Joe Smith wrote:
Steve Holden [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Jim Jewett wrote:
I think that adding parentheses would help, by at least signalling that
the logic is longer than just the next (single) expression.
level = (0 if absolute_import in self.futures
Fredrik Lundh wrote:
see subject and http://python.org/sf/1368955
comments ?
Fine with me.
Martin
___
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe:
On 3/6/06, Alex Martelli [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Mar 6, 2006, at 9:17 AM, Jim Jewett wrote:
...
I think that adding parentheses would help, by at least signalling
that the logic is longer than just the next (single) expression.
level = (0 if absolute_import in self.futures
On 3/7/06, Jeremy Hylton [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 3/6/06, Alex Martelli [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Mar 6, 2006, at 9:17 AM, Jim Jewett wrote:
...
I think that adding parentheses would help, by at least signalling
that the logic is longer than just the next (single) expression.
Paul Moore wrote:
On 3/7/06, Jeremy Hylton [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 3/6/06, Alex Martelli [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Mar 6, 2006, at 9:17 AM, Jim Jewett wrote:
...
I think that adding parentheses would help, by at least signalling
that the logic is longer than just the next (single)
Hi,
while as is being made a keyword, I remembered parallels between with
and a proposal made some time ago:
with expr as f:
do something with f
while expr as f:
do something with f
if expr as f:
do something with f
elif expr as f:
do something else with f
What do you think?
I suggest you file those as products of an overactive imagination. :-)
Have you even tried to define precise semantics for any of those, like
the expansion of with E as V: B in PEP 343?
--Guido
On 3/7/06, Georg Brandl [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi,
while as is being made a keyword, I
On Mar 7, 2006, at 6:15 AM, Georg Brandl wrote:
Hi,
while as is being made a keyword, I remembered parallels between
with
and a proposal made some time ago:
with expr as f:
do something with f
while expr as f:
do something with f
if expr as f:
do something with f
On 3/7/06, Paul Moore [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The parentheses around genexps were (AFAICT)
different - without them, the grammar was ambiguous,
so some way of disambiguating was needed.
The out-of-order evaluation is a very large change,
because now we have a situation where normal
parsing
Jim Jewett wrote:
On 3/7/06, Paul Moore [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The parentheses around genexps were (AFAICT)
different - without them, the grammar was ambiguous,
so some way of disambiguating was needed.
The out-of-order evaluation is a very large change,
because now we have a
On Mar 7, 2006, at 7:29 AM, Steve Holden wrote:
...
In fact, I think the below examples are reasonable uses
that do a better job of expressing intent than the if
statement would. I just don't like the mental backtrack
they require, and would like some sort of advance
warning.
We like to invite you to a survey about the working conditions in
Free/Open-Source Software development. This survey is conducted by the
Open-Source Research Group of the University of Würzburg (Germany).
We will compare work design in open source and proprietary software
development. Our
At 06:29 AM 3/7/2006 +0100, Fredrik Lundh wrote:
see subject and http://python.org/sf/1368955
comments ?
Why can't the UUIDs be immutable, so they can be dictionary keys? Also, it
would be nice if you could just call UUID() to create a generic UUID in a
platform-appropriate way. PEAK's uuid
On 3/7/06, Phillip J. Eby [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
At 06:29 AM 3/7/2006 +0100, Fredrik Lundh wrote:
see subject and http://python.org/sf/1368955
comments ?
would be nice if you could just call UUID() to create a generic UUID in a
platform-appropriate way. PEAK's uuid module does this such
Who 'owns' Modules/_bsddb.c, if anyone? The file doesn't mention whether it's a fork of pybsddb maintained separately or not. I ask because it seems to contain a number of refleaks, and I wanted to fix some of the style issues while I'm at it (and maybe even Py_ssize_t it,) but I'll happily send
Having UUID in the stdlib would be very helpful.
Philip Eby writes:
I like the idea of having RFC-compliant UUIDs in the stdlib, but I really
want immutable ones, preferably without {} in their standard string
representation. And efficient use of platform-local UUID generation APIs
would
Philip Eby writes:
...
I completely agree with Philip.
Sorry, I mean of course Phillip.
Bill
___
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe:
[HPH the BDFL]
I suggest you file those as products of an overactive imagination. :-)
At least not only mine. ;)
Have you even tried to define precise semantics for any of those, like
the expansion of with E as V: B in PEP 343?
Easily.
if expr as name:
BLOCK
would be equivalent to
On 3/7/06, Georg Brandl [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Have you even tried to define precise semantics for any of those, like
the expansion of with E as V: B in PEP 343?
Easily.
if expr as name:
BLOCK
would be equivalent to
name = expr
if name:
BLOCK
del name
You need to be a
Alex Martelli wrote:
I think the best use cases for 'assignment inside an if or while'
condition, as far as they go, require `capturing' a SUB-expression of
the condition, rather than the whole condition. E.g., in C,
while ( (x=next_x()) threshold ) ...
being able to capture (by
Georg Brandl [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
or something like
m = re.match(...)
if m.group(1) as filename:
do something with filename
Except that m could be None, which would raise an exception during the
.group(1) call. Perhaps you meant...
m = re.match(...)
if m and m.group(1) as
Guido van Rossum wrote:
On 3/7/06, Georg Brandl [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Have you even tried to define precise semantics for any of those, like
the expansion of with E as V: B in PEP 343?
Easily.
if expr as name:
BLOCK
would be equivalent to
name = expr
if name:
BLOCK
del
Thinking over it, this is too much a difference between the with-as and
my as, so I'm abandoning this idea. My as would just have been a
shortcut to avoid writing longish expressions that have to be checked for
true-ness and then tinkered with.
ML has a similar feature, which you may consider
Thomas Wouters wrote:
Who 'owns' Modules/_bsddb.c, if anyone?
It's a fork of pybsddb, originally contributed by Gregory Smith (*).
For all practical purposes, he also owns it, but hasn't objected
to others making changes in the past.
At the time it was imported, I recall the plan was to
On 3/7/06, Andrew Koenig [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
As it turns out, Python has similar ways of decomposing data structures:
(x, y) = foo
or
def bar((x, y)):
# etc.
and I have sometimes wished I could write
z as (x, y) = foo
or
def
Function arguments are not covered by this trick, but
def bar(z):
(x,y) = z
probably isn't too much overhead...
It's not the machine overhead, it's the intellectual overhead. I know there
are some who will disagree with me, but I would find it easier to read
def
I know that my unittests should not rely on this, but is this change
intended?
c:\sf\ctypes_headpy24
Python 2.4.2 (#67, Sep 28 2005, 12:41:11) [MSC v.1310 32 bit (Intel)] on win32
Type help, copyright, credits or license for more information.
str(Exception)
'exceptions.Exception'
^Z
On 3/7/06, Thomas Heller [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I know that my unittests should not rely on this, but is this change
intended?
c:\sf\ctypes_headpy24
Python 2.4.2 (#67, Sep 28 2005, 12:41:11) [MSC v.1310 32 bit (Intel)] on win32
Type help, copyright, credits or license for more information.
Paul Moore wrote:
On 3/7/06, Phillip J. Eby [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
At 06:29 AM 3/7/2006 +0100, Fredrik Lundh wrote:
see subject and http://python.org/sf/1368955
comments ?
would be nice if you could just call UUID() to create a generic UUID in a
platform-appropriate way. PEAK's uuid
On Tue, Mar 07, 2006 at 10:19:03PM +0100, Thomas Heller wrote:
Too bad that ctypes whill be an optional module, so I'm
not sure if it could be used in the Python library itself.
try:
import ctypes
except ImportError:
def fallback():
...
else:
def real_thing():
...
Oleg.
--
Oleg Broytmann wrote:
On Tue, Mar 07, 2006 at 10:19:03PM +0100, Thomas Heller wrote:
Too bad that ctypes whill be an optional module, so I'm
not sure if it could be used in the Python library itself.
try:
import ctypes
except ImportError:
def fallback():
...
else:
def
On 3/7/06, Brett Cannon [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 3/7/06, Thomas Heller [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I know that my unittests should not rely on this, but is this change
intended?
c:\sf\ctypes_headpy24
Python 2.4.2 (#67, Sep 28 2005, 12:41:11) [MSC v.1310 32 bit (Intel)] on
win32
Frederick suggested a change to quit/exit a while ago, so it wasn't just
a string with slight instructional purpose, but actually useful. The
discussion was surprisingly involved, despite the change really trully
not being that big. And everyone drifted off, too tired from the
discussion to
Works for me.
On 3/7/06, Ian Bicking [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Frederick suggested a change to quit/exit a while ago, so it wasn't just
a string with slight instructional purpose, but actually useful. The
discussion was surprisingly involved, despite the change really trully
not being that
On Tue, 2006-03-07 at 13:35 -0800, Guido van Rossum wrote:
IMO it shouldn't be fixed. Classic classes define their str to print
the module name and class name with a dot in between; new-style
classes use the same format as their repr. Making exceptions new-style
classes is going to break a
On 3/7/06, Barry Warsaw [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Tue, 2006-03-07 at 13:35 -0800, Guido van Rossum wrote:
IMO it shouldn't be fixed. Classic classes define their str to print
the module name and class name with a dot in between; new-style
classes use the same format as their repr. Making
Ian Bicking wrote:
class Quitter(object):
def __init__(self, name):
self.name = name
def __repr__(self):
return 'Use %s() to exit' % self.name
def __call__(self):
raise SystemExit()
quit = Quitter('quit')
exit = Quitter('exit')
This is not very
do {
cmd = readline()
do_stuff_with_cmd(cmd);
} while (!strcmp(cmd, quit));
printf(Bye!);
exit(0);
KISS?
--
mvh Björn
___
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe:
I am probably the biggest proponent of magic variables, but this just
won't work.
First, commands and lines are not the same thing, so:
print \
exit
breaks your propossal.
Second, quit and exit are bindable variables, and you need to be sure
that they still mean _quit_, and not something else.
BJörn Lindqvist wrote:
do {
cmd = readline()
do_stuff_with_cmd(cmd);
} while (!strcmp(cmd, quit));
printf(Bye!);
exit(0);
KISS?
I believe there were concerns that rebinding quit would cause strange
behavior. E.g.:
quit = False
while not quit: ...
quit
$
Or:
On 3/7/06, Ian Bicking [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Frederick suggested a change to quit/exit a while ago, so it wasn't just
a string with slight instructional purpose, but actually useful. The
discussion was surprisingly involved, despite the change really trully
not being that big. And
On 3/8/06, Brett Cannon [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 3/7/06, Ian Bicking [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: class Quitter(object):def __init__(self, name):self.name
= namedef __repr__(self):return 'Use %s() to exit' % self.namedef __call__(self):raise SystemExit() quit = Quitter('quit')
exit =
On 3/7/06, Guido van Rossum [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 3/7/06, Barry Warsaw [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Tue, 2006-03-07 at 13:35 -0800, Guido van Rossum wrote:
IMO it shouldn't be fixed. Classic classes define their str to print
the module name and class name with a dot in between;
Ian reproposed:
class Quitter(object):
def __init__(self, name):
self.name = name
def __repr__(self):
return 'Use %s() to exit' % self.name
def __call__(self):
raise SystemExit()
The one change I would suggest is the string
Paul Moore wrote:
+0 for mentioning parens around conditional expressions in PEP 8. But
it's aready covered by the general code should be readable in my
view.
Indeed. Writing readable code is ultimately the
responsibility of the person doing the writing.
It's enough that you *can* put
Alex Martelli wrote:
On Mar 7, 2006, at 6:15 AM, Georg Brandl wrote:
with expr as f:
do something with f
I expect the with example here is a red herring,
not intended to have anything to do with the new
with statement that's just been added.
I think the best use cases for 'assignment
Greg Ewing wrote:
Jeremy Hylton wrote:
Perhaps the solution
is to require parens around all expressions, a simple
consistent rule.
I actually designed a language with that feature once.
It was an exercise in minimality, with hardly anything
built-in -- all the arithmetic operators,
On 3/7/06, Martin v. Löwis [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Thomas Wouters wrote: Who 'owns' Modules/_bsddb.c, if anyone?It's a fork of pybsddb, originally contributed by Gregory Smith (*).For all practical purposes, he also owns it, but hasn't objected
to others making changes in the past.At the time it
On 2/27/06, Tim Peters [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Neal plugged another hole later, but-- alas --I have seen the same shy
failure since then on WinXP. One of the most recent buildbot test
runs saw it too, on a non-Windows box:
49 matches
Mail list logo
