[Twisted-Python] SMTP patch

Bob Ippolito bob at redivi.com
Fri May 23 18:45:58 EDT 2003

On Friday, May 23, 2003, at 17:20 America/New_York, Glyph Lefkowitz  

> On Friday, May 23, 2003, at 12:55 PM, Jp Calderone wrote:
>>> Oops!  As you imply, that should've been "200 <= code < 300".  I  
>>> still don't
>>> like the idea of constructing 100 integers, even lazily, just to test
>>> bounds, though.
>>   Neither do I.  Python should optimize it.  ;)
> This reminds me of a story:
> 	http://www.ai.mit.edu/docs/articles/good-news/ 
> subsubsection3.2.2.4.html
> It is easy to write code that is insanely slow in Python, but we  
> should be aware of that and _not do it_, regardless of how cute 'in'  
> looks. :)

Didn't you hear?  The next big thing is to fantasize about nonexistent  
programming languages that make good compile and runtime decisions for  
you.  If we start writing code like that now, our programs *might*  
finish running by the time one of these magical languages comes into  
play.  Or, we could go the Microsoft route and just upgrade our  
computers every year so they don't have to optimize their crufty decade  
old word processor.


More information about the Twisted-Python mailing list