Marko Rauhamaa wrote:
> [concerning leashed puppies]
Note: no boxes! However, there are strings attached. Now you can truly
*bind* objects to variables.
If you wanted to really bind them good and proper,
you'd use duct tape (or "duck tape" as some people
call it -- arguably more appropriate in
>
> Qt Designer is certainly a good GUI builder, but not more than that.
> When you actually want to use the designed GUI in Python, you will find
> that this needs almost as much know how and work as if you did the GUI
> in code.
>
I think that's a bit of an unfair statement. Sure conversion can
On Tuesday, June 7, 2016 at 4:36:37 PM UTC+12, Ian wrote:
> A 500-line function? Yikes, what an eyesore. When you have to include
> #end comments in order to visually match things up, that should be a
> smell that your code is excessively complex.
Feel free to come up with a simpler version.
>
On Tuesday, June 7, 2016 at 3:34:39 PM UTC+12, Dan Sommers wrote:
> I used to write a lot of assembly code, for a lot of different CPUs, and
> they all had a common, versatile looping form which could be arranged in
> different ways to suit the problem at hand. On most chips, it was (and
> still
Gregory Ewing :
> Marko Rauhamaa wrote:
>> Seriously, though, it is notable that the high-level programming
>> languages pretty unanimously refuse to make variables first-class
>> objects. I wonder why.
>
> That's an interesting question. One reason might be
> that in the absence of static type an
Lawrence D’Oliveiro :
> On Tuesday, June 7, 2016 at 4:36:37 PM UTC+12, Ian wrote:
>> A 500-line function? Yikes, what an eyesore. When you have to include
>> #end comments in order to visually match things up, that should be a
>> smell that your code is excessively complex.
>
> [...]
>
> Wow, that
On Tuesday 07 June 2016 17:52, Lawrence D’Oliveiro wrote:
> On Tuesday, June 7, 2016 at 4:36:37 PM UTC+12, Ian wrote:
>> A 500-line function? Yikes, what an eyesore. When you have to include
>> #end comments in order to visually match things up, that should be a
>> smell that your code is excessiv
Marko Rauhamaa writes:
> Gregory Ewing :
>
>> Marko Rauhamaa wrote:
>>> Seriously, though, it is notable that the high-level programming
>>> languages pretty unanimously refuse to make variables first-class
>>> objects. I wonder why.
>>
>> That's an interesting question. One reason might be
>> th
Hello All,
I need some help with semaphore implementation between two programs in python.
I'd be glad if anyone can give me some help.
--
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Hi,
Have you checked this
https://docs.python.org/3/library/multiprocessing.html#multiprocessing.Semaphore
?
Best
2016-06-07 11:43 GMT+02:00 karthik jagilinki :
> Hello All,
>
> I need some help with semaphore implementation between two programs in
> python. I'd be glad if anyone can give me som
On Tuesday 07 June 2016 15:42, Gregory Ewing wrote:
> Steven D'Aprano wrote:
>> Even if you were right that objects must exist at
>> a single well-defined location, that is strictly irrelevant. That's
>> implementation, not interface.
>
> We're talking about mental models. Sure, you could come up
On 07/06/2016 08:56, Marko Rauhamaa wrote:
Gregory Ewing :
Marko Rauhamaa wrote:
Seriously, though, it is notable that the high-level programming
languages pretty unanimously refuse to make variables first-class
objects. I wonder why.
That's an interesting question. One reason might be
that
Hello,
I have a question regarding reshaping numpy array.
I either have a 1D array that I need to reshape to a 3D array or a 3D array to
reshape to a 1d numpy array.
In both of these cases it is assumed that data follows x,y,z ordering.
and I use the following to reshape the numpy array.
On Tue, Jun 7, 2016 at 1:52 AM, Lawrence D’Oliveiro
wrote:
> Wow, that’s only twice the length of the code you’re replacing. Well done.
Huh? The example that you posted was 17 lines, excluding comments. My
replacement code is 17 lines, excluding comments. Where are you
getting "twice the length"
Gmail and the Gmail Digest only ever show the 0.9.4 tag - not sure if this
a big issue or not (but I know I would like to the 1.0.0 tag to be proudly
displayed!)
On Friday, 3 June 2016 03:57:35 UTC+2, Chris Withers wrote:
>
> Ugh, and once again, this time with a corrected title...
>
>
> On 02
On Tue, 07 Jun 2016 00:53:31 -0700, Lawrence D’Oliveiro wrote:
> On Tuesday, June 7, 2016 at 3:34:39 PM UTC+12, Dan Sommers wrote:
>
>> I used to write a lot of assembly code, for a lot of different CPUs, and
>> they all had a common, versatile looping form which could be arranged in
>> different
Op 07-06-16 om 12:18 schreef Steven D'Aprano:
> We're talking about mental models. Sure, you could come up
> with some kind of Tardis-like mental model where objects
> exist in more than one location at once. But why would
> you bother going to such mental contortions?
> Because (self-recursive dat
On Tue, Jun 7, 2016 at 7:25 AM, Heli wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I have a question regarding reshaping numpy array.
>
> I either have a 1D array that I need to reshape to a 3D array or a 3D array
> to reshape to a 1d numpy array.
>
> In both of these cases it is assumed that data follows x,y,z ordering.
On Tue, Jun 7, 2016 at 7:31 AM Heli wrote:
> Hello,
> I have a question regarding reshaping numpy array.
>
> I either have a 1D array that I need to reshape to a 3D array or a 3D
> array to reshape to a 1d numpy array.
>
> In both of these cases it is assumed that data follows x,y,z ordering.
> a
Thanks Michael,
This did the trick. array.flatten('F') works exactly as I need.
Thanks a lot,
--
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
On Tue, Jun 7, 2016, at 03:03, Gregory Ewing wrote:
> a = 42
> b = 17
> c = &a
> c = &b
>
> does 'c' now hold a reference to the variable 'b', or
> does it still hold a reference to 'a' and 'a' now
> holds a reference to 'b'?
It'd have to be spelled *c = &b, or c.value = &b or c.setvalue(&b), or
On Tue, Jun 7, 2016, at 08:32, Antoon Pardon wrote:
> > Here's a thought experiment for you. Suppose in Python 3.6, Guido announces
> > that Python will support a form of high-level pointer (not the scary,
> > dangerous
> > low-level pointer of C) called "reference". There will be a dereference
On Tue, 7 Jun 2016 10:32 pm, Antoon Pardon wrote:
> That people often use the shortcut "x is 999" doesn't make the statement
> wrong that variables are essentially references in Python.
No, I'm sorry, you're wrong, variables are essentially arrays of bits in
Python.
--
Steven
--
https://mai
On 07.06.2016 09:22, Nick Sarbicki wrote:
I think that's a bit of an unfair statement. Sure conversion can be a
bit of a pain and there is some setup for getting the classes working.
But that is generally a small static piece of code you can find all
over the net, which is then usable for most
Hi,
In industrial project many protocols are often used for read/write goal at
arrival.
I would like to implement the better designed conception to enable read/write
feature my main program.
Example be abale to read/write on opc, s7 or others protocoles.
If you have advices about this.
Than
Hi,
the two "big" GUI toolkits on Linux are GTK+ and Qt.
Both are free, have Python bindings and a graphical GUI designer, and both
have ports for Windows and Mac OS X. Qt does have a better cross-platform-
support and supports more platforms, but GTK+3 also works for Linux, Mac
OS X and Windows.
On Wednesday, June 8, 2016 at 12:28:02 AM UTC+12, Dan Sommers wrote:
> I notice plenty of break statements scattered throughout your loop
> bodies. Mixing the loop's exit conditions in with the logic is equally
> unstructured.
Is this the old “structured-programming-is-mathematically-equivalent-t
On Tuesday, June 7, 2016 at 11:53:46 PM UTC+12, Ian wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 7, 2016 at 1:52 AM, Lawrence D’Oliveiro wrote:
>> Wow, that’s only twice the length of the code you’re replacing. Well done.
>
> Huh? The example that you posted was 17 lines, excluding comments. My
> replacement code is 17
On Tuesday, June 7, 2016 at 8:00:31 PM UTC+12, Marko Rauhamaa wrote:
> I understand you are hurt when your code is criticized bluntly. However,
> you *did* stick your head out.
Don’t worry, I am not the thin-skinned type.
> I, too, insist that every function/method must be visible at once in the
Lawrence D’Oliveiro :
> While elsewhere, you were criticizing my code for already being so
> terribly large...
Code can be large, only no function should be longer than ~70 lines or
wider than 79 columns. If your function grows above that limit, you
should refactor it and break it into multiple su
On Wednesday, June 8, 2016 at 10:07:05 AM UTC+12, Marko Rauhamaa wrote:
> Lawrence D’Oliveiro:
>> While elsewhere, you were criticizing my code for already being so
>> terribly large...
>
> Code can be large, only no function should be longer than ~70 lines or
> wider than 79 columns. If your fun
Accidentally didn't reply to the list...
On 06/07/2016 03:45 PM, Roland Koebler via Python-list wrote:
> You can also try Qt (http://qt.io), and one of its Python-bindings.
> But I was never happy with Qt and think some GUI-concepts of GTK+ are much
> better than the ones of Qt, and I like Glade m
On Tue, Jun 7, 2016 at 3:58 PM, Lawrence D’Oliveiro
wrote:
> On Tuesday, June 7, 2016 at 11:53:46 PM UTC+12, Ian wrote:
>> On Tue, Jun 7, 2016 at 1:52 AM, Lawrence D’Oliveiro wrote:
>
>>> Wow, that’s only twice the length of the code you’re replacing. Well done.
>>
>> Huh? The example that you pos
I was programming a computer game and found that while 1D arrays can be
created using the module array, there is no module for two-dimensional
arrays, unlike languages like C. Currently, the closest thing Python has to
a 2D array is a dictionary containing lists.
I propose that a module , 2DArray,
Harrison Chudleigh writes:
> Currently, the closest thing Python has to a 2D array is a dictionary
> containing lists.
Tuples work fine:
d = {}
d[2,3] = 5 # etc...
> Is this idea PEPable?
I don't think it would get any traction. If you're doing something
numerical that needs 2d arrays, nu
On Tuesday, June 7, 2016 at 6:07:23 PM UTC-4, Lawrence D’Oliveiro wrote:
> On Tuesday, June 7, 2016 at 8:00:31 PM UTC+12, Marko Rauhamaa wrote:
> > I understand you are hurt when your code is criticized bluntly. However,
> > you *did* stick your head out.
>
> Don’t worry, I am not the thin-skinned
On Tuesday, June 7, 2016 at 8:19:33 PM UTC-4, Harrison Chudleigh wrote:
> I was programming a computer game and found that while 1D arrays can be
> created using the module array, there is no module for two-dimensional
> arrays, unlike languages like C. Currently, the closest thing Python has to
>
Harrison Chudleigh wrote:
> I was programming a computer game and found that while 1D arrays can be
> created using the module array, there is no module for two-dimensional
> arrays, unlike languages like C. Currently, the closest thing Python has to
> a 2D array is a dictionary containing lists.
On Wednesday, June 8, 2016 at 12:32:01 PM UTC+12, Ned Batchelder wrote:
> On Tuesday, June 7, 2016 at 6:07:23 PM UTC-4, Lawrence D’Oliveiro wrote:
> > On Tuesday, June 7, 2016 at 8:00:31 PM UTC+12, Marko Rauhamaa wrote:
> > > I understand you are hurt when your code is criticized bluntly. However,
On Wednesday, June 8, 2016 at 12:32:01 PM UTC+12, Ned Batchelder wrote:
> Lawrence writes code in an unusual style...
“Unusual” I can deal with. But when some people react with outrage, then it
becomes clear they view my code as a personal attack.
--
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/pyt
On Tuesday, June 7, 2016 at 9:29:59 PM UTC-4, Lawrence D’Oliveiro wrote:
> On Wednesday, June 8, 2016 at 12:32:01 PM UTC+12, Ned Batchelder wrote:
>
> > Lawrence writes code in an unusual style...
>
> “Unusual” I can deal with. But when some people react with outrage, then it
> becomes clear the
Hi all!
What's wrong with this?
import pandas as pd
x=pd.to_datetime("20160501")
x+pd.DateOffset(days=1)
Timestamp('2016-05-02 00:00:00', tz=None)
x.__add__(pd.DateOffset(days=1))
NotImplemented
More generally I have a class derived from pandas.datetime and I want to
implement its own __add__
The wrong way:
ldo@theon:~> python2
Python 2.7.11+ (default, May 9 2016, 15:54:33)
[GCC 5.3.1 20160429] on linux2
Type "help", "copyright", "credits" or "license" for more information.
>>> import pymtp
>>> mtp = pymtp.MTP()
>>> mtp.connect()
Device 0 (VID=04e8 and
On 2016-06-08 03:09, Paulo da Silva wrote:
Hi all!
What's wrong with this?
import pandas as pd
x=pd.to_datetime("20160501")
x+pd.DateOffset(days=1)
Timestamp('2016-05-02 00:00:00', tz=None)
x.__add__(pd.DateOffset(days=1))
NotImplemented
More generally I have a class derived from pandas.dat
On 06/01/2016 04:39 PM, Lawrence D’Oliveiro wrote:
[multiple apparent trolls redacted]
This thread is dead. Please stop beating it.
--
~Ethan~
--
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Às 04:08 de 08-06-2016, MRAB escreveu:
> On 2016-06-08 03:09, Paulo da Silva wrote:
>> Hi all!
>>
...
>>
>> More generally I have a class derived from pandas.datetime and I want to
>> implement its own __add__ that at a given point call super __add__.
>>
>> For example:
>>
>> class C(pandas.datetim
Lawrence D’Oliveiro :
> On Tuesday, June 7, 2016 at 8:00:31 PM UTC+12, Marko Rauhamaa wrote:
>> I, too, insist that every function/method must be visible at once in the
>> editor window.
>
> From subprocess.py in the Python 3.5 distribution:
> [...]
> Is that “visible at once” in your editor windo
Lawrence D’Oliveiro :
> On Wednesday, June 8, 2016 at 10:07:05 AM UTC+12, Marko Rauhamaa wrote:
>> Lawrence D’Oliveiro:
>
>>> While elsewhere, you were criticizing my code for already being so
>>> terribly large...
>>
>> Code can be large, only no function should be longer than ~70 lines
>> or wi
Random832 wrote:
Er, how would that make them not first class?
They wouldn't be as transparent as references in C++,
which you just assign to like any other variable.
That works because C++ makes a distinction between
initialisation and assignment. It's not so easy to
separate those in Python.
49 matches
Mail list logo
