On Tuesday, June 3, 2014 6:27:25 AM UTC+5:30, Ben Finney wrote:
> Steven D'Aprano writes:
> > On Mon, 02 Jun 2014 20:05:29 +0200, robertw89 wrote:
> > > I invoked the wrong bug.py :/ , works fine now (this happens to me
> > > when im a bit tired sometimes...).
> > Clarity in naming is an excellen
On Tuesday, June 3, 2014 10:36:37 AM UTC+5:30, Deb Wyatt wrote:
> That was just the first question. What does immutable really mean
> if you can add items to a list? and concatenate strings? I don't
> understand enough to even ask a comprehensible question, I guess.
It is with some pleasure that
On Tuesday, June 3, 2014 11:42:30 AM UTC+5:30, jmf wrote:
> after thinking no
Yes [Also called Oui]
--
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
On Wednesday, June 4, 2014 3:11:12 AM UTC+5:30, Paul Sokolovsky wrote:
> With that in mind, I, as many others, think that forcing Unicode bloat
> upon people by default is the most controversial feature of Python3.
> The reason is that you go very long way dealing with languages of the
> people of
On Wednesday, June 4, 2014 9:22:54 AM UTC+5:30, Chris Angelico wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 4, 2014 at 1:37 PM, Rustom Mody wrote:
> > And so a pure BMP-supporting implementation may be a reasonable
> > compromise. [As long as no surrogate-pairs are there]
> Not if you're working
On Wednesday, June 4, 2014 10:50:21 AM UTC+5:30, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
> On Tue, 03 Jun 2014 20:37:27 -0700, Rustom Mody wrote:
> > And so a pure BMP-supporting implementation may be a reasonable
> > compromise. [As long as no surrogate-pairs are there]
> At the cost on
On Wednesday, June 4, 2014 4:20:01 PM UTC+5:30, alister wrote:
> The language is ENGLISH so the correct spelling is Centre regional
> variations my be common but they are incorrect
"my"?
O mee Oo my -- cockney (or Aussie) pedant??
--
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
For the double spacing rubbish produced by GG, I hacked up a bit of
emacs lisp code
-
(defun clean-gg ()
(interactive)
(replace-regexp "^> +\n> +\n> +$" "-=\=-" nil 0 (point-max))
(flush-lines "> +$" 0 (point-max))
(replace-regexp "-=\=-" "" nil 0 (point-max)))
(global-set-key (kbd
On Thursday, February 26, 2015 at 10:16:11 PM UTC+5:30, Sam Raker wrote:
> I'm 100% in favor of expanding Unicode until the sun goes dark. Doing so
> helps solve the problems affecting speakers of "underserved"
> languages--access and language preservation. Speakers of Mongolian, Cherokee,
> Geo
On Thursday, February 26, 2015 at 10:33:44 PM UTC+5:30, Terry Reedy wrote:
> On 2/26/2015 8:24 AM, Chris Angelico wrote:
> > On Thu, Feb 26, 2015 at 11:40 PM, Rustom Mody wrote:
> >> Wrote something up on why we should stop using ASCII:
> >> http://blog.languager.org/201
On Thursday, February 26, 2015 at 10:33:44 PM UTC+5:30, Terry Reedy wrote:
> You should add emoticons, but not call them or the above 'gibberish'.
Done -- and of course not under gibberish.
I dont really know much how emoji are used but I understand they are.
JFTR I consider it necessary to be re
On Saturday, February 28, 2015 at 9:34:05 PM UTC+5:30, Cousin Stanley wrote:
> > From : Tim Chase
> >
> > A quick google-and-tally for languages
> > and their corresponding number of keywords:
> >
>
> re-sorted
>
> 21 : Lua
> 31 : Python2.x
> 33 : Python3.x
>
On Sunday, March 1, 2015 at 10:32:00 PM UTC+5:30, Marko Rauhamaa wrote:
> Mark Lawrence :
>
> > Are you suggesting that we Brits have a single "home accent"? If you
> > are, you need to stand up as your voice is rather muffled. That by the
> > way is a British expression that may or may not be u
On Monday, March 2, 2015 at 4:25:04 PM UTC+5:30, Jonas Wielicki wrote:
> I wonder whether this discussion has anything to do with the Uncanny
> Valley [1].
>[1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uncanny_valley
That's right.
And thanks for the reference.
Had seen that some time but forgot the n
On Tuesday, March 3, 2015 at 8:21:53 AM UTC+5:30, Mario Figueiredo wrote:
> On Mon, 02 Mar 2015 17:30:42 +0200, Marko Rauhamaa wrote:
>
> >Steven D'Aprano:
> >
> >> But for Britons to use American English is, in a way, to cease to be
> >> Britons at all.
> >
> >Did Hugh Laurie have to turn in his
On Tuesday, March 3, 2015 at 10:02:30 AM UTC+5:30, Mario Figueiredo wrote:
> On Mon, 2 Mar 2015 19:51:31 -0800 (PST), Rustom Mody wrote:
> >
> >I dont know what you are saying Mario or even whom you are addressing
>
> I was replying directly to Marko. I don't think it is
On Thursday, February 26, 2015 at 10:33:44 PM UTC+5:30, Terry Reedy wrote:
> On 2/26/2015 8:24 AM, Chris Angelico wrote:
> > On Thu, Feb 26, 2015 at 11:40 PM, Rustom Mody wrote:
> >> Wrote something up on why we should stop using ASCII:
> >> http://blog.languager.org/201
On Wednesday, March 4, 2015 at 12:14:11 AM UTC+5:30, Chris Angelico wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 4, 2015 at 5:03 AM, Rustom Mody wrote:
> > What I was trying to say expanded here
> > http://blog.languager.org/2015/03/whimsical-unicode.html
> > [Hope the word 'whimsical' is
On Wednesday, March 4, 2015 at 8:24:40 AM UTC+5:30, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
> Rustom Mody wrote:
>
> > On Thursday, February 26, 2015 at 10:33:44 PM UTC+5:30, Terry Reedy wrote:
> >> On 2/26/2015 8:24 AM, Chris Angelico wrote:
> >> > On Thu, Feb 2
On Wednesday, March 4, 2015 at 9:35:28 AM UTC+5:30, Rustom Mody wrote:
> On Wednesday, March 4, 2015 at 8:24:40 AM UTC+5:30, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
> > Rustom Mody wrote:
> >
> > > On Thursday, February 26, 2015 at 10:33:44 PM UTC+5:30, Terry Reedy wrote:
>
On Wednesday, March 4, 2015 at 12:07:06 AM UTC+5:30, jmf wrote:
> Le mardi 3 mars 2015 19:04:06 UTC+1, Rustom Mody a écrit :
> > On Thursday, February 26, 2015 at 10:33:44 PM UTC+5:30, Terry Reedy wrote:
> > > On 2/26/2015 8:24 AM, Chris Angelico wrote:
> > > > On
On Wednesday, March 4, 2015 at 10:25:24 AM UTC+5:30, Chris Angelico wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 4, 2015 at 3:45 PM, Rustom Mody wrote:
> >
> > It lists some examples of software that somehow break/goof going from
> > BMP-only
> > unicode to 7.0 unicode.
> >
> >
On Wednesday, March 4, 2015 at 6:46:32 PM UTC+5:30, Marko Rauhamaa wrote:
> llanitedave :
>
> > Seems the ultimate in irony when a language invented by a Dutchman and
> > named after a British comedy troupe gets bogged down in an argument
> > about whether its users are sufficiently "American".
>
On Thursday, March 5, 2015 at 1:03:13 AM UTC+5:30, Marko Rauhamaa wrote:
> Steven D'Aprano:
>
> > Care to enlighten us then? Because your anecdote doesn't appear to
> > have even the most tenuous relationship to this discussion.
>
> Even more important, when you talk about Python or other compute
On Thursday, March 5, 2015 at 7:36:32 PM UTC+5:30, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
> Rustom Mody wrote:
>
> > On Wednesday, March 4, 2015 at 10:25:24 AM UTC+5:30, Chris Angelico wrote:
> >> On Wed, Mar 4, 2015 at 3:45 PM, Rustom Mody wrote:
> >> >
> >> &g
On Thursday, March 5, 2015 at 10:49:54 AM UTC+5:30, Marko Rauhamaa wrote:
> Rustom Mody:
>
> > You keep talking of accent.
> > At first I thought you were using the word figuratively or else joking.
> > Im now beginning to wonder if you mean it literally.
> > If s
On Friday, March 6, 2015 at 10:50:35 AM UTC+5:30, Chris Angelico wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 6, 2015 at 3:53 PM, Rustom Mody wrote:
> > My conclusion: Early adopters of unicode -- Windows and Java -- were
> > punished
> > for their early adoption. You can blame the unicode consorti
On Friday, March 6, 2015 at 2:33:11 PM UTC+5:30, Rustom Mody wrote:
> Lets please stick to UTF-16 shall we?
>
> Now tell me:
> - Is it broken or not?
> - Is it widely used or not?
> - Should programmers be careful of it or not?
> - Should programmers be warned about it
On Friday, March 6, 2015 at 3:57:12 AM UTC+5:30, rand...@fastmail.us wrote:
> It's been brought up on Stack Overflow that the "in" operator (on
> tuples, and by my testing on dict and list, as well as dict lookup) uses
> object identity as a shortcut, and returns true immediately if the
> object be
On Friday, March 6, 2015 at 3:24:48 PM UTC+5:30, Chris Angelico wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 6, 2015 at 8:02 PM, Rustom Mody wrote:
> >> Broken systems can be shown up by anything. Suppose you have a program
> >> that breaks when it gets a NUL character (not unknown in C code); is
&g
On Friday, March 6, 2015 at 3:31:58 PM UTC+5:30, Chris Angelico wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 6, 2015 at 8:50 PM, Rustom Mody wrote:
> > In a language like python with decent exceptions we do not need nans.
>
> Not so. I could perhaps accept that we don't need signalling NaNs, as
&g
On Friday, March 6, 2015 at 8:20:22 PM UTC+5:30, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
> Rustom Mody wrote:
>
> > On Friday, March 6, 2015 at 10:50:35 AM UTC+5:30, Chris Angelico wrote:
>
> [snip example of an analogous situation with NULs]
>
> > Strawman.
>
> Sigh. If
On Friday, March 6, 2015 at 9:08:07 AM UTC+5:30, Chris Angelico wrote:
> Allow me to summarize this subthread:
>
> * sohcahtoa makes a comment implying that this list is full of nerds
> who know nothing about dating. Gender-nonspecific and most likely
> self-deprecating as much as insulting.
> * I
On Friday, March 6, 2015 at 10:13:55 PM UTC+5:30, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
> Rustom Mody wrote:
>
> > On Friday, March 6, 2015 at 3:57:12 AM UTC+5:30, rand...@fastmail.us
> > wrote:
> >> It's been brought up on Stack Overflow that the "in" operator
On Friday, March 6, 2015 at 10:48:07 PM UTC+5:30, Chris Angelico wrote:
> On Sat, Mar 7, 2015 at 4:04 AM, Rustom Mody wrote:
> > You dont grok your theory of computation very well do you?
> >
> > def foo(x): return x + x
> > def bar(x): return x + x
> > def b
On Friday, March 6, 2015 at 10:29:19 PM UTC+5:30, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
> Rustom Mody wrote:
>
> > On Friday, March 6, 2015 at 3:31:58 PM UTC+5:30, Chris Angelico wrote:
> >> On Fri, Mar 6, 2015 at 8:50 PM, Rustom Mody wrote:
> >> > In a language like p
On Saturday, March 7, 2015 at 5:04:02 AM UTC+5:30, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
> Rustom Mody wrote:
>
> > On Friday, March 6, 2015 at 10:13:55 PM UTC+5:30, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
> >> Rustom Mody wrote:
> >>
> >> > On Friday, March 6, 2015 at 3
On Saturday, March 7, 2015 at 10:36:54 AM UTC+5:30, Gregory Ewing wrote:
> alister wrote:
> > a popular UK soap made an extreme
> > effort not to show a cross or Christmas tree during a church wedding in
> > case it "offended not-Christians".
>
> In today's climate, when offending certain variet
On Saturday, March 7, 2015 at 11:49:44 PM UTC+5:30, Mark Lawrence wrote:
> On 07/03/2015 17:16, Marko Rauhamaa wrote:
> > Mark Lawrence:
> >
> >> It would clearly help if you were to type in the correct UK English
> >> accent.
> >
> > Your ad-hominem-to-contribution ratio is alarmingly high.
> >
>
On Saturday, March 7, 2015 at 11:41:53 AM UTC+5:30, Terry Reedy wrote:
> On 3/6/2015 11:20 AM, Rustom Mody wrote:
>
> > =
> > pp = "💩"
> > print (pp)
> > =
> > Try open it in idle3 and you get (at least I get):
> >
&g
On Saturday, March 7, 2015 at 4:39:48 PM UTC+5:30, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
> Rustom Mody wrote:
> > This includes not just bug-prone-system code such as Java and Windows but
> > seemingly working code such as python 3.
>
> What Unicode bugs do you think Python 3.
On Monday, March 9, 2015 at 7:39:42 AM UTC+5:30, Cameron Simpson wrote:
> On 07Mar2015 22:09, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
> >Rustom Mody wrote:
> >>[...big snip...]
> >> Some parts are here some earlier and from my memory.
> >> If details wrong p
On Monday, March 9, 2015 at 12:05:05 PM UTC+5:30, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
> Chris Angelico wrote:
>
> > As to the notion of rejecting the construction of strings containing
> > these invalid codepoints, I'm not sure. Are there any languages out
> > there that have a Unicode string type that require
This is more a question about standard terminology/conventions than about
semantics - of course assuming I understand :-)
Say I have a simple yielding function:
def foo(x):
yield x+1
yield x+2
And I have
g = foo(2)
If I look at type, g's type is 'generator' whereas foo is just plain-ol
Guess I should be pleased that I am doing as good as you (and Chris) describe.
For some reason or not I am not...
On Thursday, March 12, 2015 at 9:58:07 PM UTC+5:30, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
> Rustom Mody wrote:
>
> > This is more a question about standard terminology/conve
On Thursday, March 12, 2015 at 11:25:32 PM UTC+5:30, Marko Rauhamaa wrote:
> Rustom Mody :
>
> > I guess we need
> > 1. A clear ontology of the base concepts (which is a buzzword for
> > nailed-down terminology)
>
> According to the documentation, a function whose
On Friday, March 13, 2015 at 9:00:17 AM UTC+5:30, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
> Rustom Mody wrote:
>
> > On Thursday, March 12, 2015 at 11:25:32 PM UTC+5:30, Marko Rauhamaa wrote:
> >> Rustom Mody :
> >>
> >> > I guess we need
> >> > 1. A c
On Friday, March 13, 2015 at 1:53:50 PM UTC+5:30, Chris Angelico wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 13, 2015 at 4:28 PM, Rustom Mody wrote:
> > And even there I would expect generators to close with StopIteration
> > Whereas I would expect coroutines to close (on close method) with
> > G
On Saturday, March 14, 2015 at 9:15:39 AM UTC+5:30, Paul Rubin wrote:
> Mario Figueiredo writes:
> >>Question: How much money is this group, taken as the whole of the python
> >>world, spending on remote hosting per month?
> > I'd wager very little, since most options are completely free.
>
> Oh
On Saturday, March 14, 2015 at 3:28:11 PM UTC+5:30, Chris Angelico wrote:
> On Sat, Mar 14, 2015 at 12:35 PM, Dave Angel wrote:
> > Not if you don't take it to him. If you just call him on the phone, and say
> > "Jimmy doesn't work" he doesn't even know what make and model the vehicle
> > is. Or
On Saturday, March 14, 2015 at 11:34:27 AM UTC+5:30, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
>
> A generator (function) may be a function which returns an iterator,...
I find "generator-function" misleading in the same way that "pineapple"
misleadingly suggests "apple that grows on pines"
A builtin function is
On Saturday, March 14, 2015 at 8:59:22 PM UTC+5:30, Rustom Mody wrote:
> On Saturday, March 14, 2015 at 11:34:27 AM UTC+5:30, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
> >
> > A generator (function) may be a function which returns an iterator,...
>
> I find "generator-function&q
On Saturday, March 14, 2015 at 9:45:10 PM UTC+5:30, Chris Angelico wrote:
> On Sun, Mar 15, 2015 at 2:59 AM, Rustom Mody wrote:
> > Causing all sorts of unnecessary confusions:
> > An int-function returns int and a char*-functions returns char*.
> > Does a void-function return
On Saturday, March 14, 2015 at 10:22:51 PM UTC+5:30, Chris Angelico wrote:
> On Sun, Mar 15, 2015 at 3:33 AM, Rustom Mody wrote:
> > As best as I can see python makes no distinction between such a foo and
> > the more usual function/methods that have no returns.
> > You can I
On Sunday, March 15, 2015 at 1:45:37 AM UTC+5:30, Ian wrote:
> Now which should be considered definitive, the language reference or
> the PEP? This question is not rhetorical; I don't know the answer.
> Regardless of the answer though, the PEP at least illuminates the
> design intent of the termino
On Monday, March 16, 2015 at 6:02:48 PM UTC+5:30, Marko Rauhamaa wrote:
> So what we have now is:
>
> (1) plain iterators
>
> (2) generator iterators
>
> (3) coroutine generator iterators
>
> (1) and (2) are not unified, which I don't like.
Can you expand on that a bit?
It may help to
On Monday, March 16, 2015 at 7:10:03 PM UTC+5:30, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
> And of course, from a comp science theoretic perspective,
> generators are a kind of subroutine, not a kind of type.
You just showed Marko a few posts back, that
A generator is a special case of an iterator.
And you wrote t
On Monday, March 16, 2015 at 7:57:08 PM UTC+5:30, Mark Lawrence wrote:
> On 16/03/2015 14:19, Rustom Mody wrote:
> > ==
> > Anyways...
> >
> > Yes 15 years are past.
> > I dont expect the def can be revoked now.
> > [As far as I am conce
On Monday, March 16, 2015 at 8:07:22 PM UTC+5:30, Rustom Mody wrote:
> I would gladly do that if it was a minor correction here and there.
> But the problem is a bit deeper even though it can be kept mostly¹ in the docs
> and not modify any syntax/semantics of python.
>
> In
On Monday, March 16, 2015 at 11:50:33 PM UTC+5:30, Mark Lawrence wrote:
> On 16/03/2015 14:37, Rustom Mody wrote:
> > On Monday, March 16, 2015 at 7:57:08 PM UTC+5:30, Mark Lawrence wrote:
> >> On 16/03/2015 14:19, Rustom Mody wrote:
> >>> ==
>
On Tuesday, March 17, 2015 at 8:10:16 AM UTC+5:30, Ben Finney wrote:
> Thanks for discussing this, Michael.
>
> Michael Torrie writes:
>
> > For developers things are even more grim. Package managers certainly
> > don't work so well for third-party apps like VirtualBox, LibreOffice,
> > Firefox,
On Tuesday, March 17, 2015 at 8:37:25 AM UTC+5:30, Mark Lawrence wrote:
> >
> > Ok Let me throw out a suggestion:
> > - potato is a generator
> > - tomato is a cursor.
> > Acceptable?
> >
>
> No. In Python potato is a generator function, tomato is a generator.
> Why complicate something that
On Tuesday, March 17, 2015 at 8:55:27 AM UTC+5:30, Mark Lawrence wrote:
> On 17/03/2015 03:18, Rustom Mody wrote:
> > On Tuesday, March 17, 2015 at 8:37:25 AM UTC+5:30, Mark Lawrence wrote:
> >>>
> >>> Ok Let me throw out a suggestion:
> >>>- potato
On Wednesday, March 18, 2015 at 4:06:05 PM UTC+5:30, Robert Clove wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I have a perl script named "my_eth-traffic.pl" which calculates the tx and rx
> speed of the Ethernet interface in Mb.
>
> I want to run this script from another script and want the output in other
> file.
> So i
On Wednesday, March 18, 2015 at 4:23:37 PM UTC+5:30, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
> On Wed, 18 Mar 2015 08:11 pm, Ned Deily wrote:
>
> > In any case, of the two problems noted with Python itself, there is only
> > one that appears to be Python 3 related. That's still not good but I
> > think it would b
On Wednesday, March 18, 2015 at 8:12:12 PM UTC+5:30, Robert Clove wrote:
> ./my_eth_script.pl eth0 M >> a.txt
>
> How can i run this command with subprocess.popen
Something like this I guess?
>>> proc = Popen("cat", shell=True, stdout=open(inname, "w"),
>>> stdin=open(outname,"r"))
inname and
On Wednesday, March 18, 2015 at 11:36:39 PM UTC+5:30, Rustom Mody wrote:
> On Wednesday, March 18, 2015 at 8:12:12 PM UTC+5:30, Robert Clove wrote:
> > ./my_eth_script.pl eth0 M >> a.txt
> >
> > How can i run this command with subprocess.popen
>
> Something
On Thursday, March 19, 2015 at 1:58:29 AM UTC+5:30, Albert-Jan Roskam wrote:
>
> On Wed, Mar 18, 2015 7:06 PM CET Rustom Mody wrote:
>
> >On Wednesday, March 18, 2015 at 8:12:12 PM UTC+5:30, Robert Clove wrote:
> >> ./my_eth_script.pl eth0 M &g
On Friday, March 20, 2015 at 8:27:26 AM UTC+5:30, Victor Hooi wrote:
> Hi Ben,
>
> When I said "deep", I meant, as in, to an arbitrary level of nesting (i.e.
> dicts, containing dicts, containing dicts etc) - sorry if I got the
> terminology wrong.
>
> The two dicts weren't equal by intention -
On Friday, March 20, 2015 at 9:05:19 AM UTC+5:30, Chris Angelico wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 20, 2015 at 2:27 PM, Rustom Mody wrote:
> > Numbers (not complex) satisfy the trichotomy law: ie for any 2 numbers x,y:
> > x < y or x > y o x = y
>
> Real numbers, yes, an
On Friday, March 20, 2015 at 10:39:48 AM UTC+5:30, Ben Finney wrote:
> Chris Angelico writes:
>
> > Real numbers, yes […] but not IEEE floating point. Be careful of that
> > distinction; we're talking about computers here, not mythical numbers.
>
> So real numbers are mythical? IEEE floating poi
On Friday, March 20, 2015 at 12:06:00 PM UTC+5:30, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
> On Friday 20 March 2015 14:47, Rustom Mody wrote:
> > Not too many people are interested in float independent of ℝ except
> > perhaps hardware designers who need to design respecting the IEEE
> &
On Friday, March 20, 2015 at 7:40:31 PM UTC+5:30, Marko Rauhamaa wrote:
> Rustom Mody:
>
> > In all fairness to Chris, there have been notable mathematicians in
> > the last 100 years who have said more or less exactly what Chris is
> > saying: "The set ℝ is no
On Monday, March 23, 2015 at 6:32:26 AM UTC+5:30, Mark Lawrence wrote:
> On 22/03/2015 23:54, vern.muhr wrote:
> > Check out Sikuli at www.sikuli.org. It is an amazing program, and it is
> > scripted in Python (Jython actually)!
> >
> > Good luck.
> >
>
> Only 2.7 again, when are we going to ban
On Tuesday, March 24, 2015 at 7:22:25 AM UTC+5:30, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
> On Tue, 24 Mar 2015 11:59 am, Chris Angelico wrote:
>
>
> > I've never thought of the mathematical definition as being inherently
> > recursive; but as inherently sequential. Sure, you can define counting
> > numbers base
On Tuesday, March 24, 2015 at 8:33:24 AM UTC+5:30, Chris Angelico wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 24, 2015 at 12:52 PM, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
> > On Tue, 24 Mar 2015 11:59 am, Chris Angelico wrote:
> >
> >
> >> I've never thought of the mathematical definition as being inherently
> >> recursive; but as inher
On Tuesday, March 24, 2015 at 8:33:24 AM UTC+5:30, Chris Angelico wrote:
> Mathematics doesn't like defining sequences, except by defining
> functions, and so it has to convert the concept of "defining the
> Fibonacci sequence" into "defining a function F(N) which returns the
> Nth Fibonacci number
On Tuesday, March 24, 2015 at 10:51:11 AM UTC+5:30, Ian wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 23, 2015 at 4:53 PM, Terry Reedy wrote:
> > Iteration with caching, using a mutable default arg to keep the cache
> > private and the function self-contained. This should be faster.
> >
> > def fib(n, _cache=[0,1]):
> >
On Tuesday, March 24, 2015 at 11:50:40 AM UTC+5:30, Rustom Mody wrote:
> On Tuesday, March 24, 2015 at 10:51:11 AM UTC+5:30, Ian wrote:
> > On Mon, Mar 23, 2015 at 4:53 PM, Terry Reedy wrote:
> > > Iteration with caching, using a mutable default arg to keep the cache
> > &g
On Wednesday, March 25, 2015 at 11:23:08 AM UTC+5:30, Paul Rubin wrote:
> kai.peters writes
> > 1 bit images of a size of 1024 x 1280 need to be processed this way,
> > so 1310720 list elements. Also needs to be 2.7 only.
>
> Where are these lists going to come from? Files? Process the file
> d
On Thursday, March 26, 2015 at 12:44:03 AM UTC+5:30, Gary Herron wrote:
> On 03/25/2015 10:29 AM, Manuel Graune wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > I'm looking for a way to supply a condition to an if-statement inside a
> > function body when calling the function. I can sort of get what I want
> > with using ev
On Thursday, March 26, 2015 at 11:30:57 AM UTC+5:30, Chris Angelico wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 26, 2015 at 3:02 PM, Rustom Mody wrote:
> > [And BTW
> > help(filter) in python2 is much better documention than in python3
> > ]
>
> Python 2.7.3 (default, Mar 13 2014, 11:03:
On Friday, March 27, 2015 at 7:26:54 AM UTC+5:30, Chris Angelico wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 27, 2015 at 12:41 PM, Rustom Mody wrote:
> > On a more specific note, its the 1st line:
> >
> > class filter(object)
> >
> > which knocks me off.
> > If a more restr
On Friday, March 27, 2015 at 7:56:16 AM UTC+5:30, Ian wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 26, 2015 at 7:56 PM, Chris Angelico wrote:
> >> On a more specific note, its the 1st line:
> >>
> >> class filter(object)
> >>
> >> which knocks me off.
> >> If a more restricted type from the ABC was shown which exactly ca
On Friday, March 27, 2015 at 10:05:21 AM UTC+5:30, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
> On Fri, 27 Mar 2015 01:21 pm, Rustom Mody wrote:
>
> > Anyway my point is that in python (after 2.2??) saying something is an
> > object is a bit of a tautology -- ie verbiage without information.
&
On Saturday, March 28, 2015 at 5:57:08 AM UTC+5:30, Larry Hudson wrote:
> On 03/26/2015 06:56 PM, Chris Angelico wrote:
> > On Fri, Mar 27, 2015 at 12:41 PM, Rustom Mody wrote:
> [snip]
> >> After selecting the line above [inside python inside help(filter) ]for
> >>
On Saturday, March 28, 2015 at 6:26:26 AM UTC+5:30, Ian wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 27, 2015 at 6:33 PM, Mario Figueiredo wrote:
> > On Sat, 28 Mar 2015 10:39:04 +1100, Ben Finney wrote:
> >
> >>Jamie Willis writes:
> >>
> >>> This could be written as:
> >>>
> >>> hello = "hello world "
> >>
On Saturday, March 28, 2015 at 11:56:39 AM UTC+5:30, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
> On Sat, 28 Mar 2015 03:18 pm, Rustom Mody wrote:
>
> > One thing that is a bit laborious in python are object initializers:
> >
> > self.attr1 = field1
> > self.attr2 = field2
>
On Saturday, March 28, 2015 at 9:51:50 PM UTC+5:30, Rustom Mody wrote:
> So if the VB model is followed, it is purely a syntactic (ie not type-related)
> question whether an identifier is an adorned variable or an attribute of
> something else. The preceding dot is the disambiguator.
On Sunday, March 29, 2015 at 9:47:00 AM UTC+5:30, Ian wrote:
> On Sat, Mar 28, 2015 at 9:05 AM, Mario Figueiredo wrote:
> > Neiter the language. The dot symbol is a delimiter in the python
> > grammar. Not an operator. And also defined as a delimiter in the
> > official documentation, right after o
On Monday, March 30, 2015 at 8:37:13 AM UTC+5:30, Chris Angelico wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 30, 2015 at 1:51 PM, Paul Rubin wrote:
> > One way is take reports like John's seriously and receive them
> > with thanks, instead of attacking the messenger.
>
> If a messenger wants to be thanked, he should st
On Monday, March 30, 2015 at 10:05:37 AM UTC+5:30, Paul Rubin wrote:
> 2b. John, thank you for describing your experience and making the
> community's picture of the current overall state of Python 3 more
> accurate. It was apparently a bit too rosy before, and we should avoid
> fostering unrealis
On Saturday, March 21, 2015 at 11:58:43 AM UTC+5:30, Marko Rauhamaa wrote:
> Rustom Mody :
>
> > However I am talking some historical facts, viz: Because some nuts did
> > the 20th century equivalent of: "Break each others' heads about how
> > many angels can dan
On Wednesday, April 1, 2015 at 8:57:15 AM UTC+5:30, catperson wrote:
> I am new to programming, though not new to computers. I'm looking to
> teach myself Python 3 and am working my way through a tutorial. At
> the point I'm at in the tutorial I am tasked with parsing out an XML
> file created wi
On Wednesday, April 1, 2015 at 8:57:15 AM UTC+5:30, catperson wrote:
> I'm hoping with enough reading I can experiment and work my way
> through the problem and end up with a hopefully clear understanding of
> the ElementTree module and Dictionairies.
Also:
If you are not familiar with dictionar
On Friday, April 3, 2015 at 12:43:32 PM UTC+5:30, Marko Rauhamaa wrote:
> 3. Arguing about definitions is silly. Is 0 a natural number? Is 1 a
> prime number?
Speaking about silliness of definitions, I was knocked out in class by this
today:
>>> r"\""
'\\"'
Seeing the docs
https://docs.pyt
On Friday, April 3, 2015 at 8:10:54 PM UTC+5:30, Chris Angelico wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 3, 2015 at 11:52 PM, Rustom Mody wrote:
> > Speaking about silliness of definitions, I was knocked out in class by this
> > today:
> >
> >>>> r"\""
> >
On Saturday, April 4, 2015 at 1:52:20 AM UTC+5:30, Dave Angel wrote:
> On 04/03/2015 08:50 AM, Saran A wrote:
> > On Friday, April 3, 2015 at 8:05:14 AM UTC-4, Dave Angel wrote:
> >> On 04/02/2015 07:43 PM, Saran A wrote:
> >
> > I addressed most of the issues. I do admit that, as a novice, I feel
On Friday, April 10, 2015 at 2:18:22 PM UTC+5:30, Pavel S wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I noticed interesting behaviour. Since I don't have python3 installation
> here, I tested that on Python 2.7.
>
> Well known feature is that try..except block can catch multiple exceptions
> listed in a tuple:
>
>
> ex
On Saturday, April 11, 2015 at 7:53:31 AM UTC+5:30, Dave Angel wrote:
> On 04/10/2015 09:42 PM, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
> > On Sat, 11 Apr 2015 05:31 am, sohcahtoa82 wrote:
> >
> >> It isn't document because it is expected. Why would the exception get
> >> caught if you're not writing code to catch
1101 - 1200 of 1750 matches
Mail list logo
