> On 8 Jan 2023, at 21:16, Raphael Santiago
> wrote:
>
> Maybe something like re""
> It should behave exactly like a raw string but would be useful for syntax
> highlighting and debugging. Perhaps also for type hinting expected regex
> input (don't know if this is feasible).
This is unlikely
On 08Jan2023 12:44, Raphael Santiago wrote:
Maybe something like re""
It should behave exactly like a raw string but would be useful for syntax
highlighting and debugging. Perhaps also for type hinting expected regex
input (don't know if this is feasible).
A nice idea. (Though I'm personally r
On Tue, 14 Jun 2022 at 01:59, h3ck phy wrote:
>
> It would be nice if we could write something like this
> data: dict[str, *] = {}
> instead of
> data: dict[str, Any] = {}
>
> In import statement asterisk means "all names" in a module.
> But in type closure it should mean "all types".
Type hints
On Sat, 16 Apr 2022 at 17:14, Peter J. Holzer wrote:
>
> On 2022-04-16 16:49:17 +0200, Marco Sulla wrote:
> > Furthermore, you didn't answer my simple question: why does the
> > security update package contain metadata about Debian patches, if the
> > Ubuntu security team did not benefit from Debi
On 2022-04-16 16:49:17 +0200, Marco Sulla wrote:
> Furthermore, you didn't answer my simple question: why does the
> security update package contain metadata about Debian patches, if the
> Ubuntu security team did not benefit from Debian security patches but
> only from internal work?
It DOES NOT
On Sat, 16 Apr 2022 at 10:15, Peter J. Holzer wrote:
> It doesn't (or at least you can't conclude that from the evidence you
> posted).
>
> There is a subdirectory called "debian" in the build directory of every
> .deb package. This is true on Debian, Ubuntu and every other
> distribution which us
On 2022-04-14 19:31:58 +0200, Marco Sulla wrote:
> On Wed, 13 Apr 2022 at 20:05, Peter J. Holzer wrote:
> >
> > On 2022-04-12 21:03:00 +0200, Marco Sulla wrote:
> > > On Tue, 29 Mar 2022 at 00:10, Peter J. Holzer wrote:
> > > > They are are about a year apart, so they will usually contain
> > > >
On Wed, 13 Apr 2022 at 20:05, Peter J. Holzer wrote:
>
> On 2022-04-12 21:03:00 +0200, Marco Sulla wrote:
> > On Tue, 29 Mar 2022 at 00:10, Peter J. Holzer wrote:
> > > They are are about a year apart, so they will usually contain different
> > > versions of most packages right from the start. So
On 2022-04-12 21:03:00 +0200, Marco Sulla wrote:
> On Tue, 29 Mar 2022 at 00:10, Peter J. Holzer wrote:
> > They are are about a year apart, so they will usually contain different
> > versions of most packages right from the start. So the Ubuntu and Debian
> > security teams probably can't benefit
On Tue, 29 Mar 2022 at 00:10, Peter J. Holzer wrote:
> They are are about a year apart, so they will usually contain different
> versions of most packages right from the start. So the Ubuntu and Debian
> security teams probably can't benefit much from each other.
Well, this is what my updater on
On Thu, 31 Mar 2022 at 18:38, Cecil Westerhof via Python-list
wrote:
> Most people think that
> Ubuntu is that also, because it is based on Debian. But Ubuntu wants
> also provide the newest versions of software and this will affect the
> stability and security negatively.
I think you're referrin
On 2022-03-31 09:46:14 +0200, Cecil Westerhof via Python-list wrote:
> "Peter J. Holzer" writes:
> > Standard policy (there are exceptions) on most distros is to stay with
> > the same version of any package for the entire lifetime. So for example,
> > Ubuntu 20.04 was released with Apache 2.4.41
"Peter J. Holzer" writes:
> On 2022-03-30 08:48:36 +0200, Marco Sulla wrote:
>> On Tue, 29 Mar 2022 at 00:10, Peter J. Holzer wrote:
>> > They are are about a year apart, so they will usually contain different
>> > versions of most packages right from the start. So the Ubuntu and Debian
>> > sec
"Peter J. Holzer" writes:
> On 2022-03-28 15:35:07 +0200, Cecil Westerhof via Python-list wrote:
>> "Loris Bennett" writes:
>> > Ubuntu is presumably relying on the Debian security team as well as
>> > other volunteers and at least one company, namely Canonical.
>>
>> Nope. One important reason
On 2022-03-30 08:48:36 +0200, Marco Sulla wrote:
> On Tue, 29 Mar 2022 at 00:10, Peter J. Holzer wrote:
> > They are are about a year apart, so they will usually contain different
> > versions of most packages right from the start. So the Ubuntu and Debian
> > security teams probably can't benefit
On Tue, 29 Mar 2022 at 00:10, Peter J. Holzer wrote:
> They are are about a year apart, so they will usually contain different
> versions of most packages right from the start. So the Ubuntu and Debian
> security teams probably can't benefit much from each other.
Are you sure? Since LTS of Debian
On 2022-03-28 15:35:07 +0200, Cecil Westerhof via Python-list wrote:
> "Loris Bennett" writes:
> > Ubuntu is presumably relying on the Debian security team as well as
> > other volunteers and at least one company, namely Canonical.
>
> Nope. One important reason that I really hate that people use
"Loris Bennett" writes:
> Marco Sulla writes:
>
>> On Fri, 11 Mar 2022 at 19:10, Michael Torrie wrote:
>>> Both Debian stable and Ubuntu LTS state they have a five year support
>>> life cycle.
>>
>> Yes, but it seems that official security support in Debian ends after
>> three years:
>>
>> "Deb
Dear Loris,
"Loris Bennett" writes:
> (...thanks...)
> The sysadmins I know who are interested in long-term stability and
> avoiding unnecessary OS updates use Debian rather than Ubuntu,
+1; Reasonable!
Sincerely, Linux fan Byung-Hee
--
^고맙습니다 _地平天成_ 감사합니다_^))//
--
https://mail.python.org/m
On Mon, 14 Mar 2022 at 18:33, Loris Bennett wrote:
> I am not sure how different the two situations are. Ubuntu is
> presumably relying on the Debian security team as well as other
> volunteers and at least one company, namely Canonical.
So do you think that Canonical contributes to the LTS secu
Marco Sulla writes:
> On Fri, 11 Mar 2022 at 19:10, Michael Torrie wrote:
>> Both Debian stable and Ubuntu LTS state they have a five year support
>> life cycle.
>
> Yes, but it seems that official security support in Debian ends after
> three years:
>
> "Debian LTS is not handled by the Debian
Cousin Stanley wrote:
>> apt-cache search lxqt | grep ^lxqt
Chris Angelico wrote:
> Much faster:
>
> apt-cache pkgnames lxqt
>
> apt-cache search will look for "lxqt" in descriptions too,
> hence the need to filter those out
>
> apt-cache pkgnames is used by tab completion)
>
Thanks
On Fri, 11 Mar 2022 at 19:10, Michael Torrie wrote:
> Both Debian stable and Ubuntu LTS state they have a five year support
> life cycle.
Yes, but it seems that official security support in Debian ends after
three years:
"Debian LTS is not handled by the Debian security team, but by a
separate g
On 3/11/22 11:03, Marco Sulla wrote:
> Anyway I think I'll not install Debian, because it's LTS releases are
> not long enough for me. I don't know if there's a distro based on
> Debian that has a long LTS support, Ubuntu apart.
Both Debian stable and Ubuntu LTS state they have a five year support
On Fri, 11 Mar 2022 at 06:38, Dan Stromberg wrote:
> That's an attribute of your desktop environment, not the Linux distribution.
>
> EG: I'm using Debian with Cinnamon, which does support ctrl-alt-t.
Never used Cinnamon. It comes from Mint, right?
> Some folks say the desktop environment matter
On Fri, 11 Mar 2022 at 19:57, Roel Schroeven wrote:
>
> Op 11/03/2022 om 3:50 schreef Chris Angelico:
> > On Fri, 11 Mar 2022 at 09:51, Cousin Stanley
> > wrote:
> > > The following will display a list of lxqt packages
> > > that are in the repository and available to install
> > >
> >
Op 11/03/2022 om 3:50 schreef Chris Angelico:
On Fri, 11 Mar 2022 at 09:51, Cousin Stanley wrote:
> The following will display a list of lxqt packages
> that are in the repository and available to install
>
> apt-cache search lxqt | grep ^lxqt
>
Much faster:
apt-cache pkgnames lxqt
On Fri, 11 Mar 2022 at 16:39, Dan Stromberg wrote:
> Some folks say the desktop environment matters more than the distribution,
> when choosing what OS to install.
Matters more to the choice? Impossible to say.
Matters more to the UI? Without a doubt.
ChrisA
--
https://mail.python.org/mailman/
On Thu, Mar 10, 2022 at 5:04 AM Marco Sulla
wrote:
> On Thu, 10 Mar 2022 at 04:50, Michael Torrie wrote:
> >
> > On 3/9/22 13:05, Marco Sulla wrote:
> > > So my laziness pays. I use only LTS distros, and I update only when
> > > there are security updates.
> > > PS: any suggestions for a new LTS
On Fri, 11 Mar 2022 at 09:51, Cousin Stanley wrote:
>
> Marco Sulla wrote:
>
> >>
> >> Maybe Debian itself?
> >
> > I tried Debian on a VM, but I found it too much basical. A little
> > example: it does not have the shortcut ctrl+alt+t to open a terminal
> > that Ubuntu has. I'm quite sure it's si
Marco Sulla wrote:
>>
>> Maybe Debian itself?
>
> I tried Debian on a VM, but I found it too much basical. A little
> example: it does not have the shortcut ctrl+alt+t to open a terminal
> that Ubuntu has. I'm quite sure it's simple to add, but I'm starting
> to be old and lazy...
>
I use the
On 3/10/22 12:42, Marco Sulla wrote:
> PS: Is it just my impression or is there a plebiscite for Debian?
A vote? No I don't think so. Not sure what you mean. The reason we're
all suggesting Debian is because you specifically said you want a LTS
Debian-like distro. Can't get any more Debian-like
On Thu, 10 Mar 2022 at 14:13, Jack Dangler wrote:
> or why not get a cloud desktop running whatever distro you want and you
> don't have to do anything
Three reasons: privacy, speed, price. Not in this order.
On Thu, 10 Mar 2022 at 15:20, Chris Angelico wrote:
> Very easy. I use Debian with Xfc
On 3/10/22 06:03, Marco Sulla wrote:
> I tried Debian on a VM, but I found it too much basical. A little
> example: it does not have the shortcut ctrl+alt+t to open a terminal
> that Ubuntu has. I'm quite sure it's simple to add, but I'm starting
> to be old and lazy...
Debian has the same desktop
Marco Sulla writes:
> On Thu, 10 Mar 2022 at 04:50, Michael Torrie wrote:
>>
>> On 3/9/22 13:05, Marco Sulla wrote:
>> > So my laziness pays. I use only LTS distros, and I update only when
>> > there are security updates.
>> > PS: any suggestions for a new LTS distro? My Lubuntu is reaching its
On Fri, 11 Mar 2022 at 00:05, Marco Sulla wrote:
>
> On Thu, 10 Mar 2022 at 04:50, Michael Torrie wrote:
> >
> > On 3/9/22 13:05, Marco Sulla wrote:
> > > So my laziness pays. I use only LTS distros, and I update only when
> > > there are security updates.
> > > PS: any suggestions for a new LTS
On 3/10/22 08:03, Marco Sulla wrote:
On Thu, 10 Mar 2022 at 04:50, Michael Torrie wrote:
On 3/9/22 13:05, Marco Sulla wrote:
So my laziness pays. I use only LTS distros, and I update only when
there are security updates.
PS: any suggestions for a new LTS distro? My Lubuntu is reaching its
en
On Sat, May 12, 2018 at 5:38 PM, Ian Kelly wrote:
> On Fri, May 11, 2018 at 5:26 PM, Mikhail V wrote:
>> On Fri, May 11, 2018 at 9:12 AM, Ian Kelly wrote:
>>> On Thu, May 10, 2018 at 6:34 PM, Mikhail V wrote:
Do you understand that basically any python code sent by e-mail converts
ta
On Fri, May 11, 2018 at 5:26 PM, Mikhail V wrote:
> On Fri, May 11, 2018 at 9:12 AM, Ian Kelly wrote:
>> On Thu, May 10, 2018 at 6:34 PM, Mikhail V wrote:
>>> Do you understand that basically any python code sent by e-mail converts
>>> tabs to
>>> spaces, thus the only way to receive it - is to
On Sat, May 12, 2018 at 7:54 AM, Steven D'Aprano
wrote:
> On Sat, 12 May 2018 02:26:05 +0300, Mikhail V wrote:
>
>> it is just not a trivial task to find an optimal solution to this
>
> We already have an optimal solution to this.
Yes. current syntax will not go anyway so proposal
addresses case
On Sat, 12 May 2018 02:26:05 +0300, Mikhail V wrote:
> it is just not a trivial task to find an optimal solution to this
We already have an optimal solution to this.
* It works with any editor, including simple ones.
* It is safe for transmit over email, or on web forums,
so long as you av
On Fri, May 11, 2018 at 9:39 AM, Ian Kelly wrote:
> On Mon, May 7, 2018 at 9:45 PM, Mikhail V wrote:
>> *Example 1. Multi-line strings*
>>
>> data === S :
>> this is multi-line string
>> escape chars: same as in strings (\\, \\n, \\t ...) ,
>> but "no need to 'escape' quotes"
>
> My
On Fri, May 11, 2018 at 9:12 AM, Ian Kelly wrote:
> On Thu, May 10, 2018 at 6:34 PM, Mikhail V wrote:
>> On Wed, May 9, 2018 at 6:25 AM, Steven D'Aprano
>> wrote:
>>> On Tue, 08 May 2018 23:16:23 +0300, Mikhail V wrote:
>>>
>>
but I propose Tab-separated elements.
>
> Then these are not ord
On Fri, May 11, 2018 at 4:39 PM, Ian Kelly wrote:
> On Mon, May 7, 2018 at 9:45 PM, Mikhail V wrote:
>> Benefits are easy to see: say I want a tuple of strings:
>>
>> data === T :
>> "foo bar"
>> "hello world"
>> "to be continued..."
>>
>> VS current:
>>
>> data = (
>> "foo bar" ,
On Mon, May 7, 2018 at 9:45 PM, Mikhail V wrote:
> Here is an idea for 'data object' a syntax.
> For me it is interesting, how would users find such syntax.
> I personally find that this should be attractive from users
> perspective.
> Main aim is more readable presenting of typical data chunks
>
On Thu, May 10, 2018 at 6:34 PM, Mikhail V wrote:
> On Wed, May 9, 2018 at 6:25 AM, Steven D'Aprano
> wrote:
>> On Tue, 08 May 2018 23:16:23 +0300, Mikhail V wrote:
>>
>
>>> but I propose Tab-separated elements.
>>
>> We already have tab-separated elements in Python. It is allowed to use
>> tabs
On Wed, May 9, 2018 at 6:25 AM, Steven D'Aprano
wrote:
> On Tue, 08 May 2018 23:16:23 +0300, Mikhail V wrote:
>
>> but I propose Tab-separated elements.
>
> We already have tab-separated elements in Python. It is allowed to use
> tabs between any whitespace separated tokens.
Yes, exactly. So in
On Tue, 08 May 2018 23:16:23 +0300, Mikhail V wrote:
> I don't propose to remove spaces,
And that is why the syntax will be ambiguous. So long as whitespace is
*allowed* but not *required* around operators, there will be ambiguity
between a - b and a - b with no way to tell whether they are in
On Wed, May 9, 2018 at 3:14 AM, Ben Finney wrote:
> Mikhail V writes:
>
>> On Wed, May 9, 2018 at 12:33 AM, Chris Angelico wrote:
>> > On Wed, May 9, 2018 at 7:15 AM, Mikhail V wrote:
>> >> Just admit it, you try to troll me (or just pretend, I don't know).
>> >
>> > No, I am not trolling you.
Mikhail V writes:
> On Wed, May 9, 2018 at 12:33 AM, Chris Angelico wrote:
> > On Wed, May 9, 2018 at 7:15 AM, Mikhail V wrote:
> >> Just admit it, you try to troll me (or just pretend, I don't know).
> >
> > No, I am not trolling you.
>
> I don't believe you.
If that's true – if you believe C
On Wed, May 9, 2018 at 12:33 AM, Chris Angelico wrote:
> On Wed, May 9, 2018 at 7:15 AM, Mikhail V wrote:
>> On Tue, May 8, 2018 at 5:25 PM, Chris Angelico wrote:
>>> On Tue, May 8, 2018 at 10:52 PM, Mikhail V wrote:
Right? Your issues with tabs aside, I think it is impossible to ignore th
On 08/05/18 22:33, Chris Angelico wrote:
On Wed, May 9, 2018 at 7:15 AM, Mikhail V wrote:
On Tue, May 8, 2018 at 5:25 PM, Chris Angelico wrote:
On Tue, May 8, 2018 at 10:52 PM, Mikhail V wrote:
Right? Your issues with tabs aside, I think it is impossible to ignore the
the readability improv
On Wed, May 9, 2018 at 7:15 AM, Mikhail V wrote:
> On Tue, May 8, 2018 at 5:25 PM, Chris Angelico wrote:
>> On Tue, May 8, 2018 at 10:52 PM, Mikhail V wrote:
>>> Right? Your issues with tabs aside, I think it is impossible to ignore the
>>> the readability improvement. Not even speaking of how
>
On Tue, May 8, 2018 at 5:25 PM, Chris Angelico wrote:
> On Tue, May 8, 2018 at 10:52 PM, Mikhail V wrote:
>> Right? Your issues with tabs aside, I think it is impossible to ignore the
>> the readability improvement. Not even speaking of how
>> many commas and bracket you need to type in the first
On Wed, May 9, 2018 at 6:16 AM, Mikhail V wrote:
> Also I don't know what kind of human thinks that this:
> a + b
> is two elements "a" and "+ b"
> What is "+ b"?
Unary plus applied to whatever value 'b' is.
> And who writes "- b" with a space in unary minus?
> I don't. Nobody does. Is it allo
On Tue, May 8, 2018 at 6:20 PM, Steven D'Aprano
wrote:
> On Tue, 08 May 2018 15:52:12 +0300, Mikhail V wrote:
>
>>> Last time you brought up this idea, you were told that it is ambiguous.
>>> Using whitespace alone, it is impossible to distinguish between
>>>
>>> a + b
>>>
>>> and
>>>
>>>
On Tue, 08 May 2018 15:52:12 +0300, Mikhail V wrote:
>> Last time you brought up this idea, you were told that it is ambiguous.
>> Using whitespace alone, it is impossible to distinguish between
>>
>> a + b
>>
>> and
>>
>> a + b
>>
>>
>> Can you see the difference? Of course not. That's th
Il 08/05/2018 14:52, Mikhail V ha scritto:
...
What editor do you use? My editor can toggle tabs highlighting as arrows,
and I suppose almost any editor has good support for highlighting of
characters by search, etc. For NPP there are even plugins like Regex helper.
I like to 'type pr
On Tue, May 8, 2018 at 10:52 PM, Mikhail V wrote:
> Right? Your issues with tabs aside, I think it is impossible to ignore the
> the readability improvement. Not even speaking of how
> many commas and bracket you need to type in the first case.
That's incredibly subjective. Or else straight-up wr
On Tue, May 8, 2018 at 10:15 AM, Steven D'Aprano
wrote:
> On Tue, 08 May 2018 06:45:05 +0300, Mikhail V wrote:
>
>> *Example 3. Two-dimensional tuple.*
>>
>> data === T/T :
>> 123"hello"
>> ab c + de f
>>
>> is a synonym for:
>>
>> data = (
>> (1, 2, 3, "hel
On Tue, 08 May 2018 06:45:05 +0300, Mikhail V wrote:
> *Example 3. Two-dimensional tuple.*
>
> data === T/T :
> 123"hello"
> ab c + de f
>
> is a synonym for:
>
> data = (
> (1, 2, 3, "hello") ,
> (a, b, c + d, e, f ) )
Last time you brought up this
On Friday, April 1, 2016 at 1:58:29 PM UTC+5:30, Tim Golden wrote:
>
> For the latter, I take the view that I know where the delete key is (or
> the "ignore thread" button or whatever) and I just skip the thread when
> it shows up.
> Feel free to contact the list owner [python list-owner] if
>
Steven D'Aprano :
> On Fri, 1 Apr 2016 07:27 pm, Tim Golden wrote:
>
>> FWIW I'm broadly with Antoon here: wider-ranging discussions can be
>> interesting and useful.
>
> Sure. But sometimes conversations are going nowhere:
That's why GNUS has the "k" command to wipe out a whole thread.
I know,
On Fri, 1 Apr 2016 07:27 pm, Tim Golden wrote:
> FWIW I'm broadly with Antoon here: wider-ranging discussions can be
> interesting and useful.
Sure. But sometimes conversations are going nowhere:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kQFKtI6gn9Y
http://www.montypython.net/scripts/argument.php
[...]
On 01/04/2016 08:59, Antoon Pardon wrote:
Op 31-03-16 om 16:12 schreef Mark Lawrence via Python-list:
On 31/03/2016 14:27, Random832 wrote:
So can we discuss how a unified method to get a set of all valid
subscripts (and/or subscript-value pairs) on an object would be a useful
thing to have wit
On 01/04/2016 08:59, Antoon Pardon wrote:
> Op 31-03-16 om 16:12 schreef Mark Lawrence via Python-list:
>> On 31/03/2016 14:27, Random832 wrote:
>>> So can we discuss how a unified method to get a set of all valid
>>> subscripts (and/or subscript-value pairs) on an object would be a useful
>>> thin
> On Mar 31, 2016, at 10:02 AM, Marko Rauhamaa wrote:
>
> However, weirdly, dicts have get but lists don't.
Read PEP 463 for discussion on this topic.
https://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0463/
--
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Op 31-03-16 om 16:12 schreef Mark Lawrence via Python-list:
> On 31/03/2016 14:27, Random832 wrote:
>> So can we discuss how a unified method to get a set of all valid
>> subscripts (and/or subscript-value pairs) on an object would be a useful
>> thing to have without getting bogged down in theoret
On 3/31/2016 10:13 AM, Marko Rauhamaa wrote:
One could compose a table of correspondences:
with some corrections
---
list (L)dict (D)
---
L[key] = value
Jussi Piitulainen :
> operator.itemgetter(*selector)(fields) # ==> ('y', 'y', 'x')
>
> [...]
>
> operator.itemgetter(*selector)(field_dict) # ==> ('y', 'y', 'x')
>
> It's not quite the same but it's close and it works the same for
> strings, lists, dicts, ...
Not quite the same, but nicely found
Random832 :
> So can we discuss how a unified method to get a set of all valid
> subscripts (and/or subscript-value pairs) on an object would be a
> useful thing to have without getting bogged down in theoretical
> claptrap about the meaning of the mapping contract?
One could compose a table of c
On 31/03/2016 14:27, Random832 wrote:
On Thu, Mar 31, 2016, at 09:17, Mark Lawrence via Python-list wrote:
On 31/03/2016 14:08, Antoon Pardon wrote:
Op 31-03-16 om 13:57 schreef Chris Angelico:
Okay. I'll put a slightly different position: Prove that your proposal
is worth discussing by actual
Chris Angelico :
> Or, even more likely and even more Pythonic:
>
[fields[i] for i in selector]
> ['y', 'y', 'x']
>
> As soon as you get past the easy and obvious case of an existing
> function, filter and map quickly fall behind comprehensions in utility
> and readability.
The general need
On Thursday, March 31, 2016 at 6:38:56 PM UTC+5:30, Antoon Pardon wrote:
> Op 31-03-16 om 13:57 schreef Chris Angelico:
> > Okay. I'll put a slightly different position: Prove that your proposal
> > is worth discussing by actually giving us an example that we can
> > discuss. So far, this thread ha
On Thu, Mar 31, 2016, at 09:17, Mark Lawrence via Python-list wrote:
> On 31/03/2016 14:08, Antoon Pardon wrote:
> > Op 31-03-16 om 13:57 schreef Chris Angelico:
> >> Okay. I'll put a slightly different position: Prove that your proposal
> >> is worth discussing by actually giving us an example tha
On 31/03/2016 14:08, Antoon Pardon wrote:
Op 31-03-16 om 13:57 schreef Chris Angelico:
Okay. I'll put a slightly different position: Prove that your proposal
is worth discussing by actually giving us an example that we can
discuss. So far, this thread has had nothing but toy examples (and
bogoex
On 31/03/2016 13:49, Marco Sulla via Python-list wrote:
On 31 March 2016 at 14:30, Mark Lawrence via Python-list
wrote:
Note that dict also supports
__getitem__() and __len__(), but is considered a mapping rather than a
sequence because the lookups use arbitrary immutable keys rather than
inte
On Fri, Apr 1, 2016 at 12:08 AM, Antoon Pardon
wrote:
> Op 31-03-16 om 13:57 schreef Chris Angelico:
>> Okay. I'll put a slightly different position: Prove that your proposal
>> is worth discussing by actually giving us an example that we can
>> discuss. So far, this thread has had nothing but toy
Op 31-03-16 om 13:57 schreef Chris Angelico:
> Okay. I'll put a slightly different position: Prove that your proposal
> is worth discussing by actually giving us an example that we can
> discuss. So far, this thread has had nothing but toy examples (and
> bogoexamples that prove nothing beyond that
Marko Rauhamaa writes:
> Chris Angelico wrote:
>
>> Okay. I'll put a slightly different position: Prove that your
>> proposal is worth discussing by actually giving us an example that we
>> can discuss.
>
> Sorry for missing most of the arguments here, but if you are talking
> about treating lists
I want also to add that we are focusing on sequences, but my proposal
is also to make map interface more similar, introducing a vdict type
that iterates over values, and this will be for me really more
practical. PEP 234 ( http://legacy.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0234/ )
never convinced me. Van Rossu
On Thu, Mar 31, 2016 at 11:36 PM, Marko Rauhamaa wrote:
> Chris Angelico :
>
>> On Thu, Mar 31, 2016 at 10:22 PM, Antoon Pardon
>> wrote:
>> Okay. I'll put a slightly different position: Prove that your proposal
>> is worth discussing by actually giving us an example that we can
>> discuss.
>
> S
Chris Angelico :
> On Thu, Mar 31, 2016 at 10:22 PM, Antoon Pardon
> wrote:
> Okay. I'll put a slightly different position: Prove that your proposal
> is worth discussing by actually giving us an example that we can
> discuss.
Sorry for missing most of the arguments here, but if you are talking
On 31/03/2016 12:58, Marco Sulla via Python-list wrote:
On 31 March 2016 at 04:40, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
Enough of the hypothetical arguments about what one could do or might do.
Let's see a concrete example of actual real world code used in production,
not a mickey-mouse toy program, where it
On 31 March 2016 at 04:40, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
> Enough of the hypothetical arguments about what one could do or might do.
> Let's see a concrete example of actual real world code used in production,
> not a mickey-mouse toy program, where it is desirable that adding or
> deleting one key will
On Thu, Mar 31, 2016 at 10:22 PM, Antoon Pardon
wrote:
> Op 31-03-16 om 12:36 schreef Steven D'Aprano:
>> On Thu, 31 Mar 2016 06:52 pm, Antoon Pardon wrote:
>>
>>> it is your burden to argue that problem.
>> No it isn't. I don't have to do a thing. All I need to do is sit back and
>> wait as this
Op 31-03-16 om 12:36 schreef Steven D'Aprano:
> On Thu, 31 Mar 2016 06:52 pm, Antoon Pardon wrote:
>
>> it is your burden to argue that problem.
> No it isn't. I don't have to do a thing. All I need to do is sit back and
> wait as this discussion peters off into nothing. The burden isn't on me to
>
Op 31-03-16 om 12:36 schreef Steven D'Aprano:
> On Thu, 31 Mar 2016 06:52 pm, Antoon Pardon wrote:
>
>> it is your burden to argue that problem.
> No it isn't. I don't have to do a thing.
If that is how you think about this, why do you contribute? I completly
understand if you are of the opinion t
On Thu, 31 Mar 2016 06:52 pm, Antoon Pardon wrote:
> it is your burden to argue that problem.
No it isn't. I don't have to do a thing. All I need to do is sit back and
wait as this discussion peters off into nothing. The burden isn't on me to
justify the status quo. The burden is on those who wan
Op 31-03-16 om 04:44 schreef Steven D'Aprano:
> On Thu, 31 Mar 2016 03:52 am, Random832 wrote:
>
>> Like, these are common patterns:
>>
>> for i, x in enumerate(l):
>># do some stuff, sometimes assign l[i]
>>
>> for k, v in d.items():
>># do some stuff, sometimes assign d[k]
>
> for a, b in
Op 31-03-16 om 04:40 schreef Steven D'Aprano:
> On Thu, 31 Mar 2016 06:07 am, Antoon Pardon wrote:
>
>>> Because fundamentally, it doesn't matter whether dicts are surjections or
>>> not. They're still many-to-one mappings, and those mappings between keys
>>> and values should not change due to the
On Thursday 31 March 2016 13:45, Paul Rubin wrote:
> Steven D'Aprano writes:
>> I want to see an actual application where adding a new key to a
.^
>> mapping is expected to change the other keys.
> directory["mary.roommate"] = "bob"
> directory["mary.address"
Steven D'Aprano writes:
> I want to see an actual application where adding a new key to a
> mapping is expected to change the other keys.
directory["mary.roommate"] = "bob"
directory["mary.address"] = None # unknown address
...
directory["bob.address"] = "132 Elm Street"
Since Bob and Mary are
On Thu, 31 Mar 2016 03:52 am, Random832 wrote:
> Like, these are common patterns:
>
> for i, x in enumerate(l):
># do some stuff, sometimes assign l[i]
>
> for k, v in d.items():
># do some stuff, sometimes assign d[k]
for a, b in zip(spam, eggs):
# do some stuff, sometimes assign
On Thu, 31 Mar 2016 06:07 am, Antoon Pardon wrote:
>> Because fundamentally, it doesn't matter whether dicts are surjections or
>> not. They're still many-to-one mappings, and those mappings between keys
>> and values should not change due to the insertion or deletion of
>> unrelated keys.
>
> Re
On 30/03/2016 21:00, Marco Sulla via Python-list wrote:
Let me also add that even if it seems that my idea will not break any
official contracts, I can create a new ABC class and let maps and
sequence types inherit from it. IMHO it's absolutely not needed, but
at least the discussion will be no m
On 30/03/2016 20:35, Marco Sulla via Python-list wrote:
On 30 March 2016 at 02:55, Terry Reedy wrote:
To me [seq.items() and seq.keys()] are useless and confusing duplications since
enumerate()(seq)
and range(len(seq)) are quite different from dict.items and dict.keys.
It's true. Indeed IMHO
Let me also add that even if it seems that my idea will not break any
official contracts, I can create a new ABC class and let maps and
sequence types inherit from it. IMHO it's absolutely not needed, but
at least the discussion will be no more distracted my secondary
considerations, since the main
On 30 March 2016 at 02:55, Terry Reedy wrote:
> To me [seq.items() and seq.keys()] are useless and confusing duplications
> since enumerate()(seq)
> and range(len(seq)) are quite different from dict.items and dict.keys.
It's true. Indeed IMHO it's enumerate() that will be a confusing duplication
Op 30-03-16 om 17:56 schreef Steven D'Aprano:
> On Thu, 31 Mar 2016 12:12 am, Antoon Pardon wrote:
>
>> Op 30-03-16 om 14:22 schreef Steven D'Aprano:
>
> [...]
>>> Why is a mapping (such as a dict) best described as a surjection?
>>> Consider:
>>>
>>> d = {1: None, 2: 'a', 3: 'b', 4: None}
>>>
>>
1 - 100 of 253 matches
Mail list logo
