On Thu, 27 Oct 2011 20:05:13 -0700, Fletcher Johnson wrote:
> If I create a new Unicode object u'\x82\xb1\x82\xea\x82\xcd' how does
> this creation process interpret the bytes in the byte string?
It doesn't, because there is no byte-string. You have created a Unicode
object from a literal strin
>> I started a wiki page
>> here:
>>
>> http://code.google.com/p/pynguin/wiki/InstallingPynguinOnWindows
>>
>> but I can't even test if
On Thu, 27 Oct 2011 17:09:34 -0700, Patrick Maupin wrote:
> On Oct 27, 5:31 pm, Steven D'Aprano +comp.lang.pyt...@pearwood.info> wrote:
>> From the outside, you can't tell how big a generator expression is. It
>> has no length:
>
> I understand that.
>
>> Since the array object has no way of te
On Thu, 27 Oct 2011 16:00:57 -0700, DevPlayer wrote:
> def isvalid_named_reference( astring ):
> # "varible name" is really a named_reference
> # import string # would be cleaner
I don't understand the comment about "variable name".
> valid_first_char =
> '_abcdefghijklmnopqrstuvw
On Fri, 28 Oct 2011 00:52:40 +0200, candide wrote:
> Le 28/10/2011 00:19, Steven D'Aprano a écrit :
>>
>> What, you think it goes against the laws of physics that nobody thought
>> to mention it in the docs?
>
>
> No but I'm expecting from Python documentation to mention the laws of
> Python ...
On 10/28/2011 3:21 AM, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
If the slice has too few elements, you've just blown away the entire
iterator for no good reason.
If the slice is the right length, but the iterator doesn't next raise
StopIteration, you've just thrown away one perfectly good value. Hope it
wasn't
On 27/10/2011 20:53, Terry Reedy wrote:
On 10/27/2011 6:36 AM, Tim Golden wrote:
On 27/10/2011 11:27, Propad wrote:
the suggestion to add the optional second parameter fixed the problem,
spawnl now works on the Win 7 computer I'm responsible for (with
Python 2.2). So the suggested cause seems t
candide writes:
> Le 28/10/2011 00:57, Hrvoje Niksic a écrit :
>
>> was used at class definition time to suppress it. Built-in and
>> extension types can choose whether to implement __dict__.
>>
>
> Is it possible in the CPython implementation to write something like this :
>
> "foo".bar = 42
>
Le 28/10/2011 10:43, ll.snark a écrit :
On 27 oct, 17:06, Laurent Claessens wrote:
> J'aimerais donc pouvoir indiquer dans fonca, que la variable lst est
> celle définie dans fonc1.
> Je ne veux pas d'une variable locale à fonca, ni une variable globale
> à tout mon fichier (cf exemple
Le 28/10/2011 05:02, Patrick Maupin a écrit :
You can easily do that by subclassing a string:
class AnnotatedStr(str):
pass
x = AnnotatedStr('Node1')
x.title = 'Title for node 1'
Less or more what I did. But requires to transport the string graph
structure to the AnnotatedStr one.
Le 28/10/2011 10:01, Steven D'Aprano a écrit :
didn't think of it. This is hardly a surprise. Wanting to add arbitrary
attributes to built-ins is not exactly an everyday occurrence.
Depends. Experimented programmers don't even think of it. But less
advanced programmers can consider of it.
Le 28/10/2011 11:08, Hrvoje Niksic a écrit :
longer be allowed for the interpreter to transparently cache them. The
same goes for integers and other immutable built-in objects.
On the other hand, immutability and optimization don't explain the whole
thing because you can't do something like
Woops. This was aimed to the french speaking python's usenet. Sorry.
Laurent
Le 28/10/2011 11:29, Laurent a écrit :
Le 28/10/2011 10:43, ll.snark a écrit :
On 27 oct, 17:06, Laurent Claessens wrote:
> J'aimerais donc pouvoir indiquer dans fonca, que la variable lst est
> celle défi
Am 28.10.2011 10:01, schrieb Steven D'Aprano:
hasattr(int, '__dict__') # Does the int class/type have a __dict__?
> True
hasattr(42, '__dict__') # Does the int instance have a __dict__?
> False
Also __dict__ doesn't have to be an instance of __dict__. Builtin types
usually have a dictp
Héllo,
There was a thread recently about the missed opportunity for Python to be a
language that could replace Javascript in the browser.
They are several attempts at doing something in this spirit here are the
ones I'm aware of:
- pyjamas aka. pyjs it is to Python what GWT is to Java : http://p
I believe that python maybe had missed an opportunity to get in early and be
able to take over a large market share from javascript. But that doesn't
mean python is dead in the browser, it just means it will have more
competition if it wants to replace javascript for Rich Internet
Applications.
t
Find a new release of python-ldap:
http://pypi.python.org/pypi/python-ldap/2.4.4
python-ldap provides an object-oriented API to access LDAP directory
servers from Python programs. It mainly wraps the OpenLDAP 2.x libs for
that purpose. Additionally it contains modules for other LDAP-related
stu
On Fri, 28 Oct 2011 00:52:40 +0200, candide wrote:
[snip]
> hasattr(42, '__dict__')
>> False
[snip]
>
> Let'have a try :
>
> >>> hasattr(43, '__dict__')
> False
> >>>
>
> so we have proved by induction that no integer instance has a
> dictionnary attribute ;)
You left out an important step i
Hi,
I'm tryed to write my first application using SqlAlchemy. I'm using
declarative style. I need to get the attributes of the columns of my
table. This is an example of my very simple model-class:
class Country(base):
__tablename__ = "bookings_countries"
id = sqlalchemy.Column(sqlalc
Just a random note, I actually set about the task of re-implementing a
json encoder which can be subclassed, is highly extensible, and uses
(mostly) sane coding techniques (those of you who've looked at
simplejson's code will know why this is a good thing). So far
preliminary tests show the json o
Python 2.7.2
I'm having trouble in a situation where I need to mix-in the
functionality of __getattr__ after the object has already been
created. Here is a small sample script of the situation:
=snip
import types
class Cow(object):
pass
# this __getattr__ works as advertised.
On Oct 27, 10:23 pm, Terry Reedy wrote:
> I do not think everyone else should suffer substantial increase in space
> and run time to avoid surprising you.
What substantial increase? There's already a check that winds up
raising an exception. Just make it empty an iterator instead.
> > It vio
I'm trying to generate a list of values where each value is dependent
on the previous value in the list and this bit of code needs to be
repeatedly so I'd like it to be fast. It doesn't seem that
comprehensions will work as each pass needs to take the result of the
previous pass as it's argument. m
On Fri, Oct 28, 2011 at 1:34 PM, dhyams wrote:
> If I call __getattr__ directly, as in bessie.__getattr__('foo'), it
> works as it should obviously; so the method is bound and ready to be
> called. But Python does not seem to want to call __getattr__
> appropriately if I mix it in after the objec
dhyams wrote:
Python 2.7.2
I'm having trouble in a situation where I need to mix-in the
functionality of __getattr__ after the object has already been
created. Here is a small sample script of the situation:
=snip
import types
class Cow(object):
pass
# this __getattr__ works
On 10/28/2011 2:05 PM, Patrick Maupin wrote:
On Oct 27, 10:23 pm, Terry Reedy wrote:
I do not think everyone else should suffer substantial increase in space
and run time to avoid surprising you.
What substantial increase?
of time and space, as I said, for the temporary array that I think
On 10/28/2011 2:10 PM, Michael McGlothlin wrote:
I'm trying to generate a list of values
Better to think of a sequence of values, whether materialized as a
'list' or not.
where each value is dependent
on the previous value in the list and this bit of code needs to be
repeatedly so I'd like
Hi,
I would like to save many dicts with a fixed amount of keys
tuples to a file in a memory efficient manner (no random, but only
sequential access is required)
As the keys are the same for each entry I considered converting them to
tuples.
The tuples contain only strings, ints (long ints) an
On 10/28/2011 1:20 PM, Nathan Rice wrote:
Just a random note, I actually set about the task of re-implementing a
json encoder which can be subclassed, is highly extensible, and uses
(mostly) sane coding techniques (those of you who've looked at
simplejson's code will know why this is a good thing
On Oct 28, 3:19 am, Terry Reedy wrote:
> On 10/28/2011 3:21 AM, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
>
> > If the slice has too few elements, you've just blown away the entire
> > iterator for no good reason.
> > If the slice is the right length, but the iterator doesn't next raise
> > StopIteration, you've jus
I've found that in a lot of cases getting a patch submitted is only
half about good engineering. The other half is politics. I like one
of those things, I don't like the other, and I don't want to take time
out of my coding schedule to write something if in the end a reviewer
shoots down my patch
In article ,
Gelonida N wrote:
> I would like to save many dicts with a fixed amount of keys
> tuples to a file in a memory efficient manner (no random, but only
> sequential access is required)
There's two possible scenarios here. One, which you seem to be
exploring, is to carefully study y
On Oct 28, 4:51 pm, Patrick Maupin wrote:
> On Oct 28, 3:19 am, Terry Reedy wrote:
>
> > On 10/28/2011 3:21 AM, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
>
> > > If the slice has too few elements, you've just blown away the entire
> > > iterator for no good reason.
> > > If the slice is the right length, but the it
>> I'm trying to generate a list of values
>
> Better to think of a sequence of values, whether materialized as a 'list' or
> not.
The final value will actually be a string but it seems it is usually
faster to join a list of strings than to concat them one by one.
>> where each value is dependent
On Fri, 28 Oct 2011 22:47:42 +0200, Gelonida N wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I would like to save many dicts with a fixed amount of keys tuples to a
> file in a memory efficient manner (no random, but only sequential
> access is required)
What do you call "many"? Fifty? A thousand? A thousand million? How m
On Fri, 28 Oct 2011 16:27:37 -0700, Patrick Maupin wrote:
> And, BTW, the example you give of, e.g.
>
> a,b,c = (some generator expression)
>
> ALREADY LOSES DATA if the iterator isn't the right size and it raises an
> exception.
Yes. What's your point? This fact doesn't support your proposal i
On 10/27/2011 5:36 PM, Lee Harr wrote:
> What message do you get when trying to download?
It said something like "You're trying to download from a forbidden
country. That's all we know." Anyway, I was able to get the files.
Once everything is set up, it seems to work. I haven't done any serious
te
On Oct 28, 8:01 pm, Steven D'Aprano > > ALREADY LOSES DATA if the
iterator isn't the right size and it raises an
> > exception.
>
> Yes. What's your point? This fact doesn't support your proposal in the
> slightest.
You earlier made the argument that "If the slice has too few elements,
you've just
On 10/29/2011 05:20 AM, Ethan Furman wrote:
Python only looks up __xxx__ methods in new-style classes on the class
itself, not on the instances.
So this works:
8<
class Cow(object):
pass
def attrgetter(self, a):
print "CAUGHT: At
On 10/28/2011 8:49 PM, Michael McGlothlin wrote:
Better to think of a sequence of values, whether materialized as a 'list' or
not.
The final value will actually be a string but it seems it is usually
faster to join a list of strings than to concat them one by one.
.join() takes an iterable o
En Fri, 28 Oct 2011 15:10:14 -0300, Michael McGlothlin
escribió:
I'm trying to generate a list of values where each value is dependent
on the previous value in the list and this bit of code needs to be
repeatedly so I'd like it to be fast. It doesn't seem that
comprehensions will work as each
41 matches
Mail list logo
