Ben Finney wrote:
"W. eWatson" writes:
Steven D'Aprano wrote:
NameError: name 'mod' is not defined
So where is it? Here are the choices.
import sys, os, glob
import string
from numpy import *
If you use ‘from foo import *’ you forfeit any way of saying where a
name in your code gets boun
On Fri, 01 Jan 2010 13:48:28 +1100, Ben Finney wrote:
> "W. eWatson" writes:
>
>> Steven D'Aprano wrote:
>> > NameError: name 'mod' is not defined
>
>> So where is it? Here are the choices. import sys, os, glob
>> import string
>> from numpy import *
>
> If you use ‘from foo import *’ you forf
"W. eWatson" writes:
> Steven D'Aprano wrote:
> > NameError: name 'mod' is not defined
> So where is it? Here are the choices.
> import sys, os, glob
> import string
> from numpy import *
If you use ‘from foo import *’ you forfeit any way of saying where a
name in your code gets bound.
Hence,
W. eWatson wrote:
Steven D'Aprano wrote:
On Thu, 31 Dec 2009 17:30:20 -0800, W. eWatson wrote:
About a year ago, I wrote a program that used mod() for modulo under
2.5. Apparently, % is also acceptable, but the program works quite well.
I turned the program over to someone who is using 2.4, an
W. eWatson wrote:
About a year ago, I wrote a program that used mod() for modulo under
2.5. Apparently, % is also acceptable, but the program works quite
well. I turned the program over to someone who is using 2.4, and
apparently 2.4 knows nothing about mod(). Out of curiosity, what
library is mo
Steven D'Aprano wrote:
On Thu, 31 Dec 2009 17:30:20 -0800, W. eWatson wrote:
About a year ago, I wrote a program that used mod() for modulo under
2.5. Apparently, % is also acceptable, but the program works quite well.
I turned the program over to someone who is using 2.4, and apparently
2.4 kn
01-01-2010 o 02:30:20 W. eWatson wrote:
About a year ago, I wrote a program that used mod() for modulo under
2.5. Apparently, % is also acceptable, but the program works quite well.
I turned the program over to someone who is using 2.4, and apparently
2.4 knows nothing about mod(). Out of
On Thu, 31 Dec 2009 17:30:20 -0800, W. eWatson wrote:
> About a year ago, I wrote a program that used mod() for modulo under
> 2.5. Apparently, % is also acceptable, but the program works quite well.
> I turned the program over to someone who is using 2.4, and apparently
> 2.4 knows nothing about
