Hands-On Quantum Computing with Python
I am coauthoring a packt book : Hands-On Quantum Computing with Python. The book will be published around Aug 2019 The book will introduce quantum computing and a comprehensive overview of the quantum programming languages currently available, such as QCL, QASM, QUIL, and the differences between them. It will have examples and teach the reader how to write popular quantum algorithms in some of these languages, such as Grover’s search and Shor’s factorization algorithm. #python #quantumcomputing #cryptography -- https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: chr - what's this?
On 2019-01-05, Stefan Ram wrote:
> r...@zedat.fu-berlin.de (Stefan Ram) writes:
>>print( chr( 0x231E )) # Unicode Character 'BOTTOM LEFT CORNER' (U+231E)
>> File "~~~\Python\Python37\lib\encodings\cp1252.py", line 19, in encode
>
> I also have:
>
> print(chr)
>
>
> . Don't see how the call gets to cp1252.py. I see:
>
> bltinmodule.c.h
>
> #define BUILTIN_CHR_METHODDEF\
> {"chr", (PyCFunction)builtin_chr, METH_O, builtin_chr__doc__},
It isn't chr() that's throwing the exception, it's print().
chr(0x231e) is returning a unicode string, print() is trying
to display that string on stdout, and apparently on your
machine Python thinks stdout is encoded as cp1252.
--
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Hands-On Quantum Computing with Python
Good for you. On Sat, Jan 5, 2019, 06:25 Bhagvan Kommadi I am coauthoring a packt book : Hands-On Quantum Computing with Python. > The book will be published around Aug 2019 > > > > The book will introduce quantum computing and a comprehensive overview of > the quantum programming languages currently available, such as QCL, QASM, > QUIL, and the differences between them. It will have examples and teach the > reader how to write popular quantum algorithms in some of these languages, > such as Grover’s search and Shor’s factorization algorithm. > > > > #python #quantumcomputing #cryptography > -- > https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list > -- https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: the python name
On 2019-01-05, Michael Torrie wrote: > On 01/03/2019 06:35 PM, Gene Heskett wrote: >> On Thursday 03 January 2019 15:28:49 Grant Edwards wrote: >>> About 20 years ago, the RedHat Linux (way before RHEL) installer >>> (which was written in Python) was called Anaconda. > >> Thanks for rescuing my old wet ram Grant, thats exactly what I was >> thinking of. AIR, it wasn't anywhere near a "real installer" and I spent >> a decent amount of time turning perfectly good air blue. > > On the other hand I never had any troubles with it, nor have I had any > problems with it recently. Not sure what you mean about it not being > anywhere near a "real installer." > > The non-linear redesign that came out a few years ago really threw me, > and I still don't like it. Yea, same yere. I do several dozen Linux installs every year (of various distros). About half of the installs are with Anaconda (CentOS and Fedora). I find the new Anaconda far more confusing and difficult than any of the others. -- Grant -- https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: the python name
On Friday 04 January 2019 20:27:44 Michael Torrie wrote: > On 01/03/2019 06:35 PM, Gene Heskett wrote: > > On Thursday 03 January 2019 15:28:49 Grant Edwards wrote: > >> About 20 years ago, the RedHat Linux (way before RHEL) installer > >> (which was written in Python) was called Anaconda. > > > > Thanks for rescuing my old wet ram Grant, thats exactly what I was > > thinking of. AIR, it wasn't anywhere near a "real installer" and I > > spent a decent amount of time turning perfectly good air blue. > > On the other hand I never had any troubles with it, nor have I had any > problems with it recently. Not sure what you mean about it not being > anywhere near a "real installer." It never felt like it was doing things in a logical order to me, so if you wanted partitions, you made then before hand, and then turned the air blue as it formatted your home partition, destroying a 5 year corpus of emails you had saved to help you get thru an upgrade. And the only backups I had at the time were on dds2 tapes, but the drive was as usual, spending the winter in Oklahoma city in seagates crappy shop. By then I'd about outgrown the dds2's, and amanda had just grown the ability to use vtapes on a big hard drive which were at least 1000 times more dependable than affordable tapes ever thought of being, so I converted my backup setup to use them and I've never looked back. The drive I just took out, a 1T I replaced with a 2T, has over 80,000 head flying hours on it, and is still as usable as ever. Now thats what I call Dependability. > > The non-linear redesign that came out a few years ago really threw me, > and I still don't like it. Whatever debian has used for the last few years has just worked, except as usual, the partitioner has a mind of its own. So the last install I just let it do what it thought was right, and its actually not given me an excuse to fuss. I've always got amanda to bail me out. But I always install to a bigger fresh drive, so I can just mount the old drive and 4 hours or less later a 15 year corpus of email has been moved to the new drive and I'm a happy camper. Now smaller ssd's are affordable, prices are in free fall. And their speed makes a 10 year old dell fly like a 787! Love it. Take care Michael. Cheers, Gene Heskett -- -- https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: conda/anaconda and pip3 (pip)
Às 17:39 de 03/12/18, Paulo da Silva escreveu: Well ... further clarification ... > Hi! > > I have an environment created with conda (anaconda3). > There is a package that is unavailable in conda. The package is sklearn (import sklearn). - Look below before comment pls. > Installing it with pip3, with conda env activated, the installation goes > to .local/bin and .local/lib in my home dir (BTW I'm running linux > kubuntu 18.04). This is because I used pip3. pip3 is from the system. Inside conda MyPy (my conda environment) only pip is available. This "pip" works with python3. So: - I uninstalled sklearn using pip3 and installed it with pip. - This sucessfully installed sklearn (a very small bunch of small files). import sklearn didn't work! I uninstalled sklearn with pip. Then I searched for sklearn from the top level of anaconda3 dir. I find few of them, all global to anaconda3 but out of the environment. This means that these packages are not seen from the environment. Besides sklearn was inside the scikit-learn package. So I activated MyPy (my environment) and did conda install scikit-learn Now everything is working and coherent. Still confused, however ... Thank you all. Regards. --- news://freenews.netfront.net/ - complaints: n...@netfront.net --- -- https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Best practice for upgrading SQLite C library (DLL, SO, etc) that ships with Python
I noticed that there's a rather big gap between the latest version of SQLite and the version of SQLite that ships with Python 3.6/3.7. Is there best practice advice for upgrading the SQLlite C library that ships with Python ... without causing havoc and mayhem on my system? Options Don't do it - the universe will split Do it - just replace the DLL/SO library in your Python installation's folderDo it - but rename the updated version so as not to overwrite the default SQLlite library?Do it - using some type of virtual environment magic so your change is truly isolated Other? Are there OS specific issues to be concerned with or is there a general pattern here? I work across Windows, Linux, and macOS. Thank you, Malcolm -- https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
RE: the python name
Dennis, Yes, I remember seeing proofs that a bare-bones Turing Machine with an infinite bidirectional tape can solve anything done by a classical computer. I also suggest that in many cases, such a device is a way to transform any problem that can be solved decently into one that can now be solved in indefinite and sometimes effectively infinite, time. I wrote my thesis on a variant of such an automaton. But many things that are theoretically doable remain far from practical. There are often shortcuts both in hardware and software that allow simpler solutions using finite resources for reasonable amounts of data processed. I recall an example from a version of mathematical LISP that I will rewrite in python for illustration: def is_greater(left, right): if left <= 0 : return False if right <= 0 : return True return is_greater(left - 1, right - 1) That is a beautiful mathematical way of looking at it. Given two non-negative numbers, keep subtracting one from both sides until one is 0 or less. At that point, you know. The original version did not use subtraction but rather an abstract function to return a predecessor. Nice and abstract. Too abstract. Yes, this does not handle equality well. Easy enough to amend. But the POINT is that comparing a trillion to a quadrillion may take some time and without tail recursion may exhaust the stack long before it completes. Yet for an amazing number of case, a shorter solution is as simple as placing left in register A and right in register B and issuing a command that compares them bitwise or something and returns a True/False in register A as a bit, or whatever the details. Or, for big numbers, many other techniques that are still simple and fast enough can be done such as converting the number into a long string of decimals and comparing one at a time till they diverge. So for practical matters, Turing machines are no more than a debating point. Yes, a language without exponentiation can solve a large set of problems using repeated multiplication but how easily with it raise the transcendental number e to the [product of the transcendental number pi times the odd square root of -1] and get a result of -1? Heck, who needs multiplication? Repeated addition might do, to a point? Or, go back to the Turing machine where you, well, why bother? In the real world, the path to progress in the PRESENT often uses improvements that let you program at increasing levels of abstraction and allows underlying details to be handled for you with some confidence. So even though many programming constructs do an implicit goto when viewed at machine language levels, they are usually somewhat hidden when viewed as loops or exception handling. Heck, we now often hide loops. -Original Message- From: Python-list On Behalf Of Dennis Lee Bieber Sent: Saturday, January 5, 2019 1:46 PM To: python-list@python.org Subject: Re: the python name On Fri, 4 Jan 2019 22:59:40 -0500, "Avi Gross" declaimed the following: >was badly named when it was among the first to do such things. I am >saying that in retrospect, almost any language can do a basic subset of >arithmetic operations. And there is nothing in principle that >necessarily stops any CF: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turing_completeness Pretty much ANY computer language can be used to do any computation -- it may be more difficult in some, but it won't be impossible. The hypothetical Turing machine would, in one way, be the ultimate in symbolic manipulation given the basics consist of test/move/store... -- Wulfraed Dennis Lee Bieber AF6VN wlfr...@ix.netcom.comHTTP://wlfraed.home.netcom.com/ -- https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list -- https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: the python name
On Sun, Jan 6, 2019 at 9:34 AM Avi Gross wrote: > I recall an example from a version of mathematical LISP that I will rewrite > in python for illustration: > > def is_greater(left, right): > if left <= 0 : return False > if right <= 0 : return True > return is_greater(left - 1, right - 1) Possibly: if left <= 0: return is_greater(-right, -left) Otherwise it will give incorrect results for, eg, is_greater(-10, -11) But your point is taken. ChrisA -- https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
RE: the python name
Chris, As you noticed, I wanted to focus on a point and simplified the code. The point was of an example that struck me as both mathematically beautiful and completely impractical when it comes to decent programming given the languages and tools available today. What follows is really off topic so anyone not interested may wish to abort here. It helps explain my chosen example. The reality I am behind that function definition was quite a bit weirder. It was part of an exercise in a world where arithmetic as we know it did not exist and had to be bootstrapped into existence. Numbers had to be crafted from nothing starting with the special number zero and a vague function called successor() that created sort of an ordering on what became a set of integers. So ONE (1) was DEFINED as successor(0) and TWO (2) was successor(1) and so on. Of course, they then had to create a function called predecessor() with the abstract and vague concept that it was a sort of inverse of successor() so that for all elements x of the set created from 0 onward, there existed a function called predecessor() such that: predecessor(successor(x)) == x and of course: successor(predecessor(x)) == x So, at this point, negative integers are not quite in existence as nothing defines predecessor(0), at least not yet. The progression was first to create functions comparing any two entities (i.e. integers) sort of like the one I mention above and calling it something like greater_than(a,b) and so on till you built up a logical structure that included set theory and eventually all of arithmetic and beyond. As a philosophical or logical exercise, it indeed is true to suggest that the lesser of a trillion and a quadrillion is whichever is in a sense closer to zero. Closer here is defined as fewer calls to predecessor() before hitting the one known number in this scheme. At that point in the book, expressions like "5 - 3" are not yet defined. Now such attempts to do a step by step building of a mathematical structure from some minimal number of postulates is frequent in mathematics. Think Euclidean Geometry where if don't take the fifth, you may end up in other geometries like Riemannian and Lobachevskian. But in programming, we have other definitions of number and the meaning of "+" uses such definitions. We do not require multiple steps to add things. (Well, we sort of do by adding columns and carrying, but relatively few and often hidden.) We not only do not need multiple additions to do a multiplication, but have extended arithmetic so you can multiple by real numbers instead of just by integers as well as by negative ones or even by complex numbers and other extensions. Ditto for raising numbers to powers not being restricted to an integral number of multiplications. My point is that the Turing tape with a head that can maintain states is a fantasy that can be set up to very laboriously do the simplest things. Just adding two numbers can require something tedious where two areas of the tape contain N and M squares in a row that represent each of the two numbers. The head must march back and forth and copy one square at a time, perhaps to a new place, while marking the old one in a way that guides it to take the next one when it returns, or something equally silly and if you count how many times the head moves one square to the left or right in trying to add a million to a million by making a third region containing 2 million identical squares, good luck. Back to python. One feature I like in python is how flexible some things are. Specifically as an example, an integer can grow as large as you want without special arrangements being made. A dictionary similarly can grow or a list or many things that normally start with a smaller amount of space reserved for it. A dictionary may be created with space for a hundred entries but as it fills, magically, a larger amount of space is created and things are migrated over but everything already pointing to entries does not notice or care. When I used to write programs in languages like C or PASCAL some things that work fine in PYTHON would simply fail. Or, my code would be full of places where I had to check if space was used up, allocate new contiguous space and migrate things and try to sew up any loose ends. Do I want to go backward on many similar aspects where modern computing does a better job? How much time need I waste using a limited language that can, with tons of work, potentially do everything possible if I have to consciously allocate space, mange my own tables keeping track of what is in use, returning resources when no longer using them and so on. Languages with strong typing sometimes got so restrictive and hard to write realistic programs in that they had to be amended with gimmicks allowing you to go around them. Languages where nothing was mutable wasted resources by constantly copying things. It works, but there can be ways to make a different tradeoff. Python is a mix
Re: Best practice for upgrading SQLite C library (DLL, SO, etc) that ships with Python
"Malcolm Greene" wrote in message news:1546723194.1501226.1626474960.7ac72...@webmail.messagingengine.com... I noticed that there's a rather big gap between the latest version of SQLite and the version of SQLite that ships with Python 3.6/3.7. Is there best practice advice for upgrading the SQLlite C library that ships with Python ... without causing havoc and mayhem on my system? Options Don't do it - the universe will split Do it - just replace the DLL/SO library in your Python installation's folderDo it - but rename the updated version so as not to overwrite the default SQLlite library?Do it - using some type of virtual environment magic so your change is truly isolated Other? Are there OS specific issues to be concerned with or is there a general pattern here? I work across Windows, Linux, and macOS. I have done this a few times on Windows. I download the latest zip file from www.sqlite.org/download, unpack it, and replace the dll in the Python DLLs folder. I do back up the existing one first, just in case, but I have never had a problem. I also download the 'tools' zip file, which contains sqlite3.exe, a command-line program for executing sql statements. I actually had a problem once when things that worked with sqlite3.exe did not work when I ran the same command from python. I eventually realised that the two underlying versions of sqlite3 were different, so now I make sure I always keep them in sync. I can't comment about Linux or macOS, sorry. Frank Millman -- https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Is distutils deprecated?
Is `distutils` deprecated or about to be deprecated? https://github.com/python-pillow/Pillow/issues/3547 אורי (Uri) u...@speedy.net -- https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
