!!!
___
class C:
def __init__(self):
self.__foos=5*[0]
@property
def foos(self) -> list[int]:
return self.__foos
@foos.setter
def foos(self,v: int):
self.__foos=[v for __i in self.__foos]
c=C()
c.foos=5
print(c.f
(self):
self.__foos=5*[0]
@property
def foos(self) -> list[int]:
return self.__foos
@foos.setter
def foos(self,v: int):
self.__foos=[v for __i in self.__foos]
c=C()
c.foos=5
print(c.foos)
___
mypy gives
__
> >> class C:
> >> def __init__(self):
> >> self.__foos=5*[0]
> >>
> >> @property
> >> def foos(self) -> list[int]:
> >> return self.__foos
> >>
> >> @foos.setter
&
Às 07:55 de 03/11/22, dn escreveu:
On 03/11/2022 16.24, Paulo da Silva wrote:
class C:
def __init__(self):
self.__foos=5*[0]
@property
def foos(self) -> list[int]:
return self.__foos
@foos.setter
def foos(self,v: int):
self.__foos=[v for
ns "X, but don't complain if it's a @property".
Is that how it goes?
I'm sorry. A bad transposition of the text. I meant
def foos(self) -> Union[list[int],int]:
Regards.
Paulo
--
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Às 05:32 de 03/11/22, Paulo da Silva escreveu:
Às 03:24 de 03/11/22, Paulo da Silva escreveu:
Hi!
And a typing problem again!!!
___
class C:
def __init__(self):
self.__foos=5*[0]
@property
def foos(self) -> list[int]:
ret
On Fri, 4 Nov 2022 at 05:03, Paulo da Silva
wrote:
> Changing def foos(self) -> list[int]: to
> def foos(self) -> Union[list[int]]:
> fixes the problem.
> Not so elegant, however!
Wait, what?!
Union[X, Y] means "X or Y"
Union[X] means "X, but don't compl
Às 03:24 de 03/11/22, Paulo da Silva escreveu:
Hi!
And a typing problem again!!!
___
class C:
def __init__(self):
self.__foos=5*[0]
@property
def foos(self) -> list[int]:
return self.__foos
@foos.setter
def f
On 03/11/2022 04:24, Paulo da Silva wrote:
Hi!
And a typing problem again!!!
___
class C:
def __init__(self):
self.__foos=5*[0]
@property
def foos(self) -> list[int]:
return self.__foos
@foos.setter
def foos(sel
On 03/11/2022 16.24, Paulo da Silva wrote:
class C:
def __init__(self):
self.__foos=5*[0]
@property
def foos(self) -> list[int]:
return self.__foos
@foos.setter
def foos(self,v: int):
self.__foos=[v for __i in self.__foos]
c=C()
c.foo
Hi!
And a typing problem again!!!
___
class C:
def __init__(self):
self.__foos=5*[0]
@property
def foos(self) -> list[int]:
return self.__foos
@foos.setter
def foos(self,v:
On Thu, 22 Sep 2022 09:36:47 -0700 (PDT), tripd...@gmail.com wrote:
> https://nigeriapropertycentre.com/
> Has anyone scrap something like this before?
> probably i should try power bi first to see if it can?
You can try something like this.
import urllib.request
from bs4 import BeautifulSoup
U
efinition of the way he's using it, making it clear
> that it's not a universal definition. Python's definition
> is somewhat unusual, and so would not be appropriate.
>
> --
> Greg
>
> --
> https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
>
On 1/06/21 7:01 am, Alan Gauld wrote:
That was the point, the OP said it was a book about OOP.
Not a book about "OOP in Python".
In that case it would be best to avoid the word, or give
a definition of the way he's using it, making it clear
that it's not a universal definition. Python's definit
On 31/05/2021 15:59, Dennis Lee Bieber wrote:
> On Sun, 30 May 2021 21:20:24 +0100, Alan Gauld via Python-list
> declaimed the following:
>
>> On 30/05/2021 17:57, Irv Kalb wrote:
>>> I am doing some writing (for an upcoming book on OOP), and I'm a little
>>> stuck.
>>
>> Oh dear, that's one o
On 6/1/21, Jon Ribbens via Python-list wrote:
>
> I already answered that in the post you are responding to, but you
> snipped it: You can tell something's definitely not a data attribute
> if you have to put brackets after its name to call it as a method to
> invoke its function or retrieve the v
On 2021-06-01, Greg Ewing wrote:
> On 1/06/21 2:34 am, Jon Ribbens wrote:
>> From the outside, it's just a *data* attribute. Which, from the inside,
>> it isn't. Hence "pretending".
>
> But what is it about the external appearance that would make
> you think it's a data attribute, rather than som
On 1/06/21 2:34 am, Jon Ribbens wrote:
From the outside, it's just a *data* attribute. Which, from the inside,
it isn't. Hence "pretending".
But what is it about the external appearance that would make
you think it's a data attribute, rather than some other kind
of attribute?
(I'm assuming th
On 31/05/2021 01:24, Greg Ewing wrote:
> On 31/05/21 8:20 am, Alan Gauld wrote:
>>
>> That's a very Pythonic description.
>
> If it's a book about Python, it needs to be. The word "property"
> has a very specialised meaning in Python.
>
>
On 2021-05-31, Greg Ewing wrote:
> On 31/05/21 9:13 am, Jon Ribbens wrote:
>> No, I said it pretends to be a *data* attribute.
>
> I don't think it's pretending to be anything. From the outside,
> it's just an attribute.
>From the outside, it's just a *data* attribute. Which, from the inside,
it
> On May 30, 2021, at 10:15 AM, Jon Ribbens via Python-list
> wrote:
>
> On 2021-05-30, Irv Kalb wrote:
>> I understand what a "property" is, how it is used and the benefits,
>> but apparently my explanation hasn't made the light bulb go on for my
On 31/05/21 9:13 am, Jon Ribbens wrote:
No, I said it pretends to be a *data* attribute.
I don't think it's pretending to be anything. From the outside,
it's just an attribute.
Data attributes are more common than non-data attributes, so
we tend to assume that an attribute is a data attribute
On 31/05/21 4:57 am, Irv Kalb wrote:
Perhaps the best I've found so far is from the Python documentation:
A property object has getter, setter, and deleter methods usable as decorators
that create a copy of the property with the corresponding accessor function set
to the decorated fun
On 31/05/21 8:20 am, Alan Gauld wrote:
That's a very Pythonic description.
If it's a book about Python, it needs to be. The word "property"
has a very specialised meaning in Python.
In some other languages it's used the way we use "attribute" in
Python.
On 30/05/2021 23:57, Mike Dewhirst wrote:
>
> A property is an object method masquerading as a cachable object attribute
Or a group of methods perhaps?
--
Alan G
Author of the Learn to Program web site
http://www.alan-g.me.uk/
http://www.amazon.com/author/alan_gauld
Follow my photo-b
On 2021-05-30, Terry Reedy wrote:
> Note: at least one person says a property *pretends* to be an attribute.
No, I said it pretends to be a *data* attribute. It is effectively
several methods in a trenchcoat pretending to be a variable.
--
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
eggs to see if it has a
> __get__, __set__, or __delete__
> > method — if it does, it's a property.
The above is not quite right. Having a __get__ method is not
sufficient. In the quoted example, the `eggs` attribute of the
SomeObject type has to be a data descriptor type, whic
humor, give him the communist version of property. Property is
owned by the state and is a reflection of such a state. It is hidden and can
only be accessed through apparatchiks working for the state. You tell them
what you want and they go invisibly and do whatever they want which may even
include
On Sun, May 30, 2021 at 9:57 AM Irv Kalb wrote:
> I am doing some writing (for an upcoming book on OOP), and I'm a little
> stuck.
>
> I understand what a "property" is, how it is used and the benefits, but
> apparently my explanation hasn't made the light bul
On 31/05/2021 2:57 am, Irv Kalb wrote:
I am doing some writing (for an upcoming book on OOP), and I'm a little stuck.
I understand what a "property" is, how it is used and the benefits, but
apparently my explanation hasn't made the light bulb go on for my editor. The edi
On 31/05/2021 04.57, Irv Kalb wrote:
> I am doing some writing (for an upcoming book on OOP), and I'm a little
> stuck.
>
> I understand what a "property" is, how it is used and the benefits, but
> apparently my explanation hasn't made the light bulb go
s depressing how many
books and articles focus on them to the exclusion of all
else that make up the OOP paradigm! Anyway, rant over...
> I understand what a "property" is, how it is used and the benefits,
Do you? What is that based on? Is it how properties are used in OOP?
Or how the
On 5/30/2021 12:57 PM, Irv Kalb wrote:
I am doing some writing (for an upcoming book on OOP), and I'm a little stuck.
I understand what a "property" is, how it is used and the benefits, but
apparently my explanation hasn't made the light bulb go on for my editor. The edi
On 2021-05-30, Irv Kalb wrote:
> I understand what a "property" is, how it is used and the benefits,
> but apparently my explanation hasn't made the light bulb go on for my
> editor. The editor is asking for a definition of property. I've
> looked at many articl
On 5/30/21 9:57 AM, Irv Kalb wrote:
> I understand what a "property" is, how it is used and the benefits, but apparently my explanation hasn't made the
light bulb go on for my editor.
My answer from Stackoverflow [1]:
> Properties are a special kind of attribute. B
> On 30 May 2021, at 17:57, Irv Kalb wrote:
>
> I am doing some writing (for an upcoming book on OOP), and I'm a little
> stuck.
>
> I understand what a "property" is, how it is used and the benefits, but
> apparently my explanation hasn't made th
On Mon, May 31, 2021 at 2:58 AM Irv Kalb wrote:
>
> I am doing some writing (for an upcoming book on OOP), and I'm a little stuck.
>
> I understand what a "property" is, how it is used and the benefits, but
> apparently my explanation hasn't made the ligh
I am doing some writing (for an upcoming book on OOP), and I'm a little stuck.
I understand what a "property" is, how it is used and the benefits, but
apparently my explanation hasn't made the light bulb go on for my editor. The
editor is asking for a definition of prope
'collections.Iterable', got '() -> Any' instead
How can I override the type with a hint on a property of
those instances?
Thanks,
jlc
--
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
On 10/12/2020 13:06, Paul Bryan wrote:
Thanks for the comprehensive response, dn!
I guess I'm influenced by data classes here, where the object's
attribute type hints are represented by class variable annotations.
I'm a great fan of them too - the saving of 'boilerplate code' does it
for me
> Would this be a reasonably correct way to annotate a property with
> > a
> > type hint?
> >
> > > > > class Foo:
> > ... bar: int
>
>
> If we build a class with (only) the above two lines, Python's help
> lookup offers th
On 09/12/2020 13:17, Paul Bryan wrote:
Would this be a reasonably correct way to annotate a property with a
type hint?
class Foo:
... bar: int
If we build a class with (only) the above two lines, Python's help
lookup offers the following documentation:
<<<
Help on
Would this be a reasonably correct way to annotate a property with a
type hint?
>>> class Foo:
... bar: int
... @property
... def bar(self):
... return 1
...
>>> foo = Foo()
>>> import typing
>>> typing.get_type_hints(foo)
{'bar'
On Sun, Nov 1, 2020 at 3:46 AM wrote:
>
> I asked this question over on the python-forum-io group but haven't gotten
> much in the way of answers. I hope someone here can advise me.
>
> I am trying to implement getters and setters in a class using a numpy array
> as the base instance value, but I
msize + 2],
dtype=np.int32)
@property
def visits(self, coord):
return self.visited[coord[0], coord[1], coord[2]]
@visits.setter
def incr_visits(self, coord, incr):
self.visited[coord[0], coord[1], coord[2]] += incr
def Coord(x,
ctober 31, 2020 1:17 AM
> To: 'python-list@python.org'
> Subject: Can property getters and setters have additional arguments?
>
> I asked this question over on the python-forum-io group but haven't gotten
> much in the way of answers. I hope someone here can advise me
Le 26/06/2020 à 15:12, Peter Otten a écrit :
Unknown wrote:
The getter/setter of the property builtin return a new property
p = property()
q = p.getter(None)
p is q
False
where you
def getter(self, fget):
self.fget = fget
return self
modify the existing one
Le 26/06/2020 à 10:16, R.Wieser a écrit :
ast,
I have absolutily /no idea/ about how that "fahrenheit = property()" comes
into play though.
It just creates an empty property object.
You can then fill this object with the read/write/delete functions
with the methods gett
ast wrote at 2020-6-26 09:02 +0200:
>Hello,
>
>I am wondering why this code is OK:
>
>class Temperature:
> def __init__(self):
> self.celsius = 0
>
> fahrenheit = property()
>
> @fahrenheit.getter
> def fahrenheit(self):
Unknown wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I am wondering why this code is OK:
>
> class Temperature:
> def __init__(self):
> self.celsius = 0
>
> fahrenheit = property()
>
> @fahrenheit.getter
> def fahrenheit(self):
> return 9/5*self.celsius +32
> On 26 Jun 2020, at 08:02, ast wrote:
>
> Hello,
>
> I am wondering why this code is OK:
>
> class Temperature:
>def __init__(self):
> self.celsius = 0
>
>fahrenheit = property()
>
>@fahrenheit.getter
>def fahrenheit(
Hello,
I am wondering why this code is OK:
class Temperature:
def __init__(self):
self.celsius = 0
fahrenheit = property()
@fahrenheit.getter
def fahrenheit(self):
return 9/5*self.celsius +32
@fahrenheit.setter
def fahrenheit(self
Ivan Ivanyuk wrote:
> On Thu, 18 Jun 2020 at 11:26, Peter Otten <__pete...@web.de> wrote:
>>
>> Ivan Ivanyuk wrote:
>>
>> > Hello All,
>> >
>> > I have some trouble using @dataclass together with @property decorator
>> > or propert
On Thu, 18 Jun 2020 at 11:26, Peter Otten <__pete...@web.de> wrote:
>
> Ivan Ivanyuk wrote:
>
> > Hello All,
> >
> > I have some trouble using @dataclass together with @property decorator
> > or property() function.
> >
> > From the documentat
Ivan Ivanyuk wrote:
> Hello All,
>
> I have some trouble using @dataclass together with @property decorator
> or property() function.
>
> From the documentation and PEP is seems that the intended behaviour of
> @dataclass is to be the same as normal __init__() that sets
Hello All,
I have some trouble using @dataclass together with @property decorator
or property() function.
>From the documentation and PEP is seems that the intended behaviour of
@dataclass is to be the same as normal __init__() that sets instance
variables.
But it seems that when us
, it could work, for processing input, because processing is under my
control.
However, my process will create output object that I should json serialize and
return back to outer system as a response to the input. If I will have "from_"
object property instead of "from", I beli
On 6/5/2020 6:59 PM, Ethan Furman wrote:
On 06/05/2020 03:15 PM, MRAB wrote:
On 2020-06-05 22:50, Ethan Furman wrote:
There is no workaround that allows a keyword to be used except as a
keyword, other than making it a string. When faced with this kind of
situation myself I use a synonym, li
On 6/06/20 9:36 AM, zljubi...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi,
if I define class like this one:
class abc:
def __init__(self):
self._from = None
@property
def from(self):
return self._from
@from.setter
def from(self, value):
self._from = value
I get
On 06/05/2020 03:15 PM, MRAB wrote:
On 2020-06-05 22:50, Ethan Furman wrote:
There is no workaround that allows a keyword to be used except as a keyword, other than making it a
string. When faced with this kind of situation myself I use a synonym, like "since", or
a translation, like "desde
On 2020-06-05 22:50, Ethan Furman wrote:
On 06/05/2020 02:36 PM, zljubi...@gmail.com wrote:
class abc:
def __init__(self):
self._from = None
@property
def from(self):
return self._from
@from.setter
def from(self, value):
self._from = value
On 06/05/2020 02:36 PM, zljubi...@gmail.com wrote:
class abc:
def __init__(self):
self._from = None
@property
def from(self):
return self._from
@from.setter
def from(self, value):
self._from = value
I get the error SyntaxError: invalid
Hi,
if I define class like this one:
class abc:
def __init__(self):
self._from = None
@property
def from(self):
return self._from
@from.setter
def from(self, value):
self._from = value
I get the error SyntaxError: invalid syntax because of the
bject):
> b = Bar()
>
> f = Foo()
> print(f)
> f.b = 10
>
> 1. Now when we create/use @property..
> what is the first and second argument to dunder-set
>
> (my guess is, the @property is the first arg and the second arg is 'Foo'
> IF you do
>
(self, instance, value):
#b-instance of Bar, f-instance of Foo, value
print(self, instance, value)
class Foo(object):
b = Bar()
f = Foo()
print(f)
f.b = 10
1. Now when we create/use @property..
what is the first and second argument to dunder-set
(my guess is
Veek M wrote:
> class Foo(object):
> @property
> def name(self):
> if hasattr(self, '_name'):
> print('Foo name', self._name)
> return self._name
> else:
> return 'default&
class Foo(object):
@property
def name(self):
if hasattr(self, '_name'):
print('Foo name', self._name)
return self._name
else:
return 'default'
@name.setter
def name(self, value):
print(&
ius) will
not raise.
"""
if value > RefrigeratedShippingContainer.MAX_CELSIUS:
raise ValueError("Temperature too hot!")
@property
def celsius(self):
return self._celsius
@celsius.setter
def celsius(self, value):
self.validate_temp(val
instance. This
> works fine for looking up methods and property getters. It doesn't work so
> well for simulating other behaviors, like setters, or comparisons, or
> iteration, etc.
>
> A property is one example of what in Python is known as a descriptor, which
> is de
ance. This
works fine for looking up methods and property getters. It doesn't work so
well for simulating other behaviors, like setters, or comparisons, or
iteration, etc.
A property is one example of what in Python is known as a descriptor, which
is described here:
https://docs.python.
serial=str(serial).zfill(6),
category='R')
@property
def celsius(self):
return self._celsius
@celsius.setter
def celsius(self, value):
if value > RefrigeratedShippingContainer.MAX_CELSIUS:
raise ValueError(&q
Thanks to Rob, Cameron, Ian, Chris and Kirill for the detailed explanations.
Very helpful,
Irv
> On Dec 20, 2017, at 3:56 PM, Irv Kalb wrote:
>
> I am trying to work through the concept of the @property decorator with
> respect to object oriented programming.
>
>
On 20/12/17 21:39, Stefan Ram wrote:
Irv Kalb writes:
about property decorators.
The code
@property
def salary(self): pass
@salary.setter
def salary(self, newSalary): pass
is an abbreviation for
def salary_get(self): pass
salary = property( salary_get )
def salary_set(self
2017-12-21 2:56 GMT+03:00 Irv Kalb :
> My questions about this are really historical. From my reading, it looks
> like using an @property decorator is a reference to an older approach using
> a built in "property" function. But here goes:
>
> 1) Why were these decorator
On 20Dec2017 15:56, Irv Kalb wrote:
I am trying to work through the concept of the @property decorator with
respect to object oriented programming.
I believe that I understand how the @property and @.setter work -
and that they are used to turn what looks like direct access to instance
On Thu, Dec 21, 2017 at 2:38 PM, Ian Kelly wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 20, 2017 at 5:56 PM, Irv Kalb wrote:
>> 2) Alternatively, if the getter was going to use the @property decorator,
>> then it would seem complimentary to have the decorator name for the
>> associated setter
On Wed, Dec 20, 2017 at 5:56 PM, Irv Kalb wrote:
> My questions about this are really historical. From my reading, it looks
> like using an @property decorator is a reference to an older approach using a
> built in "property" function. But here goes:
>
> 1) Why w
On 12/20/2017 03:56 PM, Irv Kalb wrote:
I am trying to work through the concept of the @property decorator with
respect to object oriented programming.
I believe that I understand how the @property and @.setter work -
and that they are used to turn what looks like direct access to instance
I am trying to work through the concept of the @property decorator with
respect to object oriented programming.
I believe that I understand how the @property and @.setter work -
and that they are used to turn what looks like direct access to instance
variables into method calls in an object
On 05/10/2017 14:13, Steve D'Aprano wrote:
On Thu, 5 Oct 2017 10:51 pm, bartc wrote:
Am I allowed to say that it all seems a bit of a mess?
You may or may not be pleased to learn that there's a push to create a "record
like" or "struct like" datatype for Python 3.7 or 3.8, tentatively called
On Thu, 5 Oct 2017 10:51 pm, bartc wrote:
> Am I allowed to say that it all seems a bit of a mess?
You may or may not be pleased to learn that there's a push to create a "record
like" or "struct like" datatype for Python 3.7 or 3.8, tentatively called
a "Data Class" for now.
The proposed syntax
On 05/10/2017 12:29, Gregory Ewing wrote:
bartc wrote:
Result? You can't just look at my 'any' class and see what fields it
uses. You can't even just look at the static source code. You have to
run the program to find out. And it might be different each time.
You can usually get a pretty good
bartc wrote:
Result? You can't just look at my 'any' class and see what fields it
uses. You can't even just look at the static source code. You have to
run the program to find out. And it might be different each time.
You can usually get a pretty good idea of what attributes a
class has by loo
On Wed, 4 Oct 2017 11:46 pm, Rhodri James wrote:
> On 04/10/17 12:07, bartc wrote:
>> I've seen that example brought up before. It still doesn't cut any ice.
>>
>> You might as well be condescending of someone who finds Joyce or Proust
>> unreadable, and prefers McBain, Simenon or Chandler. (Sorr
On Thu, 5 Oct 2017 04:00 am, Paul Moore wrote:
> I wonder - would the people who want "real constants" find the
> following confusing:
>
from demo import foo
foo = 14
foo
> 14
>
> It's fundamental to the way the import function works, and how names
> in Python behave, but I can s
On Thu, 5 Oct 2017 09:08 am, bartc wrote:
[...]
> And when I tried, it didn't really work in Python 2 (extra attributes
> could still be created, and .__slots__ wasn't readonly); only Py3.
Not quite, but I don't blame you for the mistake. Its an easy one to make.
__slots__ only works in "new sty
On 04/10/2017 17:02, Rhodri James wrote:
On 04/10/17 16:33, Paul Moore wrote:
It's not an advantage or a disadvantage, just an approach. Many people
like it, you may not. Specifically, yes you can't "just declare a
lightweight struct or record with exactly two fields".
Actually you can:
>>
On Wed, Oct 4, 2017 14:03 PM, bartc wrote >
"A property, in some object-oriented programming languages, is a special
>sort of class member, intermediate in functionality between a field (or
>data member) and a method."
>
>But Python has some problems just in using fi
you want it.
>
> $ cat demo.py
> import sys
>
> class DemoModule:
> @property
> def foo(self):
> return 42
>
> sys.modules['demo'] = DemoModule()
>
> $ python3 -c 'import demo; print(demo.foo); demo.foo = 14'
> 42
> Traceback (most
On 4 October 2017 at 17:02, Rhodri James wrote:
> Actually you can:
>
class Point:
> ... __slots__ = ("x", "y")
> ... def __init__(self, x, y):
> ... self.x = x
> ... self.y = y
> ... def __str__(self):
> ... return "({0},{1})".format(self.x, self.y)
> ...
p = Point(3,4
t too
> unsafe for big projects. We have read-only attributes in classes, but not
> read-only names in modules. That makes me a little bit sad.
Which brings up the point that you can hack it in if you want it.
$ cat demo.py
import sys
class DemoModule:
@property
def foo(self):
return 4
On 04/10/17 16:33, Paul Moore wrote:
On 4 October 2017 at 16:03, bartc wrote:
No error. Some would perceive all this as an advantage, but it means you
can't just declare a lightweight struct or record 'Point' with exactly two
fields x and y. You have to use other solutions ('namedtuples' or wha
On 4 October 2017 at 16:03, bartc wrote:
> No error. Some would perceive all this as an advantage, but it means you
> can't just declare a lightweight struct or record 'Point' with exactly two
> fields x and y. You have to use other solutions ('namedtuples' or whatever,
> which probably are immuta
On Thu, 5 Oct 2017 12:41 am, Ian Kelly wrote:
> Python has the simplest named constants of all:
>
> C = 12345
>
> As long as you don't subsequently change it, it's a constant. And it's
> very simple because it works just like any other variable.
I do feel that the lack of constants[1] is a (mi
#x27;re
> just used in the form of properties. Here's a list of languages that
> support properties:
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Property_(programming)#Example_syntax
"A property, in some object-oriented programming languages, is a special
sort of class member, intermediate in f
On Wed, Oct 4, 2017 at 5:07 AM, bartc wrote:
> It is just being elitist. I have a preference for keeping things simple and
> avoiding unnecessary complexity. But with programming languages many do have
> a penchant for the latter.
>
> As an example, a recent discussion on comp.lang.c was about imp
On 04/10/17 12:07, bartc wrote:
I've seen that example brought up before. It still doesn't cut any ice.
You might as well be condescending of someone who finds Joyce or Proust
unreadable, and prefers McBain, Simenon or Chandler. (Sorry, can't think
of any modern pulp novelists).
I don't thin
On 04/10/2017 06:32, Steve D'Aprano wrote:
On Wed, 4 Oct 2017 02:00 am, bartc wrote:
Does all this advanced stuff (which I don't understand and which doesn't
look very appealing either; hopefully I will never come across such
code) still count as programming?
I could not have hoped to see a m
On Wed, 4 Oct 2017 02:00 am, bartc wrote:
> Does all this advanced stuff (which I don't understand and which doesn't
> look very appealing either; hopefully I will never come across such
> code) still count as programming?
I could not have hoped to see a more perfect example of the Blub effect in
On Tue, Oct 3, 2017 at 9:16 AM, Jorge Gimeno wrote:
> No, I see this as teaching the skills involved to drive a car. Practicing a
> turn, scanning gauges, and checking blind spots are all a part of driving.
> When one is learning, it's easier to learn these in isolation so when the
> problem must
1 - 100 of 884 matches
Mail list logo
