On Sep 5, 7:27 am, El Pitonero <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> I am a bit surprised that today, September 2007, in a thread about
> complex numbers, no one has mentioned about geometric algebra.
Here is a good reference for whoever is interested. It's quite
accessible to gen
On Sep 1, 3:54 am, Grzegorz S odkowicz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> You're mixing definition with application. You didn't say a word about
> what complex numbers are, not a word about the imaginary unit, where
> does it come from, why is it 'imaginary' etc.
> ...
> I'd also like to see a three-
Paul Boddie wrote:
> Shane Hathaway wrote:
> >
> > Make sure the pipes are unbuffered. Launch the process with "python -u"
> > and flush() the streams after writing. (That's the issue I've
> > encountered when doing this before.)
>
> The -u option is critical, yes. I wrote some code recently whic
Flavio wrote:
> I wish all my problems involved just a couple of variables, but
> unfortunately the real interesting problems tend to be complex...
>
> def fun(**kw):
> a = 100
> for k,v in kw.items():
> exec('%s = %s'%(k,v))
> print locals()
>
>
> >>> fun(**{'a':1,'b':2})
> {'a
Paul Rubin wrote:
>
> Let's see, say I'm a bank manager, and I want to close my cash vault
> at 5pm today and set its time lock so it can't be opened until 9am
> tomorrow, including by me. Is that "handcuffs"? It's normal
> procedure at any bank, for good reason. It's not necessarily some
> distr
Bengt Richter wrote:
>
> I decided to read this thread today, and I still don't know exactly
> what your requirements are for "private" whatevers.
No name collision in subclassing. Notice that even if you use
self._x = 3
in a parent class, it can be overriden in a sub-sub-class accidentally.
>
googleboy wrote:
>
> I am reading in a csv file that documents a bunch of different info
on
> about 200 books, such as title, author, publisher, isbn, date and
> several other bits of info too.
> ...
> I really want to be able to sort the list of books based on other
> criterium, and even multiple
Bengt Richter wrote:
> I still don't know what you are asking for, but here is a toy,
> ...
> But why not spend some time with the tutorials, so have a few more
cards in your deck
> before you try to play for real? ;-)
Communication problem.
All he wanted is automatic evaluation a la spreadsheet
It may be useful to separate the code into version-independent part and
version-dependent part. Also, one can try to implement the higher-level
logic directly in the class definition of A, B, etc., and then use the
version objects only as patches for the details. That is, one can use
place-holder c
Bengt Richter wrote:
> On 5 Apr 2005 19:28:55 -0700, "El Pitonero" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>
> >Scott David Daniels wrote:
> >> Ron_Adam wrote:
> >> > ...
> >>
> >> def tweakdoc(name):
> >> def decorato
Scott David Daniels wrote:
> Ron_Adam wrote:
> > ...
>
> def tweakdoc(name):
> def decorator(function):
> function.__doc__ = 'Tweak(%s) %r' % (name, function.__doc__)
> return function
> return decorator
>
> What is confusing us about what you write is tha
Martin v. Löwis wrote:
> Ron_Adam wrote:
> >
> > No, I did not know that you could pass multiple sets of arguments
to
> > nested defined functions in that manner.
>
> Please read the statements carefully, and try to understand the
mental
> model behind them. He did not say that you can pass around
Ron_Adam wrote:
>
> So I didn't know I could do this:
>
> def foo(a1):
> def fee(a2):
> return a1+a2
> return fee
>
> fum = foo(2)(6) <-- !!!
Ah, so you did not know functions are objects just like numbers,
strings or dictionaries. I think you may have been influenced by othe
Ron_Adam wrote:
> On 2 Apr 2005 08:39:35 -0800, "Kay Schluehr" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
>
> >There is actually nothing mysterious about decorators.
>
> I've heard this quite a few times now, but *is* quite mysterious if
> you are not already familiar with how they work. Or instead of
> mysteri
Ron_Adam wrote:
>
> # (0) Read defined functions into memory
>
> def decorator(d_arg): # (7) Get 'Goodbye' off stack
>
> def get_function(function): # (8) Get func object off stack
>
> def wrapper(f_arg):# (9) Get 'Hello' off stack
>
> new_arg = f_arg+'-'+d_arg
>
Christos TZOTZIOY Georgiou wrote:
>
> One of the previous related threads is this (long URL):
>
http://groups-beta.google.com/group/comp.lang.python/messages/f7dea61a92f5e792,5ce65b041ee6e45a,dbf695317a6faa26,19284769722775d2,7599103bb19c7332,abc53bd83cf8f636,4e87b44745a69832,330c5eb638963459,e4c8d
Lucas Raab wrote:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > I am blessed with a *very* gifted nine-years old daughter...
> > Now, I would like to teach her programming basics using Python
>
> Let her mess around with it on her own. I'm 15 and have been using
> Python for 2-3 years and had nothing to really go
Tim Jarman wrote:
> But if your foo is under your control, why not do everyone a favour
and call
> it something else?
His case is a canonical example of a patch. Often you'd like to choose
the "patch" approach because:
(1) the third-party may eventually incorporate the changes themselves,
hence y
Francisco Borges wrote:
> There are 2 "foo" named modules, 'std foo' and 'my foo'. I want to be
> able to import 'my foo' and then from within my foo, import 'std
> foo'. Anyone can help??
In other words, you would like to make a "patch" on third-party code.
There are many ways to do it. Here is j
George Sakkis wrote:
> "Aahz" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> > Raymond Hettinger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > >
> > >The proposed names could possibly be improved (perhaps tally() is
more active
> > >and clear than count()).
> >
> > +1 tally()
>
> -1 for count():
Raymond Hettinger wrote:
>
> As written out above, the += syntax works fine but does not work with
append().
> ...
> BTW, there is no need to make the same post three times.
The append() syntax works, if you use the other definition of safedict
(*). There are more than one way of defining safedict
Raymond Hettinger wrote:
> Separating the two cases is essential. Also, the wording should
contain strong
> cues that remind you of addition and of building a list.
>
> For the first, how about addup():
>
> d = {}
> for word in text.split():
> d.addup(word)
import copy
class safe
Dan Sommers wrote:
> On Sat, 19 Mar 2005 01:24:57 GMT,
> "Raymond Hettinger" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > The proposed names could possibly be improved (perhaps tally() is
more
> > active and clear than count()).
>
> Curious that in this lengthy discussion, a method name of
"accumulate"
> never
On Sat, 19 Mar 2005 01:24:57 GMT, "Raymond Hettinger"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>I would like to get everyone's thoughts on two new dictionary methods:
>
>def count(self, value, qty=1):
>try:
>self[key] += qty
>except KeyError:
>self[
Fernando wrote:
> The real problem with Python is ... Python is
> going the C++ way: piling feature upon feature, adding bells
> and whistles while ignoring or damaging its core design.
I totally agree.
Look at a recent thread "Compile time evaluation (aka eliminating
default argument hacks)"
ht
25 matches
Mail list logo
