On Tue, 09 Sep 2008 08:32:29 +1000, Tom Harris wrote:
> I agree. So did Forth's early designers. That is why Forth's number
> parser considers a word that starts with a number and has embedded
> punctuation to be a 32 bit integer, and simply ignores the punctuation.
> I haven't used Forth in years
On Thu, Sep 4, 2008 at 10:22 AM, Alexander Schmolck
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> It's amazing that after over half a century of computing we still can't denote
> numbers with more than 4 digits readably in the vast majority of contexts.
>
I agree. So did Forth's early designers. That is why Fort
On Sat, 06 Sep 2008 23:30:03 +, Alan G Isaac wrote:
>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
>>
>>> For Python 2.7/3.1 I'd now like to write a PEP regarding the
>>> underscores into the number literals, like: 0b_0101_, 268_435_456
>>> etc.
>>
>> +1 on such a capability.
>>
>> -1 on underscore as th
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
For Python 2.7/3.1 I'd now like to write a PEP regarding the
underscores into the number literals, like: 0b_0101_, 268_435_456
etc.
+1 on such a capability.
-1 on underscore as the separator.
On 9/1/2008 9:13 PM Ben Finney apparently wrote:
When you proposed
Alexander Schmolck wrote:
A problem is that '1234' in Python is a string, so using ' in numbers
looks a bit dangerous to me (and my editor will color those numbers as
alternated strings, I think).
Yeah, editors, especially those with crummy syntax highlighting (like emacs)
might get it wrong.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> A problem is that '1234' in Python is a string, so using ' in numbers
> looks a bit dangerous to me (and my editor will color those numbers as
> alternated strings, I think).
Yeah, editors, especially those with crummy syntax highlighting (like emacs)
might get it wron
Steven D'Aprano <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Thu, 04 Sep 2008 01:22:22 +0100, Alexander Schmolck wrote:
>
>> It seems to me that the right choice for thousands seperator is the
>> apostrophe.
>
> You mean the character already used as a string delimiter?
Yup. No ambiguity or problem here; in
Steven D'Aprano wrote:
> On Thu, 04 Sep 2008 01:22:22 +0100, Alexander Schmolck wrote:
>
>> It seems to me that the right choice for thousands seperator is the
>> apostrophe.
>
> You mean the character already used as a string delimiter?
Hey - I just found a new use for the backtick!
123`456`7
On Thu, 04 Sep 2008 01:22:22 +0100, Alexander Schmolck wrote:
> It seems to me that the right choice for thousands seperator is the
> apostrophe.
You mean the character already used as a string delimiter?
--
Steven
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Alexander Schmolck:
> It also reads well, unlike the underscore
> which is visually obstrusive and ugly (compare 123'456'890 to 123_456_789).
I like that enough, in my language that symbol is indeed the standard
one to separate thousands, in large numbers. It's light, looks
natural, and as you say
Ben Finney <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
>
>> For Python 2.7/3.1 I'd now like to write a PEP regarding the
>> underscores into the number literals, like: 0b_0101_, 268_435_456
>> etc.
>
> +1 on such a capability.
>
> -1 on underscore as the separator.
>
> When you pro
On Sep 2, 12:34 am, Fredrik Lundh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Ben Finney wrote:
> > I would argue that the precedent, already within Python, for using a
> > space to separate pieces of a string literal, is more important than
> > precedents from other programming languages.
>
> that precedent also
Ben Finney:
> … for numbers with many digits the digits may be divided into
> groups of three by a thin space, in order to facilitate reading.
> Neither dots nor commas are inserted in the spaces between groups
> of three.
> http://www.bipm.org/en/si/si_brochure/chapter5/5-3-2.h
On 2008-09-03, Ben Finney <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Another reason in support of spaces (rather than underscores) to
> separate digit groups: it's the only separator that follows the SI
> standard for representing numbers:
>
> ??? for numbers with many digits the digits may be divided into
On 2008-09-03, Ben Finney <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Ben Finney <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
>> I don't see any good reason (other than your familiarity with the D
>> language) to use underscores for this purpose, and much more reason
>> (readability, consistency, fewer arbitrary differences in
On 2008-09-02, Christian Heimes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Fredrik Lundh wrote:
>> Peter Pearson wrote:
>>
>>> (startled noises) It is a delight to find a reference to
>>> that half-century-old essay (High Finance) by the wonderful
>>> C. Northcote Parkinson, but how many readers will catch the
Ben Finney <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I don't see any good reason (other than your familiarity with the D
> language) to use underscores for this purpose, and much more reason
> (readability, consistency, fewer arbitrary differences in syntax,
> perhaps simpler implementation) to use whitespace
On Sep 2, 6:35 am, Nick Craig-Wood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > It's not just my familiarity, Ada language too uses underscore for
> > that purpose, I think, so there's a precedent, and Ada is a language
> > designed to always minimize programmin
Peter Pearson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I thought I was a geek, for the past 40 years; but maybe its time
> for me to be demoted to the dad on whose bookshelf you'll find that
> old book.
Once a geek, always a geek. You either stay sharp or get sloppy, but
you never stop being a geek :-)
--
Fredrik Lundh wrote:
Peter Pearson wrote:
(startled noises) It is a delight to find a reference to
that half-century-old essay (High Finance) by the wonderful
C. Northcote Parkinson, but how many readers will catch the
allusion?
anyone that's been involved in open source on the development si
On Tue, 02 Sep 2008 17:18:58 GMT, Alan G Isaac <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> On 02 Sep 2008 06:10:51 GMT, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
>>> At the risk of bike-shedding,
>> [snip]
>
> Peter Pearson wrote:
>> (startled noises) It is a delight to find a reference to
>> that half-century-old essay (High Fin
Peter Pearson wrote:
(startled noises) It is a delight to find a reference to
that half-century-old essay (High Finance) by the wonderful
C. Northcote Parkinson, but how many readers will catch the
allusion?
anyone that's been involved in open source on the development side for
more than, say
On 02 Sep 2008 06:10:51 GMT, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
At the risk of bike-shedding,
[snip]
Peter Pearson wrote:
(startled noises) It is a delight to find a reference to
that half-century-old essay (High Finance) by the wonderful
C. Northcote Parkinson, but how many readers will catch the
allus
On 02 Sep 2008 06:10:51 GMT, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
> At the risk of bike-shedding,
[snip]
(startled noises) It is a delight to find a reference to
that half-century-old essay (High Finance) by the wonderful
C. Northcote Parkinson, but how many readers will catch the
allusion?
--
To email me, s
[EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Ben Finney:
> > I don't see any good reason (other than your familiarity with the D
> > language) to use underscores for this purpose, and much more reason
> > (readability, consistency, fewer arbitrary differences in syntax,
> > perhaps simpler imple
On Mon, 01 Sep 2008 22:11:13 -0700, Dennis Lee Bieber wrote:
> On Tue, 02 Sep 2008 13:51:16 +1000, Ben Finney
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> declaimed the following in
> comp.lang.python:
>
>> This is no more the case than for literal strings:
>>
>> a = "spam" "eggs" "ham"
>>
>> a = "spam", "eggs", "ham
On Tue, 02 Sep 2008 11:13:27 +1000, Ben Finney wrote:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
>
>> For Python 2.7/3.1 I'd now like to write a PEP regarding the
>> underscores into the number literals, like: 0b_0101_, 268_435_456
>> etc.
>
> +1 on such a capability.
>
> -1 on underscore as the separator
Ben Finney wrote:
I would argue that the precedent, already within Python, for using a
space to separate pieces of a string literal, is more important than
precedents from other programming languages.
that precedent also tells us that the whitespace approach is a common
source of errors. tak
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> Ben Finney:
> > I don't see any good reason (other than your familiarity with the
> > D language) to use underscores for this purpose, and much more
> > reason (readability, consistency, fewer arbitrary differences in
> > syntax, perhaps simpler implementation) to use w
Ben Finney:
> I don't see any good reason (other than your familiarity with the D
> language) to use underscores for this purpose, and much more reason
> (readability, consistency, fewer arbitrary differences in syntax,
> perhaps simpler implementation) to use whitespace just as with string
> liter
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> For Python 2.7/3.1 I'd now like to write a PEP regarding the
> underscores into the number literals, like: 0b_0101_, 268_435_456
> etc.
+1 on such a capability.
-1 on underscore as the separator.
When you proposed this last year, the counter-proposal was made
htt
31 matches
Mail list logo
