Re: Python 3 is killing Python
On Wed, 28 May 2014 14:23:17 -0500, Larry Martell wrote: >Somthing I came across in my travels through the ether: > >https://medium.com/@deliciousrobots/5d2ad703365d/ I just bought a new book on Python, since the one I had borrowed from my son only dealt with Python 2.3, and everyone told me that was old. So I bought this book, and decided that whatever version of Python it deals with, that's the one I will download and use. The book is: Cunningham, Katie. 2014. Teach yourself Python in 24 hours. Indianapolis: Sams. ISBN: 978-0-672-33687-4 For Python 2.7.5 I'll leave Python 3.2 on my computer, but 2.7.5 will be the one I'm installing now. Even if I could *find* a book that deals with Python 3.x, couldn't afford to but yet another Python book. -- Steve Hayes from Tshwane, South Africa Web: http://www.khanya.org.za/stevesig.htm Blog: http://khanya.wordpress.com E-mail - see web page, or parse: shayes at dunelm full stop org full stop uk -- https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Optparse to parsing Suggestions !!
Am Sa Mai 31 2014, 13:08:12 schrieb Ganesh Pal:
>> I think you have to do it manually:
>>
>> options, args = parser.parse_args()
>>
>> if options.object == "super_block" and options.path is not None:
>> parser.error("Paths not allowed for 'super_block' object")
>>
>> elif options.object == "files" and options.path is None:
>> parser.error("'files' object requires a path")
>>
>> --
>> https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
>
> Thanks Peter , above will work for case 2.
>
> How about case 1. i.e .
>
> The --path is optional for few for the object type.
>
>#python corrupt.py --object=super_block --size=1000
>
> ==> Should work even if --path is not given and should not complain
> if --path is missing
My code example is meant to convey the basic idea; you have to adapt it to
your needs. E. g.
if options.object == "super_block":
if not path_is_acceptable_for_super_block(options.path):
parser.error(
"{!r} not an acceptable path for super_block object"
.format(options.path))
elif options.object == "files" and options.path is None:
parser.error("'files' object requires a path")
where you are to write the path_is_acceptable_for_super_block() function to
comply with your requirements.
--
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Python 3 is killing Python
On 31.05.2014 12:07, Steve Hayes wrote: > So I bought this book, and decided that whatever version of Python it deals > with, that's the one I will download and use. This sounds like remarkably bad advice. That's like saying "I bought a can of motor oil in my department store and whatever engine that is good for that's the car that I'll buy and put into!" > The book is: > > Cunningham, Katie. 2014. Teach yourself Python in 24 hours. >Indianapolis: Sams. >ISBN: 978-0-672-33687-4 >For Python 2.7.5 > > I'll leave Python 3.2 on my computer, but 2.7.5 will be the one I'm installing > now. Even if I could *find* a book that deals with Python 3.x, couldn't afford > to but yet another Python book. Lucky for you 2.7.5 isn't all that different from Py3 and most of it will apply. You'll be missing out on a bunch of cool features (arbitrary precision ints, int division operator, real Unicode support) but that's no big deal. Regards, Johannes -- >> Wo hattest Du das Beben nochmal GENAU vorhergesagt? > Zumindest nicht öffentlich! Ah, der neueste und bis heute genialste Streich unsere großen Kosmologen: Die Geheim-Vorhersage. - Karl Kaos über Rüdiger Thomas in dsa -- https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Python 3 is killing Python
Johannes Bauer, 31.05.2014 13:09: > Lucky for you 2.7.5 isn't all that different from Py3 and most of it > will apply. You'll be missing out on a bunch of cool features (arbitrary > precision ints Py2 has them as well (although they are called long). 1 << 300 gives the right answer in both Py2 and Py3, whether the result is a "long" or an "int". > int division operator AFAIR, that was added in Py2.5, so a book about Py2.7 should mention it somewhere. > real Unicode support Now, that is really something that has improved in Py3, and certainly a reason for many people to prefer Py3 over Py2. Stefan -- https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
webdesigning
website.. www.webdizer.com -- https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Python 3 is killing Python
On Sat, 31 May 2014 12:07:59 +0200, Steve Hayes wrote: > I'll leave Python 3.2 on my computer, but 2.7.5 will be the one I'm > installing now. Even if I could *find* a book that deals with Python > 3.x, couldn't afford to but yet another Python book. Version 2.7 is a good choice, and it will be around for a long time: it will be supported until at least 2020, so you should get many years of use from it. Do not be discouraged about Python 3. There are differences, but they aren't so different as to be a major barrier. By the time you have a bit of experience with 2.7, you will be more than capable of dealing with the differences with version 3. They are not different languages, think of them as slightly different dialects of the same language, like UK and South African English. -- Steven D'Aprano http://import-that.dreamwidth.org/ -- https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Python 3 is killing Python
Steve Hayes : > I'll leave Python 3.2 on my computer, but 2.7.5 will be the one I'm > installing now. Even if I could *find* a book that deals with Python > 3.x, couldn't afford to but yet another Python book. Unfortunately, in the computer field, if there's a book written on a topic, it will most likely be out of date. In the 1990's, I used to buy computer books on various topics. I don't think I have bought one for ten years. Either it is online or it doesn't exist. There's enough Python material online to become a pro in it: * tutorials, * the complete language reference, * the complete library reference, * the complete reference implementation, * this discussion group. Marko -- https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Optparse to parsing Suggestions !!
On May 30, 2014 8:26 AM, "Ganesh Pal" wrote: > > > Hello Python world , > > > I wanted suggestion on how to modify the below code to help me accomodate the below two cases Your question was answered already, but I'd like to point out that optparse is deprecated. If possible, you should use argparse instead. -- https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Python 3.2 has some deadly infection
Some interesting comments here http://techtonik.rainforce.org/2014/05/python-32-has-some-deadly-infection.html so I'm simply asking for other opinions. -- My fellow Pythonistas, ask not what our language can do for you, ask what you can do for our language. Mark Lawrence --- This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection is active. http://www.avast.com -- https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Multi-line commands with 'python -c'
Chris Angelico wrote:
> On Sat, May 31, 2014 at 7:42 AM, Devin Jeanpierre
> wrote:
>> In unix shells you can literally use a new line. Or is that only
bash?
>
> You can in bash, I know, but it's fiddly to type it; and more
> importantly, it's not a good point in the "this is cleaner than a
> series of pipes" argument. My primary recommendation, of course, was a
> three-line script saved as an actual file, but for a more direct
> parallel to the pipe-it-three-ways model, I wanted to use -c.
and you also wrote originally that it's fiddly to edit. I think that
Windows Powershell has (at least in the current ISE command line) got
the editing a bit better. It's a minor difference though and it has
taken Microsoft about 30 years to get to that point.
What may be a larger difference, or may just be my lack of Linux-foo, is
this:
PS C:\python33> $script = @"
import os
for root, dirs, files in os.walk("."):
if len(dirs + files) == 1: print(root)
"@
PS C:\python33> python -c $script
.\Doc
.\Lib\concurrent\__pycache__
.\Lib\curses\__pycache__
...
which is a style I've found useful for example when running a group of
related timeit.py commands as I can put things like multi-line setup
statements in a variable and then have a simpler command to repeat.
But bash as far as I can won't let me do that:
$ script='import os
for root, dirs, files in os.walk("."):
if len(dirs + files) == 1: print(root)
'
$ python -c $script
File "", line 1
import
^
SyntaxError: invalid syntax
--
Duncan Booth
--
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: pyflakes best practices?
On 30/05/2014 02:14, Roy Smith wrote: In article , Mark Lawrence wrote: On 30/05/2014 01:13, Roy Smith wrote: We've recently started using pyflakes. The results seem to be similar to most tools of this genre. It found a few real problems. It generated a lot of noise about things which weren't really wrong, but were easy to fix (mostly, unused imports), and a few plain old false positives which have no easy "fix" (in the sense of, things I can change which will make pyflakes STFU). So, what's the best practice here? How do people deal with the false positives? Is there some way to annotate the source code to tell pyflakes to ignore something? I was under the impression that pyflakes was configurable. It it isn't I'd simply find another tool. Having said that if you don't get better answers here try gmane.comp.python.code-quality. I didn't know that list existed, it looks very interesting. Thanks for the pointer! FYI the full list of Python lists on gmane here http://dir.gmane.org/index.php?prefix=gmane.comp.python -- My fellow Pythonistas, ask not what our language can do for you, ask what you can do for our language. Mark Lawrence --- This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection is active. http://www.avast.com -- https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Multi-line commands with 'python -c'
Duncan Booth wrote:
> Chris Angelico wrote:
>
>> On Sat, May 31, 2014 at 7:42 AM, Devin Jeanpierre
>> wrote:
>>> In unix shells you can literally use a new line. Or is that only
> bash?
>>
>> You can in bash, I know, but it's fiddly to type it; and more
>> importantly, it's not a good point in the "this is cleaner than a
>> series of pipes" argument. My primary recommendation, of course, was a
>> three-line script saved as an actual file, but for a more direct
>> parallel to the pipe-it-three-ways model, I wanted to use -c.
>
> and you also wrote originally that it's fiddly to edit. I think that
> Windows Powershell has (at least in the current ISE command line) got
> the editing a bit better. It's a minor difference though and it has
> taken Microsoft about 30 years to get to that point.
>
> What may be a larger difference, or may just be my lack of Linux-foo, is
> this:
>
> PS C:\python33> $script = @"
> import os
> for root, dirs, files in os.walk("."):
> if len(dirs + files) == 1: print(root)
> "@
>
> PS C:\python33> python -c $script
> .\Doc
> .\Lib\concurrent\__pycache__
> .\Lib\curses\__pycache__
> ...
>
> which is a style I've found useful for example when running a group of
> related timeit.py commands as I can put things like multi-line setup
> statements in a variable and then have a simpler command to repeat.
>
> But bash as far as I can won't let me do that:
>
> $ script='import os
> for root, dirs, files in os.walk("."):
> if len(dirs + files) == 1: print(root)
> '
> $ python -c $script
> File "", line 1
> import
> ^
> SyntaxError: invalid syntax
$ script='import os
> for root, dirs, files in os.walk("."):
> if len(dirs + files) == 1:
> print(root)
> '
$ python3 -c "$script"
.
./heureka
$ python3 -c 'import sys; print(sys.argv)' $script
['-c', 'import', 'os', 'for', 'root,', 'dirs,', 'files', 'in',
'os.walk("."):', 'if', 'len(dirs', '+', 'files)', '==', '1:', 'print(root)']
$ python3 -c 'import sys; print(sys.argv)' "$script"
['-c', 'import os\nfor root, dirs, files in os.walk("."):\nif len(dirs +
files) == 1:\nprint(root)\n']
--
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Suds and Python3
Suds is defacto python SOAP client, but it does not mainte recent few years. Why? I want to use SOAP and Python3. How do it? -- https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Script suddenly stops
Dear All, thanks a lot for your replies. I've found my mistake. The script output stopped, but the script was still filling the MySQL table. When I resized the Gnome terminal window the output continued. -- Christian -- https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Suds and Python3
On 5/31/14, 11:36 AM, tokib...@gmail.com wrote: Suds is defacto python SOAP client, but it does not mainte recent few years. Why? Is it really the defacto? It seems like I've heard more about pysimplesoap, and looking at GitHub there have been commits in the past 4 days. As far as why it hasn't been maintained, you could write and ask the authors directly. In general, SOAP has been falling out of favor over the past half decade at least because of its relative heaviness next to, e.g. RESTful web services usually using JSON instead of XML. Way, way simpler and more fun to do. That said, SOAP will be around for a long time and if you need to do it, you want a good library for it. I don't have direct experience, but I did do cursory reviews of a handful of the SOAP libaries listed here in the python wiki: https://wiki.python.org/moin/WebServices And from what I can tell without actually trying any of them, pysimplesoap feels like the best option currently. I want to use SOAP and Python3. How do it? If it were me, I'd install each of the libraries listed on the wiki page and make a matrix of features desired, make up a suite of unit tests to test those features, and then run each of them through the suite to see how they stack up. Also consider how "alive" the project is, and how the project's bug tracker is maintained, look at their forum, etc. Paul -- https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Python 3 is killing Python
> > I just bought a new book on Python, since the one I had borrowed from my > son > only dealt with Python 2.3, and everyone told me that was old. > > So I bought this book, and decided that whatever version of Python it > deals > with, that's the one I will download and use. > > The book is: > > Cunningham, Katie. 2014. Teach yourself Python in 24 hours. >Indianapolis: Sams. >ISBN: 978-0-672-33687-4 >For Python 2.7.5 > > I'll leave Python 3.2 on my computer, but 2.7.5 will be the one I'm > installing > now. Even if I could *find* a book that deals with Python 3.x, couldn't > afford > to but yet another Python book. > > > -- > Steve Hayes from Tshwane, South Africa > Web: http://www.khanya.org.za/stevesig.htm > Blog: http://khanya.wordpress.com > E-mail - see web page, or parse: shayes at dunelm full stop org full stop > uk > -- > https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list In my search for information to learn about object oriented programming, since I come from a pre oop background, I found this site: http://it-ebooks.info/ tons of free books, many fairly up-to-date. A wealth of knowledge for the do it yourself learner. Hope this is helpful to you. Deb in WA, USA FREE 3D MARINE AQUARIUM SCREENSAVER - Watch dolphins, sharks & orcas on your desktop! Check it out at http://www.inbox.com/marineaquarium -- https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Python 3.2 has some deadly infection
Mark Lawrence : > Some interesting comments here > http://techtonik.rainforce.org/2014/05/python-32-has-some-deadly-infection.html > so I'm simply asking for other opinions. I read the article, but unfortunately I failed to see interesting comments or opinions. There was some graphic, but it didn't say anything to me, and the article didn't really seem to be making any argument apart from the disappointed tone. Marko -- https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: IDE for python
On Fri, 30 May 2014 13:53:06 +0100, Rustom Mody wrote: On Thursday, May 29, 2014 10:14:35 PM UTC+5:30, Paul Rudin wrote: Terry Reedy writes: > 3. Search unopened files (grep) for a string or re. Emacs. How do you do this with emacs? I find a menagerie of greppish commands -- rgrep, lgrep, grep-find etc I generally find "M-x grep" sufficient. -- Rhodri James *-* Wildebeest Herder to the Masses -- https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Business model
I am already writing programs in python. I wish to use my programming skills for a business model, any business approach. Is any one here business oriented to give me some guide lines or do any person knows Google groups that i can join that will help me approach my objective. Hope to hear from you guys please. Thanks -- https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Business model
On 01/06/2014 01:28, ngangsia akumbo wrote: I am already writing programs in python. I wish to use my programming skills for a business model, any business approach. Is any one here business oriented to give me some guide lines or do any person knows Google groups that i can join that will help me approach my objective. Hope to hear from you guys please. Thanks http://code.activestate.com/lists/python-list/60/ seems rather similar. -- My fellow Pythonistas, ask not what our language can do for you, ask what you can do for our language. Mark Lawrence --- This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection is active. http://www.avast.com -- https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Business model
On Sunday, June 1, 2014 2:30:01 AM UTC+1, Mark Lawrence wrote: > On 01/06/2014 01:28, ngangsia akumbo wrote: sorry for asking the same question > > -- > > My fellow Pythonistas, ask not what our language can do for you, ask > > what you can do for our language. > > > > Mark Lawrence > > > > --- > > This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus > protection is active. > > http://www.avast.com -- https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: IDE for python
On Friday, May 30, 2014 10:37:00 PM UTC+5:30, Rustom Mody wrote: > You are talking about the infrastructure needed for writing unicode apps. > The language need not have non-ASCII lexemes for that > I am talking about something quite different. > Think for example of a German wanting to write "Gödel" > According to some conventions (s)he can write Goedel > But if that is forced just because of ASCII/US-104/what-have-u it would > justifiably > cause irritation/offense. Curiously I just saw this tex/emacs question/answer elsewhere – particularly amusing the first 'char' of the answer. Question: | I'm a new Emacs/Auctex User. Auctex for Emacs is amazing but | there are some little things could be better. When generating a | section with c-c c-s the label ist generated automatically. But | if there is an german Umlaut in the section title like 'ä' this | becomes just 'a' in the label. Is there any possibility that | auctex will substitute the 'ä' by 'ae' and not by 'a'? Answer: | '�' is not possible, since latex can not handle Umlauts in references. | For 'ae' I'm sure someone is able to provide a little patch. -- https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Python 3.2 has some deadly infection
On Sat, 31 May 2014 17:10:20 +0100, Mark Lawrence wrote:
> Some interesting comments here
> http://techtonik.rainforce.org/2014/05/python-32-has-some-deadly-
infection.html
> so I'm simply asking for other opinions.
Oh, Anatoly Techtonik. He's quite notorious on python-dev for wanting to
impose his wild and sometimes wacky processes on the entire community.
Specific examples aren't coming to mind, and I'm too lazy to search the
archives, so I'll just make one up to give you an idea of the flavour of
his requests:
"Twitter is the only way that developers can effectively
communicate. We must shut down all the mailing lists and the
bug tracker and move all communication immediately to
Twitter. And by we I mean you."
[Not an actual quote.]
I've come to the conclusion that he occasionally has a point to his
posts, but only at random by virtue of the scatter-gun technique. He's
obviously widely read, but not deeply, and so he fires off a lot of ill-
thought out but superficially attractive proposals. Just by chance a few
of them end up being interesting, not *interesting enough* for somebody
else to do the work. At this point the ideas languish, because he refuses
to sign a contributor agreement so the Python core developers cannot
accept anything from him.
This blog post is a strong opinion about Python, but it isn't clear what
that opinion *actually is*. His post is rambling and unfocused and
incoherent ("art is the future"). He rails against having to write PEPs,
and decries the lack of stats, summaries, analysis and comparison,
utterly missing the point that the purpose of the PEP process is to
provide those stats, summaries, analysis and comparison. Reading between
the lines, I think what he means, deep down, is that *somebody else*
ought to gather those stats and do the analysis to support his ideas, and
not expect him to write the PEP.
He makes at least one factually wrong claim:
"I thought that C/C++ must die, because really all major
security problems are because of it."
[actual quote]
He's talking about buffer overflows. Buffer overflows have never been
responsible for "all" major security problems. Even allowing for a little
hyperbole, buffer overflows have not been responsible for the majority of
major security problems for a very long time. It is not 1992 any more,
and today the single largest source of security bugs are code injection
attacks. In Python terms that mostly means failure to sanitize SQL
queries and the use of eval() and exec() on untrusted data.
http://cwe.mitre.org/top25/
Three of the top four software errors are forms of code injection: SQL
injection, OS command injection, cross-site scripting. The classic C
buffer overflow comes in at number 3, so it's not an inconsiderable cause
of security vulnerabilities even today, but it is not even close to the
only such cause.
See also http://www.sans.org/top25-software-errors/
Back to the blog post... it's 2014, Python 3.3 and 3.4 have come out, why
is he talking about 3.2?
It's interesting that he starts off by stating his graph is meaningless:
"They don't measure anything - just show some lines that
correlate to each other."
then immediately tries to draw a conclusion from those lines:
"It looks like the peak of Python was on February 2011,
and since then there was a significant drop."
I've written about the difficulty of measuring language popularity in any
meaningful way:
http://import-that.dreamwidth.org/1388.html
http://import-that.dreamwidth.org/2873.html
Anatoly has picked the TIOBE Index, but I don't know that this is the
best measure of language popularity. According to it, Python is more
popular than Javascript. I love Python, but really, more popular than
Javascript? That feels wrong to me.
In any case, I think that a better explanation for the observed dip in
Feb 2011 is not that Python 3.2 is infected (infected by what?) but
*regression to the mean*. Regression to the mean is a statistical
phenomenon which basically says that all else being equal, an extreme
value is likely to be followed by a less extreme (closer to the average)
value.
Language popularity, as measured by TIOBE, is at least in part random.
(Look at how wiggly the lines are. The wiggles represent random
variation.) If by chance a language gets a spike in interest one month,
it is less likely to
Because TIOBE's results contain so much random noise, they really ought
to smooth them out by averaging the scores over a three month window, and
show trend lines. They don't, I believe, because random hiccoughs in the
data provide interest: "Last month, Java was overthrown from it's #1
ranking by C. This month it has fought its way back to #1 again! Tune in
next month to see if C can repeat it's stunning victory!!!"
I think that long term trend lines would be much less exciting but much
more informative. Eyeballing the graph, it seems to me that Ja
Re: Business model
On Sat, 31 May 2014 18:49:53 -0700, ngangsia akumbo wrote: > On Sunday, June 1, 2014 2:30:01 AM UTC+1, Mark Lawrence wrote: >> On 01/06/2014 01:28, ngangsia akumbo wrote: > > sorry for asking the same question No need to apologise. It's an interesting question, and reading the answers given last time will be useful. After you have read those dozen or so answers, please come back with any further questions. Here's the link again: http://code.activestate.com/lists/python-list/60/ -- Steven -- https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Python 3.2 has some deadly infection
On Sun, Jun 1, 2014 at 12:26 PM, Steven D'Aprano wrote: > TL;DR: Anatoly's blog post is long on disappointment and short on actual > content. It feels to me that we could summarise his post as: > > I don't know what I want, I won't recognise it even if I saw > it, but Python 3 isn't it. I blame others for not living up > to my expectations for features I cannot describe and were > never promised. I think that summary is accurate. When Mark posted this last night (okay, it was last night for me, probably not for most of you), I tried to read the post and figure out what he was actually saying... and failed. Gave up on it and moved on. Got better things to do with my life... like, I dunno, actually writing code, which seems to be something that people who whine in blog posts don't do. ChrisA -- https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Python 3 is killing Python
On Sat, 31 May 2014 13:09:45 +0200, Johannes Bauer wrote: >On 31.05.2014 12:07, Steve Hayes wrote: > >> So I bought this book, and decided that whatever version of Python it deals >> with, that's the one I will download and use. > >This sounds like remarkably bad advice. That's like saying "I bought a >can of motor oil in my department store and whatever engine that is good >for that's the car that I'll buy and put into!" No, it's a bit like flying in a Boeing 747 rather than a Concorde. The latyer may be later and more technically advanced and flew faster, but no one uses or supports it. > >> The book is: >> >> Cunningham, Katie. 2014. Teach yourself Python in 24 hours. >>Indianapolis: Sams. >>ISBN: 978-0-672-33687-4 >>For Python 2.7.5 >> >> I'll leave Python 3.2 on my computer, but 2.7.5 will be the one I'm >> installing >> now. Even if I could *find* a book that deals with Python 3.x, couldn't >> afford >> to but yet another Python book. > >Lucky for you 2.7.5 isn't all that different from Py3 and most of it >will apply. You'll be missing out on a bunch of cool features (arbitrary >precision ints, int division operator, real Unicode support) but that's >no big deal. I'm prepared to forgo whatever advantages those may have to avoid the frustration of example code not working and not knowing why. -- Steve Hayes from Tshwane, South Africa Web: http://www.khanya.org.za/stevesig.htm Blog: http://khanya.wordpress.com E-mail - see web page, or parse: shayes at dunelm full stop org full stop uk -- https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Python 3 is killing Python
On 31 May 2014 12:30:11 GMT, Steven D'Aprano wrote: >On Sat, 31 May 2014 12:07:59 +0200, Steve Hayes wrote: > >> I'll leave Python 3.2 on my computer, but 2.7.5 will be the one I'm >> installing now. Even if I could *find* a book that deals with Python >> 3.x, couldn't afford to but yet another Python book. > >Version 2.7 is a good choice, and it will be around for a long time: it >will be supported until at least 2020, so you should get many years of >use from it. > >Do not be discouraged about Python 3. There are differences, but they >aren't so different as to be a major barrier. By the time you have a bit >of experience with 2.7, you will be more than capable of dealing with the >differences with version 3. They are not different languages, think of >them as slightly different dialects of the same language, like UK and >South African English. That's more or less what the book said, about why it chose to use 2 rather than 3. -- Steve Hayes from Tshwane, South Africa Web: http://www.khanya.org.za/stevesig.htm Blog: http://khanya.wordpress.com E-mail - see web page, or parse: shayes at dunelm full stop org full stop uk -- https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Python 3 is killing Python
On Sat, 31 May 2014 15:44:46 +0300, Marko Rauhamaa wrote: >Steve Hayes : > >> I'll leave Python 3.2 on my computer, but 2.7.5 will be the one I'm >> installing now. Even if I could *find* a book that deals with Python >> 3.x, couldn't afford to but yet another Python book. > >Unfortunately, in the computer field, if there's a book written on a >topic, it will most likely be out of date. > >In the 1990's, I used to buy computer books on various topics. I don't >think I have bought one for ten years. Either it is online or it doesn't >exist. > >There's enough Python material online to become a pro in it: I hate reading stuff online, and find it diffucult to learn anything with that method. I use MS Word 97 in preference to Libre Office wor Word 2010 (both of which I have) because I have a book on the first, but not on the others. I can't read online books in the bath or in bed. -- Steve Hayes from Tshwane, South Africa Web: http://www.khanya.org.za/stevesig.htm Blog: http://khanya.wordpress.com E-mail - see web page, or parse: shayes at dunelm full stop org full stop uk -- https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Python 3 is killing Python
On Sun, Jun 1, 2014 at 12:57 PM, Steve Hayes wrote: > On Sat, 31 May 2014 13:09:45 +0200, Johannes Bauer > wrote: > >>On 31.05.2014 12:07, Steve Hayes wrote: >> >>> So I bought this book, and decided that whatever version of Python it deals >>> with, that's the one I will download and use. >> >>This sounds like remarkably bad advice. That's like saying "I bought a >>can of motor oil in my department store and whatever engine that is good >>for that's the car that I'll buy and put into!" > > No, it's a bit like flying in a Boeing 747 rather than a Concorde. The latyer > may be later and more technically advanced and flew faster, but no one uses or > supports it. "Conky" is more like Python 1 - nobody uses it now (actually, there are more people using Python 1.x than flying Concorde), but it had its place in history. You're flying in a 747-400, which is fine, but when I want to go to England, I'd much rather go in a 777-300ER. (And yes, I've flown in both. Can't remember what model Queenie was, but with the 777s it's usually an Emirates 300ER.) The 747 is still functional, but no more functional than its era, and life's a lot better with the newer aircraft. If you want to start a brand new airline, you won't go for 747s if you can get 777s and A380s for the same price. For those who have 747s in their fleet, there's no problem - there'll be spare parts available from the manufacturer until at least donkey's years, and even after that, you can probably get third-party spare parts from some ex-Soviet mob (at least, they must be Soviets, why else would they wear red hats?); but you'll only get the features that were in the 747s when they were built, plus maybe some minor upgrades to the ancillary bits and pieces. Sure, you can get some of the fancy interior pieces that were designed for the 777s (enum, for instance), but the main hull isn't changing. So if you want to start a one-man airline (where you're managing the company, flying the plane, and everything else), do you start by looking at the relative merits of the 747-400 and 777-300ER and choosing, or do you poke around in your local second-hand shop for "Learn To Fly A Jet In Twenty-Four Hours" and see which cockpit it's showing photos of? There are courses for both types; both aircraft come with excellent "quick start" guides (see https://docs.python.org/2/tutorial/ and https://docs.python.org/3/tutorial/ ); and everything you want to ask about either type can be answered by the team of boeing-l...@boeing.org people, any hour of the day or night. All you're doing is picking your technology on the basis of *one* dead-tree book that you happen to have found. Is that really the most important deciding point? ChrisA -- https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Python 3 is killing Python
On Sunday, June 1, 2014 9:05:11 AM UTC+5:30, Chris Angelico wrote: > So if you want to start a one-man airline (where you're managing the > company, flying the plane, and everything else), do you start by > looking at the relative merits of the 747-400 and 777-300ER I guess a person starting a one-man airline would be choosing a 7-15 seater and doing short to medium runs. Are there 7[47]7's in 7-15 seater range ? And the earlier description of the choice for Word 97 reminded me of one of the 'prophet's' quotes from Illusions: <> [Disclaimer: I was a Richard Bach fan in my youth] -- https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Python 3 is killing Python
in 722929 20140601 035727 Steve Hayes wrote: >No, it's a bit like flying in a Boeing 747 rather than a Concorde. The latyer >may be later and more technically advanced and flew faster, but no one uses or >supports it. Actually, the Concorde preceded the 747, and wasn't as "technically advanced", it was just faster. -- https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Python 3 is killing Python
On 01/06/2014 07:01, Bob Martin wrote: in 722929 20140601 035727 Steve Hayes wrote: No, it's a bit like flying in a Boeing 747 rather than a Concorde. The latyer may be later and more technically advanced and flew faster, but no one uses or supports it. Actually, the Concorde preceded the 747, and wasn't as "technically advanced", it was just faster. I recall Barnes Wallis slagging off the droop nose, but what did he know about aircraft? -- My fellow Pythonistas, ask not what our language can do for you, ask what you can do for our language. Mark Lawrence --- This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection is active. http://www.avast.com -- https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
