On 12 April 2017 at 02:44, Nathan Ernst wrote:
> goto is a misunderstood and much misaligned creature. It is a very useful
> feature, but like nearly any programming construct can be abused.
>
> Constructs like 'break', 'continue' or 'next' in languages like Python or
> C/C++ are goto's with impli
On 13 April 2017 at 02:17, Rob Gaddi wrote:
>
> def finder:
> for s in S:
> if s == 'i':
> return 'found on stage 1'
>
> S = S + ' hello world'
> for s in S:
> if s == 'd':
> return 'found on stage 2'
>
> raise ValueError('not found; S=' + S)
>
> try:
> message = fin
On 13 April 2017 at 18:48, Ian Kelly wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 13, 2017 at 10:23 AM, Mikhail V wrote:
>> Now I wonder, have we already collected *all* bells and whistles of Python
>> in these two examples, or is there something else for expressing trivial
>> thing.
>
> F
On 13 April 2017 at 19:38, Ian Kelly wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 13, 2017 at 11:25 AM, Mikhail V wrote:
>> On 13 April 2017 at 18:48, Ian Kelly wrote:
>>> On Thu, Apr 13, 2017 at 10:23 AM, Mikhail V wrote:
>>>> Now I wonder, have we already collected *all* bells and wh
On 14 April 2017 at 03:44, Steve D'Aprano wrote:
> On Fri, 14 Apr 2017 12:52 am, bartc wrote:
>
>> I know this isn't the Python need-for-speed thread, but this is a
>> classic example where the lack of one simple feature leads to using
>> slower, more cumbersome ones.
>
> Dear gods, have I fallen
On 17 April 2017 at 04:00, Steve D'Aprano wrote:
> On Mon, 17 Apr 2017 05:49 am, Dennis Lee Bieber wrote:
>
>> On Mon, 17 Apr 2017 02:48:08 +1000, Steve D'Aprano
>> declaimed the following:
>>
>>>On Sun, 16 Apr 2017 11:57 pm, bartc wrote:
>>>
But people just don't want it.
>>>
>>>Damn straig
Quite often I need raw string literals for concatenating console commands.
I want to input them exactly as they are in python sources.
There is r"" string, but it is obviously not enough because e.g. this:
s = r"ffmpeg -i "\\server-01\D\SER_Bigl.mpg" "
is not valid.
The closest I've found is tr
On 20 April 2017 at 17:44, Mikhail V wrote:
> Quite often I need raw string literals for concatenating console commands.
> I want to input them exactly as they are in python sources.
>
> There is r"" string, but it is obviously not enough because e.g. this:
> s = r&
On 20 April 2017 at 17:55, Chris Angelico wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 21, 2017 at 1:44 AM, Mikhail V wrote:
>> What I think: why there is no some built-in function, for example like:
>> s = raw("ffmpeg -i "\\server-01\D\SER_Bigl__"")
>>
>> which would jus
On 20 April 2017 at 17:59, Grant Edwards wrote:
> On 2017-04-20, Mikhail V wrote:
>> Quite often I need raw string literals for concatenating console commands.
>> I want to input them exactly as they are in python sources.
>>
>> There is r"" string, but i
On 20 April 2017 at 19:27, Chris Angelico wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 21, 2017 at 2:26 AM, wrote:
>> I find this:-
>>
>> s = r"ffmpeg -i '\\server-01\D\SER_Bigl.mpg' "
>>
>> vastly superior.
>
> It's semantically different though. I don't know whether single quotes
> are valid in that context, on Wind
On 20 April 2017 at 22:43, Random832 wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 20, 2017, at 16:01, Grant Edwards wrote:
>> On 2017-04-20, MRAB wrote:
>> > There _is_ a "universal solution"; it's called a Hollerith constant. :-)
>>
>> Wow, I haven't seen one of those in a _long_ time -- probably about 45
>> years. I
On 20 April 2017 at 18:40, Grant Edwards wrote:
> On 2017-04-20, Mikhail V wrote:
>> On 20 April 2017 at 17:59, Grant Edwards wrote:
>>> On 2017-04-20, Mikhail V wrote:
>>>> Quite often I need raw string literals for concatenating console commands.
>>>>
On 20 April 2017 at 23:54, MRAB wrote:
> On 2017-04-20 22:03, Mikhail V wrote:
>>
>> On 20 April 2017 at 22:43, Random832 wrote:
>>> [snip]
>>>
>>> The best solution I can think of is to have a text editor designed to
>>> parse a strin
On 23 April 2017 at 00:48, Chris Angelico wrote:
> On Sun, Apr 23, 2017 at 8:30 AM, Mikhail V wrote:
>> The purpose is simple: reduce manual work to escape special
>> characters in string literals (and escape non-ASCII characters).
>>
>> Simple usage scenario:
>
On 23 April 2017 at 02:33, Chris Angelico wrote:
> On Sun, Apr 23, 2017 at 10:19 AM, Mikhail V wrote:
>> On 23 April 2017 at 00:48, Chris Angelico wrote:
>>> On Sun, Apr 23, 2017 at 8:30 AM, Mikhail V wrote:
>>>> The purpose is simple: reduce manual work to esc
On 23 April 2017 at 05:03, MRAB wrote:
> On 2017-04-22 23:30, Mikhail V wrote:
>>
>> On 20 April 2017 at 23:54, MRAB wrote:
>> > On 2017-04-20 22:03, Mikhail V wrote:
>> >>
>> >> On 20 April 2017 at 22:43, Random832 wrote:
>> >>> [
> The creator of Scala, Martin Odersky, has proposed introducing Python-like
> significant indentation to Scala and getting rid of braces:
>
> I was playing for a while now with ways to make Scala's syntax
>indentation-based. I always admired the neatness of Python syntax
>and also found
On Sat, 15 Jul 2017 05:50 pm, Marko Rauhamaa wrote:
> Random access to code points is as uninteresting as random access to
> UTF-8 bytes.
> I might want random access to the "Grapheme clusters, a.k.a.real
> characters".
What _real_ characters are you referring to?
If your data has "á" (U00E1), the
>> On Sat, 15 Jul 2017 05:50 pm, Marko Rauhamaa wrote:
>>> Random access to code points is as uninteresting as random access to
>>> UTF-8 bytes. I might want random access to the "Grapheme clusters,
>>> a.k.a.real characters".
>>
>> What _real_ characters are you referring to?
>> If your data has "
ChrisA wrote:
>On Sun, Jul 16, 2017 at 2:33 PM, Rustom Mody wrote:
>> Right now in an adjacent mailing list (debian) I see someone signed off with
>> a
>>
>> grüß
>>
>> I guess the third character is a u with some ‘dirt’
>> Whats the fourth?
>It's a "sharp S".
or "Eszett", is a merge of two s
ChrisA wrote:
>Yep! Nobody would take any notice of the fact that you just put dots
>on all those letters. It's not like it's going to make any difference
>to anything. We're not dealing with matters of life and death here.
>Oh wait.
>https://www.theinquirer.net/inquirer/news/1017243/cellphone-l
On 2017-07-18, Steve D'Aprano wrote:
> That's neither better nor worse than the system used by English and French,
> where letters with dicritics are not distinct letters, but guides to
> pronunciation.
>_Neither system is right or wrong, or better than the other._
If that is said just "not to
Marko Rauhamaa wrote:
>What did you think of my concrete examples, then? (Say, finding
>"Alvárez" with the regular expression "Alv[aá]rez".)
I think that should match both "Alvarez" and "Alvárez" ...?
But firstly, I feel like I need to _guess_ what ideas you
are presenting. Unless I open up Vim a
ChrisA wrote:
>On Wed, Jul 19, 2017 at 6:05 AM, Mikhail V wrote:
>> On 2017-07-18, Steve D'Aprano wrote:
>>
>>> That's neither better nor worse than the system used by English and French,
>>> where letters with dicritics are not distinct letters, but
Steven D'Aprano wrote:
>On Wed, 19 Jul 2017 10:34 am, Mikhail V wrote:
>> Ok, in this narrow context I can also agree.
>> But in slightly wider context that phrase may sound almost like:
>> "neither geometrical shape is better than the other as a basis
>> for
>
> What would you expect this syntax to return?
>
> [x + 1 for x in (0, 1, 2, 999, 3, 4) while x < 5]
>
Nice question BTW
I'd suppose two possible outcomes:
a) It will behave exactly the same as if there was "if" instead of "while"
so [1, 2, 3, 4, 5].
b) It will return syntax error, because "whi
101 - 127 of 127 matches
Mail list logo
