> Either I'm misunderstanding what you mean or you need to get a clue
> about what Python can already do before you go around making suggestions
> for what Python needs. Lists have supported "in" tests since at least
> version 1.5.2:
>
Well IN was what I was looking for and would have saved this t
On Aug 30, 4:48 pm, "Chris Mellon" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 8/30/07, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Aug 30, 4:31 pm, Ben Finney <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > wrote:
> > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> > > > In my case of have done os.listdir() on two directories. I want to
On Aug 30, 4:31 pm, Ben Finney <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> > In my case of have done os.listdir() on two directories. I want to see
> > what files are in directory A that are not in directory B.
>
> You get that information unambiguously. It's an exceptional case,
> sin
On Aug 30, 4:28 pm, Ben Finney <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> > On Aug 30, 12:09 am, Ben Finney <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > wrote:
> > > It's letting you know that the item isn't in the list. There's no
> > > sensible return value from an "index" function in that condition.
>
On Aug 30, 12:18 pm, Wildemar Wildenburger
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > I have read that you can derive from the base classes such as str,
> > list, dict.
>
> > I guess this would look like:
>
> > def MyString(str):
> > def MyList(list):
> > def MyDict(dict):
>
> Well,
On Aug 30, 12:13 pm, Arnaud Delobelle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Aug 30, 8:00 pm, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> > I have read that you can derive from the base classes such as str,
> > list, dict.
>
> > I guess this would look like:
>
> > def MyString(str):
> > def MyList(list):
> > def MyDict(
I have read that you can derive from the base classes such as str,
list, dict.
I guess this would look like:
def MyString(str):
def MyList(list):
def MyDict(dict):
How do you access the data that is contained in the super class?
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
> That wish will only come true if you maintain your own fork of Python 3.
> has_key() will go away, period. It has been made obsolete by "in", which
> is faster and more concise.
Is there really some reason "key" IN dict can be implemented faster
than dict.has_key("key")???
--
http://mail.p
Neil, Steve,
Thanks for the responses on sets. I have not used them before and was
not even aware Python had them. I will try them out.
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
> While I agree that Bruno's response was perhaps needlessly snippy, your
> original question was needlessly inflammatory, as if you somehow wanted
> some "religious zealot" to act the way Bruno did. If we start labeling
> people, this thread will earn you a label that rhymes with "roll".
>
That is
On Aug 30, 12:42 am, Bruno Desthuilliers wrote:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] a écrit :
>
> What's with using your brain instead of whining ?
I knew there would be at least one religious zealot.
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
>
> How could it not be an exception, in the plain English sense of the
> word? Most certainly you're asking for the index because you want to do
> something with the index. If the item is not found, you have no index,
> so that's a special case that must be handled separately. There is no
> logica
On Aug 30, 12:09 am, Ben Finney <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> > What's with the index() function of lists throwing an exception on not
> > found?
>
> It's letting you know that the item isn't in the list. There's no
> sensible return value from an "index" function in that
What's with the index() function of lists throwing an exception on not
found? Let's hope this is rectified in Python 3. If nothing else, add
a function that doesn't throw an exception. There are a million
situations where you can have an item not be in a list and it is not
an exception situation.
14 matches
Mail list logo
