail.com> writes:
>>>
>>>>
>>>> Also -- the most important thing. What to call these things? We're
>>>> pretty much settled on the semantics and how to create them (A =
>>>> NewType('A', int)) but what should we call types like A when we're
>>>> talking about them? "New types" sounds awkward.
>>>
>>> back in high school, i was introduced to c programming with the
> "disciplined
>>> C" preprocessor [0].
>>> it made the distinction between information type and representation type
>>> (e.g. between the semantic and the implementation).
>>> those new types where created using typedefs and were named 'parallel
> types'
>>> below is the relevant part of the dcc presentation:
>>
>>
>> Interesting! Prior art. And parallel type isn't a bad name...
>
> If I heard "parallel type", I'd assume it had something to do with parallel
> processing.
>
This also happens to me every time I read it.
RetroSearch is an open source project built by @garambo | Open a GitHub Issue
Search and Browse the WWW like it's 1997 | Search results from DuckDuckGo
HTML:
3.2
| Encoding:
UTF-8
| Version:
0.7.4