On 08/01/2014 00:32, Dennis Lee Bieber wrote:
On Tue, 7 Jan 2014 11:04:11 +1100, Chris Angelico
declaimed the following:
"Python finance" could also be interpreted in many other ways,
including "I want to write a finance application in Python", and "How
does the PSF get its money?".
PyQt5 v5.2 has been released and is available from
http://www.riverbankcomputing.com/software/pyqt/download5.
PyQt5 is a comprehensive set of bindings for v5 of Digia's Qt
cross-platform application framework. It supports Python v3, v2.7 and
v2.6.
The highlights of this release include full sup
On Wed, Jan 8, 2014 at 1:34 PM, Grant Edwards wrote:
> On 2014-01-08, Chris Angelico wrote:
>>> I think that, in hindsight, this was a major screw-up in Python 3.
>>
>> Which part was?
>
> The fact that b'ASDF'[0] in Python2 yeilds something different than it
> does in Python3 -- one yields b'A'
Programing Challenge: Constructing a Tree Given Its Edges.
Show you are the boss.
http://xahlee.info/perl-python/python_construct_tree_from_edge.html
here's plain text.
── ── ── ── ──
Problem: given a list of edges of a tree: [child, parent], construct the
On 2014-01-08, Chris Angelico wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 8, 2014 at 11:15 AM, Steven D'Aprano
> wrote:
>> Why decide that the bytes type is best considered as a list of
>> bytes rather than a string of bytes? It doesn't have any list methods, it
>> looks like a string and people use it as a string. As y
On 01/07/2014 04:15 PM, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
Ethan Furman wrote:
On 01/07/2014 07:19 AM, David Robinow wrote:
Python 3 grudgingly allows the "abomination" of byte strings (is that
what they're called?)
No, that is *not* what they're called. If you find any place in the
Python3 docs that d
On Wed, Jan 8, 2014 at 11:15 AM, Steven D'Aprano
wrote:
> Why decide that the bytes type is best considered as a list of
> bytes rather than a string of bytes? It doesn't have any list methods, it
> looks like a string and people use it as a string. As you have discovered,
> it is an inconvenient
Ethan Furman wrote:
> On 01/07/2014 07:19 AM, David Robinow wrote:
>>
>> Python 3 grudgingly allows the "abomination" of byte strings (is that
>> what they're called?)
>
> No, that is *not* what they're called. If you find any place in the
> Python3 docs that does call them bytestrings please su
On Wed, Jan 8, 2014 at 8:54 AM, Ben Finney wrote:
> Chris Angelico writes:
>
>> Sad. This is yet another of those politically-charged distinctions
>> that, quite frankly, I have no interest in.
>
> I raised the point because you're giving advice to others on which
> software to use. If you have n
On 1/7/2014 9:54 AM, Terry Reedy wrote:
On 1/7/2014 8:34 AM, wxjmfa...@gmail.com wrote:
Le dimanche 5 janvier 2014 23:14:07 UTC+1, Terry Reedy a écrit :
Memory: Point 2. A *design goal* of FSR was to save memory relative to
UTF-32, which is what you apparently prefer. Your examples show that
REQUEST FOR DISCUSSION (RFD)
unmoderated group pt.comp.lang.python
This is a formal Request for Discussion (RFD) for the creation of the
unmoderated newsgroup pt.comp.lang.python.
NEWSGROUPS LINE:
pt.comp.lang.python Portuguese version of comp.lang.pyt
On 8 January 2014 00:34, wrote:
>
> Point 2: This Flexible String Representation does no
> "effectuate" any memory optimization. It only succeeds
> to do the opposite of what a corrrect usage of utf*
> do.
>
UTF-8 is a variable-width encoding that uses less memory to encode code
points with lowe
Michael Torrie writes:
> On 01/05/2014 04:30 PM, Ben Finney wrote:
> > In short: Everything that was good about OpenOffice is now called
> > LibreOffice, which had to change its name only because the owners of
> > that name refused to let it go.
>
> Your information is a year or two out of date.
Django is great
On Tuesday, January 7, 2014 12:55:07 AM UTC-7, CM wrote:
> On Monday, January 6, 2014 8:57:22 PM UTC-5, Roy Smith wrote:
>
>
>
> > Yes, exactly. There's nothing magic about a django view. It's just a
>
> > function which is passed an instance of HttpRequest (and possibly a f
I am trying to run ez_setup.py on a fresh installation of Python 2.7.6
in a Win XP environment, but I keep getting an error. Here's the traceback:
C:\Python27\Lib>python ez_setup.py
Extracting in c:\docume~1\dick\locals~1\temp\tmpkjidy0
Now working in c:\docume~1\dick\locals~1\temp\tmpkjidy0\set
07.01.14 18:12, Steven D'Aprano написав(ла):
In Python 2.7, if you have a
chunk of binary data, you can easily do this:
data = b'\xE1\xE2\xE3\xE4'
data[0] == b'\xE1'
and it returns True just as expected.
data[0] == b'\xE1'[0] works as expected in both Python 2.7 and 3.x.
--
https://mail.pyt
On 01/07/2014 10:22 AM, MRAB wrote:
On 2014-01-07 17:46, Andrew Barnert wrote:
On Jan 7, 2014, at 7:44, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
I was thinking about Ethan's suggestion of introducing a new bytestring
class and a lot of these suggestions are what I thought the bytestring
class could do.
Sup
On 2014-01-07 17:46, Andrew Barnert wrote:
> I think Stephen's name "7-bit" is confusing people. If you try to
> interpret the name sensibly, you get Steven's broken interpretation.
> But if you read it as a nonsense word and work through the logic, it
> all makes sense.
>
> On Jan 7, 2014, at 7:4
On 01/07/2014 07:19 AM, David Robinow wrote:
Python 3 grudgingly allows the "abomination" of byte strings (is that
what they're called?)
No, that is *not* what they're called. If you find any place in the Python3 docs that does call them bytestrings please
submit a bug report.
On 01/07/20
Apologies to the list for the noise! Should have replied off-list.
--
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
On 01/07/2014 10:14 AM, Chris Angelico wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 8, 2014 at 4:10 AM, Michael Torrie wrote:
>> LO does reference images if you would like. But I find embedding the
>> whole works is just more self-contained. And with multiple file
>> documents the chances of losing data or messing with
On Wed, Jan 8, 2014 at 4:10 AM, Michael Torrie wrote:
> LO does reference images if you would like. But I find embedding the
> whole works is just more self-contained. And with multiple file
> documents the chances of losing data or messing with pagination are
> contained to individual sections.
On 01/07/2014 09:58 AM, Chris Angelico wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 8, 2014 at 3:45 AM, Michael Torrie wrote:
>> I tend to add my own [styles]
>> for quotes, captions, etc. After composing the document,
>> then you modify the styles to set the spacings, fonts, indentations,
>> border lines, etc. The wor
On Wed, Jan 8, 2014 at 3:42 AM, Martijn Faassen wrote:
> To get back to a hypothetical Python 2.8, it could implement this kind of
> behavior, and I think it would help support incremental upgrades. As long as
> you're using Py 3 bytes and str in your code, you'll be aware of errors and
> be force
On Wed, Jan 8, 2014 at 3:38 AM, Michael Torrie wrote:
> [OpenOffice v4] is mostly feature identical to
> LibreOffice 4, and even has a couple of features that LibreOffice lacks.
> They really need to merge back into one project again, but I suspect
> they won't either for ideological or legal rea
On Wed, Jan 8, 2014 at 3:45 AM, Michael Torrie wrote:
> I tend to add my own [styles]
> for quotes, captions, etc. After composing the document,
> then you modify the styles to set the spacings, fonts, indentations,
> border lines, etc. The workflow is very similar to using LyX, or even a
> plai
Hi,
I've posted a documentation issue to the 'future' module which includes
a further evolution of my thinking. As I expected, the author of the
'future' module has thought this through more than I had:
https://github.com/PythonCharmers/python-future/issues/27
To get back to a hypothetical P
On 01/06/2014 08:53 AM, Grant Edwards wrote:
> Yea, I think laying out a book with something like MS Word or
> LibreOffice is nuts. Depending on her formatting needs, a
> lighter-weight mark-up language (something like asciidoc) might suite:
I've laid out a book with LibreOffice and it actually
On 01/05/2014 04:30 PM, Ben Finney wrote:
> In short: Everything that was good about OpenOffice is now called
> LibreOffice, which had to change its name only because the owners of
> that name refused to let it go.
Your information is a year or two out of date. OpenOffice.org is alive
and well, u
David Robinow wrote:
> "treating bytes as chars" considered harmful?
Who is talking about treating bytes as chars? You're making assumptions that
aren't justified by my question.
> I don't know the answer to your question but the behavior seems right to
> me.
This issue was raised in an earl
Hi there,
I just tried this out with the future module to see what it actually
does, and I got this:
On 01/07/2014 01:54 PM, Martijn Faassen wrote:
First the Python 3 behavior:
py3str + py3str = py3str
Yup, of course.
py3bytes + py3bytes = py3bytes
Again of course.
py3str + py3bytes
Sorry for top-posting. I thought I'd mastered gmail.
--
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
"treating bytes as chars" considered harmful?
I don't know the answer to your question but the behavior seems right to me.
Python 3 grudgingly allows the "abomination" of byte strings (is that
what they're called? I haven't fully embraced Python3 yet). If you
want a substring you use a slice.
b
On 1/7/2014 8:34 AM, wxjmfa...@gmail.com wrote:
Le dimanche 5 janvier 2014 23:14:07 UTC+1, Terry Reedy a écrit :
Memory: Point 2. A *design goal* of FSR was to save memory relative to
UTF-32, which is what you apparently prefer. Your examples show that FSF
successfully met its design goal. Bu
On 1/7/2014 6:13 AM, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
Does anyone know what the rationale behind making byte-string indexing
return an int rather than a byte-string of length one?
That is, given b = b'xyz', b[1] returns 121 rather than b'y'.
This former is the normal behavior of sequences, the latter is
Le dimanche 5 janvier 2014 23:14:07 UTC+1, Terry Reedy a écrit :
> On 1/5/2014 9:23 AM, wxjmfa...@gmail.com wrote:
>
> > Le samedi 4 janvier 2014 23:46:49 UTC+1, Terry Reedy a écrit :
>
> >> On 1/4/2014 2:10 PM, wxjmfa...@gmail.com wrote:
>
> >>> And I could add, I *never* saw once one soul, who
On 01/07/2014 01:19 AM, Chris Angelico wrote:
Can we get a run-down of everything that actually must be broken in
2.7 -> 3.3, that can't be backported via __future__, so we can start
cherry-picking which bits to break in 2.8? The biggest one is going to
be Unicode strings, for a large number of
- Original Message -
> Thanks for that. It resolved the issue and it was so simple compared
> to everything else I saw on the net.
>
> Only outstanding thing I have to work out is how to execute functions
> from a dictionary. I will continue searching on the net.
>
>
> Sean
This may hel
Ervin Hegedüs wrote:
> hi,
>
> On Tue, Jan 07, 2014 at 10:13:29PM +1100, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
>> Does anyone know what the rationale behind making byte-string indexing
>> return an int rather than a byte-string of length one?
>>
>> That is, given b = b'xyz', b[1] returns 121 rather than b'y'.
hi,
On Tue, Jan 07, 2014 at 10:13:29PM +1100, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
> Does anyone know what the rationale behind making byte-string indexing
> return an int rather than a byte-string of length one?
>
> That is, given b = b'xyz', b[1] returns 121 rather than b'y'.
>
> This is especially surprisi
"Sean Murphy" wrote in message
news:0cf6151e-e063-4252-9ac3-4fd4698eb...@gmail.com...
> Hello all.
>
> I have some questions again. :-)
>
> I wish to be able to place a function within a data structure. I would
> like to use a dictionary because I could pass it a key and then the
> function co
On 1/6/14 11:01 PM, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
On Mon, 06 Jan 2014 16:32:01 -0500, Ned Batchelder wrote:
On 1/6/14 12:50 PM, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
Ned Batchelder wrote:
You are still talking about whether Armin is right, and whether he
writes well, about flaws in his statistics, etc. I'm talki
Does anyone know what the rationale behind making byte-string indexing
return an int rather than a byte-string of length one?
That is, given b = b'xyz', b[1] returns 121 rather than b'y'.
This is especially surprising when one considers that it's easy to extract
the ordinal value of a byte:
ord(
Sean Murphy wrote:
> Only outstanding thing I have to work out is how to execute functions from
> a dictionary. I will continue searching on the net.
I don't quite understand this question. Do you mean something like this?
def spam(n):
return "spam"*n
def eggs(n):
return "eggs"*n
d =
Thanks for that. It resolved the issue and it was so simple compared to
everything else I saw on the net.
Only outstanding thing I have to work out is how to execute functions from a
dictionary. I will continue searching on the net.
Sean
On 07/01/2014, at 9:21 PM, Jean-Michel Pichavant wrote
On 1/6/14 5:30 PM, Mark Lawrence wrote:
On 06/01/2014 22:22, Ned Batchelder wrote:
On 1/6/14 5:08 PM, Mark Lawrence wrote:
On 06/01/2014 21:42, Ned Batchelder wrote:
On 1/6/14 4:33 PM, Mark Lawrence wrote:
That strikes me as being as useful as "The PEP 393 FSR is completely
wrong but I'm not
- Original Message -
> Hello all.
>
> I have some questions again. :-)
>
> I wish to be able to place a function within a data structure. I
> would like to use a dictionary because I could pass it a key and
> then the function could be called. I couldn't find anything on the
> net to s
Hello all.
I have some questions again. :-)
I wish to be able to place a function within a data structure. I would like to
use a dictionary because I could pass it a key and then the function could be
called. I couldn't find anything on the net to show me how to do this. More
then likely, not
On Monday, January 6, 2014 8:57:22 PM UTC-5, Roy Smith wrote:
> Yes, exactly. There's nothing magic about a django view. It's just a
> function which is passed an instance of HttpRequest (and possibly a few
> other things, depending on your url mapping), and which is expected to
> return an i
49 matches
Mail list logo
