On Sat, Mar 29, 2014 at 12:10 AM, Marko Rauhamaa wrote:
> If encapsulation exists outside OO and inheritance is not key to it,
> what is OO then, a marketing term?
>
Yep, OO is a marketing term. So's programming - after all, it's just
flipping bits in memory... we only pretend it means anything.
Roy Smith :
> I'm not sure how "decoupling internal representation from external
> behavior" is substantially different from encapsulation.
Yes, that's encapsulation. The idea of encapsulation is older than OO.
> And, no, I don't think inheritance is a fundamental characteristic of
> OOD, nudge
On Fri, 28 Mar 2014 08:30:11 -0400, Roy Smith wrote:
> In article <533558fa$0$29994$c3e8da3$54964...@news.astraweb.com>,
> Steven D'Aprano wrote:
>
>> > Yes. The whole idea of OOD is to decouple internal representation
>> > from external behavior.
>>
>> The *whole* idea? You don't think that
Roy Smith :
> There're certainly not mutually exclusive. Mutually exclusive means if
> you have one, you can't have the other.
Correct.
The classic inheritance diamond:
class A(B, C):
def add_bean(self):
??? # how to implement
class B(D): pass
class C(D): pass
cl
On Sat, Mar 29, 2014 at 1:35 AM, Steven D'Aprano
wrote:
> It's difficult to pin-point exactly what characteristics of OOP are
> fundamental, but inheritance is surely one of them.
I've always understood OOP to be all about binding code and data
together (methods as part of an object, rather than
On Friday, March 28, 2014 6:52:15 PM UTC+5:30, Roy Smith wrote:
> Chris Angelico wrote:
> > On Sat, Mar 29, 2014 at 12:10 AM, Marko Rauhamaa wrote:
> > > If encapsulation exists outside OO and inheritance is not key to it,
> > > what is OO then, a marketing term?
> > Yep, OO is a marketing term.
In article <871txmwjt4@elektro.pacujo.net>,
Marko Rauhamaa wrote:
> what is OO then, a marketing term?
Sometimes, I think it must be :-)
> (It's a different thing, then, that encapsulation and inheritance are
> mutually exclusive principles.)
There're certainly not mutually exclusive. Mu
On Sat, Mar 29, 2014 at 12:22 AM, Roy Smith wrote:
> In article ,
> Chris Angelico wrote:
>
>> On Sat, Mar 29, 2014 at 12:10 AM, Marko Rauhamaa wrote:
>> > If encapsulation exists outside OO and inheritance is not key to it,
>> > what is OO then, a marketing term?
>> >
>>
>> Yep, OO is a market
In article ,
Chris Angelico wrote:
> On Sat, Mar 29, 2014 at 12:10 AM, Marko Rauhamaa wrote:
> > If encapsulation exists outside OO and inheritance is not key to it,
> > what is OO then, a marketing term?
> >
>
> Yep, OO is a marketing term. So's programming - after all, it's just
> flipping b
In article <533558fa$0$29994$c3e8da3$54964...@news.astraweb.com>,
Steven D'Aprano wrote:
> > Yes. The whole idea of OOD is to decouple internal representation from
> > external behavior.
>
> The *whole* idea? You don't think that encapsulation and inheritance
> might also be involved? *wink*
On Thu, 27 Mar 2014 20:29:17 -0400, Roy Smith wrote:
> In article <5334b747$0$29994$c3e8da3$54964...@news.astraweb.com>,
> Steven D'Aprano wrote:
>
>> On Thu, 27 Mar 2014 08:52:24 -0400, Roy Smith wrote:
>>
>> > In article ,
>> > Chris Angelico wrote:
>> >> It's not "equally braindead", it f
On Fri, Mar 28, 2014 at 1:24 PM, Terry Reedy wrote:
> I do know that the people responsible are not normally braindead ;-).
Yeah, anyone who develops Python is clearly abnormally braindead...
*dives for cover*
ChrisA
--
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
On 3/27/2014 9:59 PM, Roy Smith wrote:
In article ,
Terry Reedy wrote:
On 3/27/2014 5:10 PM, Terry Reedy wrote:
On 3/27/2014 7:42 AM, Chris Angelico wrote:
In any case... what I'd suggest would be opening a tracker issue, or
discussing this on python-ideas, and seeing what core devs think
In article ,
Terry Reedy wrote:
> On 3/27/2014 5:10 PM, Terry Reedy wrote:
> > On 3/27/2014 7:42 AM, Chris Angelico wrote:
> >
> >> In any case... what I'd suggest would be opening a tracker issue, or
> >> discussing this on python-ideas, and seeing what core devs think of
> >> the matter. I thi
On 3/27/2014 5:10 PM, Terry Reedy wrote:
On 3/27/2014 7:42 AM, Chris Angelico wrote:
In any case... what I'd suggest would be opening a tracker issue, or
discussing this on python-ideas, and seeing what core devs think of
the matter. I think that, on balance, it's probably better to show the
wh
Roy Smith writes:
> In article <5334b747$0$29994$c3e8da3$54964...@news.astraweb.com>,
> Steven D'Aprano wrote:
>
> > On Thu, 27 Mar 2014 08:52:24 -0400, Roy Smith wrote:
> > > Give ma a real-life situation where you would want such behavior
> > > [the ‘datetime.timedelta.__str__’ method returni
In article <5334b747$0$29994$c3e8da3$54964...@news.astraweb.com>,
Steven D'Aprano wrote:
> On Thu, 27 Mar 2014 08:52:24 -0400, Roy Smith wrote:
>
> > In article ,
> > Chris Angelico wrote:
> >> It's not "equally braindead", it follows a simple and logical rule:
> >> Only the day portion is ne
On 03/27/2014 02:10 PM, Terry Reedy wrote:
On 3/27/2014 7:42 AM, Chris Angelico wrote:
In any case... what I'd suggest would be opening a tracker issue, or
discussing this on python-ideas, and seeing what core devs think of
the matter. I think that, on balance, it's probably better to show the
On Thu, 27 Mar 2014 08:52:24 -0400, Roy Smith wrote:
> In article ,
> Chris Angelico wrote:
>> It's not "equally braindead", it follows a simple and logical rule:
>> Only the day portion is negative.
>
> Simple and logical, yes. But also entirely braindead.
Do you think it is "braindead" for
On 3/27/2014 7:42 AM, Chris Angelico wrote:
In any case... what I'd suggest would be opening a tracker issue, or
discussing this on python-ideas, and seeing what core devs think of
the matter. I think that, on balance, it's probably better to show the
whole thing with the same sign; but should i
On 27-03-14 13:52, Roy Smith wrote:
>> On Thu, Mar 27, 2014 at 9:22 PM, Johannes Bauer wrote:
>>> Besides, there's an infinite amount of (braindead) timedelta string
>>> representations. For your -30 hours, it is perfectly legal to say
>>>
>>> 123 days, -2982 hours
>>>
>>> Yet Python doesn't (but
Skip Montanaro :
> Feel free to submit a patch to improve str(t), where t is negative,
The cat's out of the bag already, isn't it?
Marko
--
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
On Fri, Mar 28, 2014 at 1:12 AM, Antoon Pardon
wrote:
> I don't recall specifics, but I do remember multiple times
> where I was working with a structure that consisted of
> a whole part and a fracture part where I found it useful
> to have the fracture part always positive and displayed
> as such
>> There are,
>> as I see it, two common cases where t is negative:
>>
>> -1 day < t < 0
>>
>> and
>>
>> t <= -1 day
>
> There are two types of negative numbers: Those closer to zero than -1,
> and those not closer to zero than -1. Yeah, I think those are the most
> common cases. :)
Sorry I wa
> On Thu, Mar 27, 2014 at 9:22 PM, Johannes Bauer wrote:
> > Besides, there's an infinite amount of (braindead) timedelta string
> > representations. For your -30 hours, it is perfectly legal to say
> >
> > 123 days, -2982 hours
> >
> > Yet Python doesn't (but chooses an equally braindead represen
On Thu, Mar 27, 2014 at 10:56 PM, Skip Montanaro wrote:
> There are,
> as I see it, two common cases where t is negative:
>
> -1 day < t < 0
>
> and
>
> t <= -1 day
There are two types of negative numbers: Those closer to zero than -1,
and those not closer to zero than -1. Yeah, I think those
I took a moment to scan the datetime documentation. The behavior of
str() on timedelta objects is very consistent, and matches the
internal representation. From the docs:
str(t) Returns a string in the form [D day[s], ][H]H:MM:SS[.UU],
where D is negative for negative t. (5)
Note (5) reads: S
On Thu, Mar 27, 2014 at 10:25 PM, Johannes Bauer wrote:
> And it makes it extremely error-prone to the reader:
>
str(datetime.timedelta(0, -1))
> '-1 day, 23:59:59'
>
> This looks MUCH more like "almost two days ago" than
>
> '-00:00:01'
>
> does.
It's easy when the timedelta is >-1 day. Is
On Thu, Mar 27, 2014 at 10:05 PM, Johannes Bauer wrote:
> On 27.03.2014 11:44, Chris Angelico wrote:
>> On Thu, Mar 27, 2014 at 9:22 PM, Johannes Bauer wrote:
>>> Besides, there's an infinite amount of (braindead) timedelta string
>>> representations. For your -30 hours, it is perfectly legal to
On 27.03.2014 11:44, Chris Angelico wrote:
> It's not "equally braindead", it follows a simple and logical rule:
> Only the day portion is negative.
The more I think about it, the sillier this rule seems to me.
A timedelta is a *whole* object. Either the whole delta is negative or
it is not. It
On 27.03.2014 11:44, Chris Angelico wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 27, 2014 at 9:22 PM, Johannes Bauer wrote:
>> Besides, there's an infinite amount of (braindead) timedelta string
>> representations. For your -30 hours, it is perfectly legal to say
>>
>> 123 days, -2982 hours
>>
>> Yet Python doesn't (but
On Thu, Mar 27, 2014 at 9:22 PM, Johannes Bauer wrote:
> Besides, there's an infinite amount of (braindead) timedelta string
> representations. For your -30 hours, it is perfectly legal to say
>
> 123 days, -2982 hours
>
> Yet Python doesn't (but chooses an equally braindead representation).
It's
On 27.03.2014 01:16, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
> py> divmod(30, 24)
> (1, 6)
>
> That makes perfect intuitive sense: 30 hours is 1 day with 6 hours
> remaining. In human-speak, we'll say that regardless of whether the
> timedelta is positive or negative: we'll say "1 day and 6 hours from now"
> o
On 26.03.2014 10:53, Jean-Michel Pichavant wrote:
> Note : I don't see what's wrong in your example, however I have the feeling
> the term "stupiditie" is a little bit strong ;)
The problem is that for a given timedelta t with t > 0 it is intuitive
to think that its string representation str(t)
On 27/03/2014 01:38, Roy Smith wrote:
In article ,
Chris Angelico wrote:
On Thu, Mar 27, 2014 at 11:16 AM, Steven D'Aprano
wrote:
If an event happened 30 hours ago, it is correct to say that it occurred
"18 hours after 2 days ago", but who talks that way?
That response demonstrates real
On Thu, 27 Mar 2014 00:16:57 +, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
> py> divmod(-30, 24)
> (-2, 18)
>
> If an event happened 30 hours ago, it is correct to say that it
> occurred "18 hours after 2 days ago", but who talks that way?
Well, not *exactly*, but:
If today happens to be Wednesday, and an even
In article ,
Chris Angelico wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 27, 2014 at 11:16 AM, Steven D'Aprano
> wrote:
> > If an event happened 30 hours ago, it is correct to say that it occurred
> > "18 hours after 2 days ago", but who talks that way?
>
> That response demonstrates real genius. Rue the datetime? Wh
On Thu, Mar 27, 2014 at 11:16 AM, Steven D'Aprano
wrote:
> If an event happened 30 hours ago, it is correct to say that it occurred
> "18 hours after 2 days ago", but who talks that way?
That response demonstrates real genius. Rue the datetime? Who talks like that?
ChrisA
--
https://mail.python
On Wed, 26 Mar 2014 19:25:45 -0400, Dennis Lee Bieber wrote:
> On Tue, 25 Mar 2014 20:58:27 -0400, Roy Smith declaimed
> the following:
>
>>One of my roles on this newsgroup is to periodically whine about
>>stupidities in the Python datetime module. This is one of those times.
>>
>>I have some
On 03/26/2014 04:25 PM, Dennis Lee Bieber wrote:
On Tue, 25 Mar 2014 20:58:27 -0400, Roy Smith declaimed the
following:
One of my roles on this newsgroup is to periodically whine about
stupidities in the Python datetime module. This is one of those times.
I have some code which computes how
Chris Angelico wrote:
By showing those last ones as 1̅.091... and 2̅.091..., you emphasize
the floating-point nature of the data: everything after the decimal is
the mantissa, and everything before the decimal is the exponent.
The reason for writing them that way is so that you
can look the las
- Original Message -
> One of my roles on this newsgroup is to periodically whine about
> stupidities in the Python datetime module. This is one of those
> times.
>
> I have some code which computes how long ago the sun set. Being a
> nice
> pythonista, I'm using a timedelta to represent
Grant Edwards writes:
> We're still just papering-over the basic problem: the entire
> time/calendar system use by "western civilization" is a mess. I don't
> know a lot about other systems in use, but from what I have seen they
> were all pretty much just as bad. We should fix the basic problem
On 2014-03-26, Skip Montanaro wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 26, 2014 at 10:58 AM, Marko Rauhamaa wrote:
>> Fractions of seconds are supported -- the other fields can't be
>> fractional.
>
> Actually, it appears that whatever the last value you give can be
> fractionated. From the Wikipedia page you refer
Skip Montanaro :
> There is a good reason that the internal units of timedelta objects
> are days, seconds, and microseconds. They are well-defined outside of
> a calendar context.
>
> So, I guess Roy is back to square one. He can always roll his own
> timedelta subclass and give it a __str__ impl
On Wed, Mar 26, 2014 at 10:58 AM, Marko Rauhamaa wrote:
> Fractions of seconds are supported -- the other fields can't be
> fractional.
Actually, it appears that whatever the last value you give can be
fractionated. From the Wikipedia page you referenced:
"The smallest value used may also have
Skip Montanaro :
> Note though, that the ISO8601 representation isn't without its own
> flaws (which might explain why Tim avoided it BITD):
>
> * It doesn't appear to provide a way to represent fractions of a
> second (though perhaps all the fields can be fractional)
> * How many days are in a mo
On Mar 26, 2014, at 11:39 AM, Skip Montanaro wrote:
> The point of my post was that there is no obvious one best way to
> present negative timedeltas in a human readable form.
I agree that there are a number of possible representations which might make
sense. But, using negative days and positi
On Wed, Mar 26, 2014 at 10:04 AM, Roy Smith wrote:
> No, what you said was "negative four days, positive 3605 seconds".
My apologies for not showing all my work, professor. I use datetime
and timedelta objects all the time. I did the arithmetic to go from
3605 to one hour, five minutes in my head
On Wednesday, March 26, 2014 9:37:06 AM UTC-4, Skip Montanaro wrote:
> The problem gets more challenging once you get into magnitudes > one
> day:
>
> >>> e = datetime.timedelta(days=-4, seconds=3605)
> >>> e
> datetime.timedelta(-4, 3605)
> >>> print e
> -4 days, 1:00:05
>
> Hmmm... It's printi
Antoon Pardon :
> On 26-03-14 01:58, Roy Smith wrote:
>> previous sunset: -1 day, 22:25:26.295993
>>
>> The idea of str() is that it's supposed to return a human-friendly
>> representation of a value. Humans do not say things like, "The sun set
>> 1 day ago plus 22 hours and 25 minutes".
> Ther
On Thu, Mar 27, 2014 at 1:02 AM, Antoon Pardon
wrote:
> There is a difference between how people say things and what is useful.
> I remember when I was studying logarithms, a negative number like -5.73
> was written down as ̅6.27 (with a bar only over the six). That notation
> had the advantage th
On 26-03-14 01:58, Roy Smith wrote:
> One of my roles on this newsgroup is to periodically whine about
> stupidities in the Python datetime module. This is one of those times.
>
> I have some code which computes how long ago the sun set. Being a nice
> pythonista, I'm using a timedelta to repre
It's not clear to me what the correct str should be. I think the
desired format changes depending on the relative magnitude of the
timedelta object. For small values (less than a day), I agree, the
behavior is, well, odd. You can get around that easily enough:
>>> d = datetime.timedelta(seconds=-
On 26/03/2014 01:19, Ethan Furman wrote:
On 03/25/2014 05:58 PM, Roy Smith wrote:
One of my roles on this newsgroup is to periodically whine about
stupidities in the Python datetime module. This is one of those times.
I have some code which computes how long ago the sun set. Being a nice
pyth
On 03/25/2014 05:58 PM, Roy Smith wrote:
One of my roles on this newsgroup is to periodically whine about
stupidities in the Python datetime module. This is one of those times.
I have some code which computes how long ago the sun set. Being a nice
pythonista, I'm using a timedelta to represent
One of my roles on this newsgroup is to periodically whine about
stupidities in the Python datetime module. This is one of those times.
I have some code which computes how long ago the sun set. Being a nice
pythonista, I'm using a timedelta to represent this value. It would be
difficult to i
57 matches
Mail list logo
