On Tue, Jul 17, 2018 at 8:41 AM, Roel Schroeven wrote:
> In any case, even though Python 3's byte strings are not quite unlike Python
> 2's strings, they're not exactly like them either. And I feel there are
> cases where that makes things somewhat harder, even though I can't prove it.
You're abs
> On Jul 16, 2018, at 3:28 PM, Terry Reedy wrote:
>
>> On 7/16/2018 1:11 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>
>> Many consider that UTF-32 is a variable-width encoding because of the
>> combining characters. It can take multiple ‘codepoints’ to define what
>> should be a single ‘character’ for display
On 2018-07-16 21:59, Marko Rauhamaa wrote:
Tim Chase :
While the python world has moved its efforts into improving Python3,
Python2 hasn't suddenly stopped working.
The sword of Damocles is hanging on its head. Unless a consortium is
erected to support Python2, no vendor will be able to use it
On Tue, 17 Jul 2018 08:48:55 +1000, Chris Angelico wrote:
> That said, though, the fact that indexing a byte string yields an int
> instead of a one-byte string is basically unable to be changed now ...
Agreed.
> ... and IMO it'd be better to be consistent with text strings than
> with bytearray
On Tue, Jul 17, 2018 at 9:18 AM, Dan Sommers wrote:
> Quick: how long is the byte array that displays as '\xff'? Too easy?
> What about '\0xff' and '0\xff'?
1, 4, 2 bytes respectively. Yep, easy... but then, I'm used to reading
backslash escapes. Nothing to do with text vs bytes.
DNS, of cours
On Mon, 16 Jul 2018 20:03:39 +0100, Steve Simmons wrote:
> +1 Seems to me Bart is being banned for "being a dick" and "talking
> rubbish" (my words/interpretation) with irritating persistence.
I know that when I first started here, I often talked rubbish. The
difference is, I was willing to lis
On Mon, 16 Jul 2018 15:09:16 -0400, Terry Reedy wrote:
> On 7/16/2018 11:50 AM, Dennis Lee Bieber wrote:
>
>> For Python 4000 maybe
>
> Please don't give people the idea that there is any current intention to
> have a 'Python 4000' similar to 'Python 3000'. Call it 'a mythical
> Python 400
On 16/07/18 21:16, Rhodri James wrote:
On 16/07/18 20:58, Terry Reedy wrote:
On 7/16/2018 1:27 PM, Jim Lee wrote:
90% of the world *is* "beneath my notice" when it comes to
programming for myself. I really don't care if that's not PC enough
for you.
Had you actually read my words with *in
On Mon, 16 Jul 2018 22:40:13 +0300, Marko Rauhamaa wrote:
> Terry Reedy :
>
>> On 7/15/2018 5:28 PM, Marko Rauhamaa wrote:
>>> if your new system used Python3's UTF-32 strings as a foundation,
>>
>> Since 3.3, Python's strings are not (always) UFT-32 strings.
>
> You are right. Python's strings
On Tue, 17 Jul 2018 06:15:25 +1000, Chris Angelico wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 17, 2018 at 4:55 AM, Steven D'Aprano
> wrote:
>> There is nothing special about diacritics such that we ought to treat
>> some combinations like "Ch" (two code points = one character) as "fixed
>> width" while others like "â"
On 2018-07-16 23:59, Marko Rauhamaa wrote:
> Tim Chase :
> > While the python world has moved its efforts into improving
> > Python3, Python2 hasn't suddenly stopped working.
>
> The sword of Damocles is hanging on its head. Unless a consortium is
> erected to support Python2, no vendor will be
On 2018-07-17 01:25, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
On Mon, 16 Jul 2018 15:09:16 -0400, Terry Reedy wrote:
On 7/16/2018 11:50 AM, Dennis Lee Bieber wrote:
For Python 4000 maybe
Please don't give people the idea that there is any current intention to
have a 'Python 4000' similar to 'Python 3
On Mon, 16 Jul 2018 23:50:12 +0200, Roel Schroeven wrote:
> There are times (encoding/decoding network protocols and other data
> formats) when I have a byte string and I want/need to process it like
> Python 2 does, and that is the one area where I feel Python 3 make
> things a bit more difficult
On Mon, 16 Jul 2018 19:02:36 -0400, Richard Damon wrote:
> You are defining a variable/fixed width codepoint set. Many others want
> to deal with CHARACTER sets.
Good luck coming up with a universal, objective, language-neutral,
consistent definition for a character.
> This doesn’t mean that U
On Mon, 16 Jul 2018 15:28:51 -0400, Terry Reedy wrote:
> On 7/16/2018 1:11 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>
>> Many consider that UTF-32 is a variable-width encoding because of the
>> combining characters. It can take multiple ‘codepoints’ to define what
>> should be a single ‘character’ for display.
>
On Mon, 16 Jul 2018 22:51:32 +0300, Marko Rauhamaa wrote:
> All UTF-8. No unicode strings.
That just means you are re-implementing the bits of Unicode you care
about (which may be "nothing at all") as UTF-8. If your application is
nothing but middleware squirting bytes from one layer to another
> On Jul 16, 2018, at 9:21 PM, Steven D'Aprano
> wrote:
>
>> On Mon, 16 Jul 2018 19:02:36 -0400, Richard Damon wrote:
>>
>> You are defining a variable/fixed width codepoint set. Many others want
>> to deal with CHARACTER sets.
>
> Good luck coming up with a universal, objective, language-neut
On Mon, Jul 16, 2018 at 08:56:11PM +0100, Rhodri James wrote:
> The problem everyone is having with you, Marko, is that you are
> using the terminology incorrectly. [...] When you call UTF-32 a
> variable-width encoding, you are incorrect.
But please don't overlook that the "terminology" is in fac
On 2018-07-17 01:08, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
> In English, I think most people would prefer to use a different
> term for whatever "sh" and "ch" represent than "character".
The term you may be reaching for is "consonant cluster"?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Consonant_cluster
-tkc
--
https:/
On 2018-07-17 01:21, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
> > This doesn’t mean that UTF-32 is an awful system, just that it
> > isn’t the magical cure that some were hoping for.
>
> Nobody ever claimed it was, except for the people railing that
> since it isn't a magically system we ought to go back to the G
Thank you for reaching out.
1) Don't know what do you mean by the traceback.
2) In DOS, pip install pandas
3) Yes, in DOS, Win 10
4) 3.7
5) Not getting much info
On Sun, Jul 15, 2018 at 5:44 PM, boB Stepp wrote:
> On Sun, Jul 15, 2018 at 7:34 PM S Lea wrote:
> >
> > I can't seem to install th
'pip' not recognized as internal or external command, operable program or
batch.
And for some reason it's a 32 bit version
On Mon, Jul 16, 2018 at 8:03 PM, S Lea wrote:
> Thank you for reaching out.
>
> 1) Don't know what do you mean by the traceback.
> 2) In DOS, pip install pandas
> 3) Yes, i
Also, I can't find the location of Python insallation, it refers
to C:\Users\Precision\PycharmProjects\my first project from
video\venv\Scripts
On Mon, Jul 16, 2018 at 8:06 PM, S Lea wrote:
> of python 3.7
>
> On Mon, Jul 16, 2018 at 8:06 PM, S Lea wrote:
>
>> 'pip' not recognized as internal o
of python 3.7
On Mon, Jul 16, 2018 at 8:06 PM, S Lea wrote:
> 'pip' not recognized as internal or external command, operable program or
> batch.
>
> And for some reason it's a 32 bit version
>
> On Mon, Jul 16, 2018 at 8:03 PM, S Lea wrote:
>
>> Thank you for reaching out.
>>
>> 1) Don't know w
On Monday 16 July 2018 23:06:19 S Lea wrote:
> 'pip' not recognized as internal or external command, operable program
> or batch.
>
> And for some reason it's a 32 bit version
>
Huh? My ancient wet ram memory is probably out to lunch, but ISTR reading
about someone else with the same problem at l
Steven D'Aprano :
> On Mon, 16 Jul 2018 22:51:32 +0300, Marko Rauhamaa wrote:
>> UTF-8 bytes can only represent the first 128 code points of Unicode.
>
> This is DailyWTF material. Perhaps you want to rethink your wording
> and maybe even learn a bit more about Unicode and the UTF encodings
> befor
Tim Chase :
> On 2018-07-16 23:59, Marko Rauhamaa wrote:
>> Tim Chase :
>> > While the python world has moved its efforts into improving
>> > Python3, Python2 hasn't suddenly stopped working.
>>
>> The sword of Damocles is hanging on its head. Unless a consortium is
>> erected to support Python
On Tue, Jul 17, 2018 at 2:31 PM Marko Rauhamaa wrote:
>
> Steven D'Aprano :
> > On Mon, 16 Jul 2018 22:51:32 +0300, Marko Rauhamaa wrote:
> >> UTF-8 bytes can only represent the first 128 code points of Unicode.
> >
> > This is DailyWTF material. Perhaps you want to rethink your wording
> > and ma
On 7/16/2018 7:02 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
On Jul 16, 2018, at 3:28 PM, Terry Reedy wrote:
If one is using a broader definition than usual, it is clearer to say so.
This is the core of what I wrote. Do you disagree?
You are defining a variable/fixed width codepoint set.
No, I did not
On 2018-07-15 08:37:05 +0200, Christian Gollwitzer wrote:
> Am 05.07.18 um 12:04 schrieb Steven D'Aprano:
> > On Thu, 05 Jul 2018 09:17:20 +0200, Christian Gollwitzer wrote:
> > But... it compiles? Seriously?
[...]
> > Sometimes I wonder how C programmers manage to write a bug-free "Hello
> > World
101 - 130 of 130 matches
Mail list logo
