----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
@MSGID:
bbfde9d6
@REPLY:
<38bf060a-e838-4925-8814-c423fdb19289n@googlegroups.com> 1fafaa34
@REPLYADDR pehache <pehache.7@gmail.com>
@REPLYTO 2:5075/128 pehache
@CHRS: CP866 2
@RFC: 1 0
@RFC-Message-ID:
@RFC-References: 1@dont-email.me>
<38bf060a-e838-4925-8814-c423fdb19289n@googlegroups.com>
@TZUTC: 0000
@PID: Nemo/0.999a
@TID: FIDOGATE-5.12-ge4e8b94
Le 01/09/2023 ? 15:16, gah4 a ?crit :
> On Friday, September 1, 2023 at 5:27:25 AM UTC-7, pehache wrote:
>
> (snip)
>
>> 1) promote a language that can be highly inefficient if used "naively"
>
> (snip)
>
> Note that you can write naive inefficient code in any language.
>
> Fortran has some well known, but maybe not well enough,
> problems in this area.
Fair enough... But naive inefficient code in Fortran is still way faster
than naive inefficient code in Python.
That said I have nothing against Python in itself.
--- Nemo/0.999a
* Origin: Nemoweb (2:5075/128)
SEEN-BY: 5001/100 5005/49 5015/255 5019/40 5020/715
848 1042 4441 12000
SEEN-BY: 5030/49 1081 5058/104 5075/128
@PATH: 5075/128 5020/1042 4441