Re: p2exe using wine/cxoffice
James Stroud wrote: > "better". The only reason I want this functionality is to make my software > available to windoze users--despite their unfortunate ignorance, they are > people too. That's what I always say. Actually, I think it's many unix/linux users who are ignorant of just how nice, stable and productive Windows can be as a desktop environment. ... and I really mean that. ;-). Ever since Win2K got rid of the constant blue screens, the reasons for switching over to Linux have grown less and less urgent. The 'Nix desktop environments are growing visibly more mature with each passing year, but device support in Linux is still decidedly inferior and it still takes far too much time to do some things you take for granted under Windoze. I'm experienced enough with Linux that I can customize a distribution like Slackware to a fair extent, but for desktop work, I stay in Windows almost exclusively. I have this bunch of Linux zealots in a mailing list to thank for encouraging me to realize how good Windows can be. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Favorite flavor of Linux? (for python or anything else)
Ivan Shevanski wrote: > Looking to replace my older flavor of linux with something new. . .What > are some of your favorites for python programming and anything else? Still Slackware for me. Slackware is the 'true' Linux. To paraphrase the Brooke Shields Calvin Klein ad - "Nothing comes between me and my kernel (and utilities)". ;-) -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Most SHAMEFUL one-liner:
Jeremy Moles wrote:
> I was looking through some code of my today and noticed this little gem
> I wrote a few days back that I had totally forgot about:
>
> fill = [("%%-%ds\n" % (columns - 1)) % " " for i in range(yoffset - 2)]
>
> ...and then I went on to do:
>
> "".join(fill)
>
> Talk about using the wrong tool for the job... :(
>
> All I needed was:
>
> " " * (columns - 1) * (yoffset - 2)
>
> Anyone else remember any shameful one-liners like this? :) I'm just
> curious to see what kinda mistakes people make you think about a
> solution WAY TO HARD... :)
So TIMTOWTDI after all in Python!!
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Xah's Edu Corner: Examples of Quality Technical Writing
Sherm Pendley wrote: > Xah's a pretty well-known troll in these parts. I suppose he thinks someone > is going to take the bait and rush to "defend" the other languages or some > such nonsense. Actually, I think Xah often has a point, except he can't seem to express it without resorting to profanity and a controlled manner, thus giving the impression he's a troll. Also, he seems to be blissfully unaware of the concept of netiquette. ;-) -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Bitching about the documentation...
Tony Meyer wrote: > This makes no sense. If you want to complain about Python, try a > Perl list. Why would a list dedicated to discussion about/help with > a language need complaints about the language? Huh?!? Usually people complain because they need help or feel that things can be improved. > You might want to consider the difference between complaining and > constructive criticism and suggestions, and which are likely to get > better responses. In the case of programming languages, I don't see any real difference between something being a 'constructive criticism' and a 'complaint'. Why, oh why, do so many programmers insist on elevating software tools they are using to the status of a *religion* such that they feel personally offended when someone badmouths the language or tool they are using??? Anyone can badmouth Python and things associated with all they want, the only time it would even begin to bother me is only if these were false accusations or there is a dishonest agenda behind it. If the complaints are untrue, then I'd just be laughing at others' ignorance, not be offended by it. If it is an honest complaint arising out of personal experience with the language, then certainly there is a need to examine what can be improved. I generally don't see any need to feel uncomfortable with strident whining against Python because the only thing being attacked here is a software tool, not persons. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Bitching about the documentation...
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > FWIW I find Python's docs to be OK at best, with some horrible > parts, and a lot of mediochre to poor parts. I myself have no big beef about Python's docs, but you're certainly not the first one to complain about them. Xah Lee rants very heavily against the quality against Python's docs and considers many sections of it as written in a manner more to show-off one's knowledge of jargon rather than to explain things properly. I don't really notice that but this could be because I'm already quite comfortable with jargon at the level it is used in the Python docs (or maybe I'm one of those highfalutin' chaps as well ;-D). Seriously though, sometimes jargon is necessary in order to put across a point concisely and accurately so its use cannot always be considered gratuitous. The only problem I have with Python docs is that for most of the the standard library API documentation, the function calls are not organized very well (i.e. I don't believe they are alphabetized or ordered in any intutive manner). -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Continuations Based Web Framework - Seaside.
none wrote: Does Python really need yet another framework? Apart from the intellectual excersise, wouldn't it be nice if Python would get a framework "for the rest of us" (meaning: mere mortals) which would focus upon getting work done in a simple manner instead of creating yet another, new, hip, exciting, way of creating dynamic websites? If Python cannot deliver a PHP clone, at least you would expect a Rails lookalike. Spyce (http://spyce.sf.net) would be the superior Python-based PHP clone you are looking for. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: The best way to do web apps with Python?
worzel wrote: What is the best way to web developemnt with Python? Is there anything close to PHP style in-page script placement that can create and use other Python objects? Spyce ( http://spyce.sf.net ) is what you're looking for. I was looking exactly for the same thing as you are - a PHP workalike - and tried around half a dozen or so alternatives before I settled upon Spyce as the best one. If Spyce's [[ and ]] delimiters are not to your liking, you can actually switch to using <% and %> without any problem. Spyce also handles the Python indent issue quite nicely and elegantly, imo, while you can use the free and open source SciTE text editor to separately syntax highlight Spyce source code + Javascript + HTML very nicely (config file tweaking required). what is the expectataion of Python for this kind of stuff? Would one use Python for certain other things but turn to PHP for web apps - or would one use their Python skills in place of PHP? Python can be a full (and superior) replacement for PHP. The only caveat would be third party hosting support. The following post by on the Spyce mailing list (by Andy of Neotitans.com web development) explains why: "One major roadblock to Spyce and other Python server side technologies seeing acceptance on the scale of PHP is the fact that mod_python deployment on 3rd party shared hosting solutions is more complex and involved than mod_php. Apparently, security considerations mean that each mod_python user will need to get their own instance of an Apache server acting as a proxy behind a central instance of an Apache server (which is what's responsible for accepting requests at the shared server's http port). A per-shared user Spyce proxy server approach would likely be more economical (of server resources) and more easily set up than multiple mod_python-enabled Apache server instances. If your hosting solution will permit you to have your own long-running processes (afaik, most won't :-( ), and if they are willing make the necessary httpd.conf mods to pass Spyce page requests over to your own instance of the Spyce proxy server or their .htaccess setup allows you to do that yourself, then you're all set. I'm also happy to report that Spyce CGI works great on any hosting solution that supports CGI and has Python installed. This means that virtually all Linux-based hosting solutions (including those ultra-cheap shared server ones) will support Spyce CGI. It would seem that FastCGI support is probably the hardest to come by." -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: a new Perl/Python a day
Bob Smith wrote: With terms such as "blabbering Unix donkeys" and "sloppy perl monkeys" I would say that the monkey-mind is indeed one that is enamoured with obfuscation and complicated gadgetry for its own sake. Ever wonder why no one has ever considered using the phrase "Zen of Perl"? (yes, it sounds completely off-kilter) ... or why 'Perl monkey' is an oft-heard term whereas 'Python monkey' just doesn't seem to be appropriate? -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Windows GUIs from Python
Wow, Venster looks cool and to think I've never heard of it before. I knew following this newsgroup would pay off one day... Luke Skywalker wrote: On Tue, 11 Jan 2005 22:15:36 +0100, Thomas Heller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Well, venster. Although it is most certainly alpha. But with some work... Thx, I'll keep an eye on it. http://venster.sourceforge.net/ Luke. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Windows GUIs from Python
Still, what I think would appeal to a lot of people (although they might not know it yet) as a GUI solution for Python is Mozilla XUL with all the RDF and XPCOM crap surgically removed from it. If you've ever tried a couple of basic XUL tutorials, I think you would be convinced that XUL is an even better way to develop GUIs than visual RAD tools. After years of doing web apps, I feel the DHTML/DOM approach as applied to GUI creation is superior in terms of learning curve, productivity and ease of code maintenance to imperative language, event-driven, IDE-coupled frameworks like Delphi, Windows Forms or Swing... except for the fact that the HTML widgets (if you could even call them that) are very primitive. XUL essentially gives you full fledged GUI widgets and allows you to script them from Javascript the same way you script HTML elements via DOM or DHTML (very easily, in other words). Now, imagine being able to use Python instead of Javascript... sounds like a match made in heaven to me. Unfortunately, the Mozilla developers are too enamoured with Javascript and RDF and XPCOM to realize that XUL (which is really shaping up beautifully if you look at Firefox and Thunderbird) is the real star in their stable and many people would like to use it without being forced to deal with the other complicated, overengineered technologies surrounding it. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Python.org, Website of Satan
This would be funny except for the fact that there are actually people out there who will take this seriously. http://rmitz.org/freebsd.daemon.html Don't forget Python == Snake == Serpent == ... ;-D [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > python.org = 194.109.137.226 > > 194 + 109 + 137 + 226 = 666 > > What is this website with such a demonic name and IP address? What > evils are the programmers who use this language up to? -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Another look at language comparisons
Max M wrote: Jan Dries wrote: [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: And there is hope for Python, as Guido has recently been seen with a beard :-) http://www.tbray.org/ongoing/When/200x/2004/12/08/-big/IMG_3061.jpg LOL, he is working on linux, isn't he? So it was about bloody time. Guido Van Rossum is now working on linux?? -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: "Architecture of Python" was removed ?
Skip Montanaro wrote: Yes, perhaps. Note that it doesn't appear that the Wayback Machine contains the meat of the essay, just the front page. It came from a wiki. Perhaps Most of the text seems to be there, but there are some critical diagrams (images) which the Wayback Machine did not archive. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Another look at language comparisons
Anyone know of a cached copy where the photos are present? The whole thing makes little sense with the photos gone. Pierre Quentel wrote: http://khason.biz/blog/2004/12/why-microsoft-can-blow-off-with-c.html -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Another look at language comparisons
Terry Reedy wrote: It would hardly make more sense with the photos. The photos would be graphic evidence and would make it more entertaining to read through. "Not the law is clear? There is a beard - there is a success. There is no beard - you are guilty. " Terry J. Reedy And what about the moustache issue and Grace Hopper (COBOL is/was a very popular language but very much maligned and criticized like Perl and BASIC whose creators had moustaches instead of beards) ? Also, what about C#? AFAIK, Heljsberg has neither beard nor moustache, or is he sprouting one now (no pic to confirm...)? -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Integration with java (Jpype vs. JPE)
Can someone summarize in a nutshell what is the difference between JPype and JPE? -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Producer/consumer Queue "trick"
I don't get it. If the consumer and the producer are separate threads, why does the consumer thread block when the producer thread is generating a new board? Or why does it take forever for the producer thread to be pre-empted? Also, I don't understand why the solution works. How does sleeping for .001 seconds right after putting a new board on the queue solve the problem? Evan Simpson wrote: WEBoggle needs a new game board every three minutes. Boards take an unpredictable (much less than 3min, but non-trivial) amount of time to generate. The system is driven by web requests, and I don't want the request that happens to trigger the need for the new board to have to pay the time cost of generating it. I set up a producer thread that does nothing but generate boards and put them into a length-two Queue (blocking). At the rate that boards are pulled from the Queue, it's almost always full, but my poor consumer thread was still being blocked for "a long time" each time it fetched a board. At this point I realized that q.get() on a full Queue immediately wakes up the producer, which has been blocked waiting to add a board to the Queue. It sets about generating the next board, and the consumer doesn't get to run again until the producer blocks again or is preempted. The solution was simple: have the producer time.sleep(0.001) when q.put(board) returns. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: huygens lands on titan
I sure as hell bet it didn't too. Fuzzyman wrote: John Thingstad wrote: -- huygens lands on titan Using M2, Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/m2/ I bet it didn't... Regards, Fuzzy http://www.voidspace.org.uk/python/index.shtml -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Python vs. Perl
Michael McGarry wrote: I intend to use a scripting language for GUI development and front end code for my simulations in C. I want a language that can support SQL, Sockets, File I/O, and shell interaction. In my experience, Python is definitely much more suitable than Perl for the first four areas mentioned in the last sentence. For the last area, I'm not sure, but Python's capabilities in this area are also quite good. For GUI development and front end, Python most likely has better facilities than Perl, but still leaves a lot to be desired (after getting a taste of Delphi 3rd party VCL components, all other RAD environments pale in comparison). -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: lies about OOP
projecktzero wrote: A co-worker considers himself "old school" in that he hasn't seen the light of OOP.(It might be because he's in love with Perl...but that's another story.) He thinks that OOP has more overhead and is slower than programs written the procedural way. The problem with OOP is not overhead in the sense of slower programs. It's overhead in terms of complexity. OOP frameworks also make doing simple things require way too much effort and study. Inheritance is a very inflexible way of organizing code - it makes it impossible/extremely difficult/expensive to change the design of base classes. Hence, the recent popularity of interfaces as an alternative. The thing I love about Python is how it manages to hide its OOP-ness most of the time compared to languages like Java and C++. Python concepts like 'protocols' greatly lessen the need to deal with awkward OOP ideas. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: PHP vs. Python (speed-wise comparison)
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Anyone know which is faster? I'm a PHP programmer but considering getting into Python ... did searches on Google but didn't turn much up on this. Thanks! Stephen If you're talking about usage as a server side scripting language, then PHP will likely give better page serving throughput for the same hardware configuration versus even something that is mod_python based (but I believe the speed diff would be well under 100%). However, Python is just so much superior as a language (I was deep into PHP before I tried out Python and I always hate having to go back to PHP nowadays in the cases where it is unavoidable) that you will still want to use Python even if PHP requires lower server specs to handle the same throughput. Also, if you have a more complex application for which pooled variable reuse is an important performance-determining factor, Python-based server-side scripting solutions might offer better control of this aspect and may thus yield superior performance to a PHP-based one. The real problem with Python is not speed but _availability_. The number of hosting services out there supporting mod_php completely outstrips those supporting mod_python. Moreover, they are significantly cheaper, and offer a lot more features (Fantastico, etc...). The python-based hosting solutions out there tend to be dedicated to Python and thus do not offer these solutions. If this is not an issue (i.e. you will be running your own server), then I highly recommend going the Python route using something like Spyce (which is the closest thing to PHP in the Python world). -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
putting the output of a print statement into a string
There are objects whose repr() is not the same
as what gets printed out when you apply the
print statement to them. Usually these are
complex objects like exceptions.
Example:
>>> import smtplib
>>> server=smtplib.SMTP("smtp.yourisp.com")
>>> try:
server.sendmail("[EMAIL PROTECTED]",
"[EMAIL PROTECTED]","message")
except smtplib.SMTPRecipientsRefused, senderrs:
exc_obj=senderrs
>>> repr(exc_obj)
''
>>> print exc_obj
{'[EMAIL PROTECTED]': (550, 'Verification failed for <[EMAIL
PROTECTED]>\nunrouteable mail domain "in88validdomain.com"\nSender
verify failed')}
Question:
Is there a way to somehow put the output of 'print exc_obj' into
a string?
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: putting the output of a print statement into a string
Thanks, man! That was one fast reply... Marc 'BlackJack' Rintsch wrote: > In <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Jon Perez wrote: > > >>Question: >> >>Is there a way to somehow put the output of 'print exc_obj' into >>a string? > > > There are ways to do even that, but maybe ``str(exc_obj)`` is enough for > your needs!? > > Ciao, > Marc 'BlackJack' Rintsch -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Indentation/whitespace
Joe wrote: > Is Python going to support s syntax the does not use it's infamous > whitespace rules? I recall reading that Python might include such a > feature. Or, maybe just a brace-to-indentation preprocessor would be > sufficient. Nope never. Because that would destroy one of the most important things about Python. *Enforced* indentation is one of the reasons why we love Python. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Indentation/whitespace
Ilias Lazaridis wrote: >>>Is Python going to support s syntax the does not use it's infamous >>>whitespace rules? > > > Of course. > > I estimate it will take around 1 to 2 years from now, until this > whitespace-concept will become optionally. > > Backwards-compatibility will be kept, thus those who love this feature > will remain happy python users. If enforced indentation ever became optional, it would completely defeat its purpose, because it would then make 'creatively' indented python code possible which would be an absolute nightmare to maintain. > Python accepts the diversity of its userbase - at least where > technically possible. > > And in this case it is. Don't forget Python is also very much about language feature aesthetics, and non-enforced indentation violates Python's creator's design sensibilities completely. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Indentation/whitespace
thakadu wrote: > While I have no doubt that there are lousy browsers out there, the > problem is not only with browsers, but also I agree with you its not > Python's fault. The issue is that the code I am pasting may have used a > DIFFERENT indentation scheme, so lets say I used four spaces and the > code I am pasting used two spaces, or worse yet, a tab, that is where > the problem arises. Now assuming that the browser and the copy and > paste buffers dont screw up the indentation, when I paste that code > into my editor that is where the problem arises. Sure if everyone stuck > to the recommended 4 spaces in the style guide it would help. But even > then in the context of your program you may be a further level of > indentation. Although the below does work, I believe: def fun1(): print "I use two space indentation" while (1): print "but" print "four space works just as well" print "and can coexist" It just has to be consistent within a *single* block. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Indentation/whitespace
Joe wrote: > As for me, I'm not suggesting that braces are better than indentation. > In fact, requiring indentation is a good idea, and I agree that braces > can be quite ugly. It is the lack of visible block closing when there's > more than one level that I dislike. > ... I'm talking about double un-indent at the end of a nested loop, > where the inner-most code is long enough that the end is a double > dedent. It is especially bad because one persons single dedent can be as > big as another persons double dedent. I agree with dislikes for brace > notation, but I think it goes against the argument that Python's way is > natural and right. For me, I just feel Python's approach is simple and works. > If one includes an end-thing for every start-thing, I think it is more > natural, and still far better than C, but also more verbose. Indeed. I don't like unnecessary verbosity. > In Python, one can use comments where needed, like below, which is what > I eventually started doing. But, Python is supposed to require 'easy to > read' code. > >if ... > for x... >for y... > ... lots of code ... >#end for > #end for >#end if Well doesn't that mean that in Python, you get the best of both worlds? You can make it verbose if you need the security of closing tokens, but it is not necessary. I suspect you may still have some sort of hangover from using C-style indentation in that you are subliminally not confident that a block is properly closed unless there is a visible closing token. > The main thing that I just don't get is why Python promoters are so > sure that everyone will like the Python syntax once they get used to it. I myself would never assume that 100% of people will like Python syntax. But I know I took to it (including and *especially* the enforced indentation) like a duck to water, and apparently so do many people. But then that's why there are other languages out there. ;-) -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
