On Sunday 13 March 2005 18:35, Robey Pointer wrote:
[on the os.access unicode fix]
Ok, I'm convinced - Martin, can you check this in?
--
Anthony Baxter [EMAIL PROTECTED]
It's never too late to have a happy childhood.
___
Python-Dev mailing list
Kurt B. Kaiser wrote:
I had some strange experiences.
Weird indeed.
I downloaded the 2.4.1c1 installer to the desktop and clicked on it.
It complained that it couldn't access the installer.
Do you happen to remember the precise error message?
I then clicked on the 2.4.1b2 installer and that
Martin,
This is somewhat of a corner case, but maybe worth investigating:
To check what I mentioned on comp.lang.python earlier, I ran the installer
again (with 2.4.1 still intact), selected the Change Python 2.4.1c1 radio
button, clicked the Finish Button, clicked the Advanced button, clicked
-Original Message-
From: Martin v. Lowis [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Saturday, March 12, 2005 3:12 PM
To: Leeuw van der, Tim
Cc: python-dev@python.org
Subject: Re: [Python-Dev] Python2.4.1c1 and win32com
Leeuw van der, Tim wrote:
The generated files crash the Python interpreter
[Nick Coghlan]
That 'x in seq' bit still shouts containment to me rather than
iteration, though.
Perhaps repurposing 'from':
(x from seq if f(x))
That rather breaks TOOWTDI though (since it is essentially new syntax
for a for loop). And I have other hopes for the meaning of (x
There are a few design choices we could have made for sum(); in
particular, for non-empty sequences we could not have used the
identity element (the optional second argument). As it is, we get
unjustified but understandable complaints that sum() only supports
numbers. An alternative design could
On Sun, 13 Mar 2005, Greg Ewing wrote:
Brian Sabbey wrote:
I prefer re-using the 'for' loop for this purpose because it allows the
problem to be solved in a general way by re-using a structure with which
most users are already familiar, and uses generators, which are easier to
use in this case
Anthony Baxter wrote:
Ok, I'm convinced - Martin, can you check this in?
Done!
Martin
___
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe:
Brian Sabbey wrote:
The problem with creating a new mechanism is that sometimes you will
want to loop. For example, reading a bunch of items from a shared
resource, modifying them, and sending them back. A new, non-looping
mechanism will not be adequate for this because it cannot loop,
If
On Mon, 14 Mar 2005, Greg Ewing wrote:
Brian Sabbey wrote:
The problem with creating a new mechanism is that sometimes you will want
to loop. For example, reading a bunch of items from a shared resource,
modifying them, and sending them back. A new, non-looping mechanism will
not be adequate
Guido van Rossum wrote:
- the identity (defaulting to 0) if the sequence is empty
- the first and only element if the sequence only has one element
- (...(((A + B) + C) + D) + ...) if the sequence has more than one element
While this might be reasonable if the identity
argument is not specified, I
Brian Sabbey wrote:
How about something like below? In the same way
that self is passed behind the scenes as the first argument, so can
the thunk be.
with stopwatch() result dt:
a()
b()
print 'it took', dt, 'seconds to compute'
Something like that would be better, yes. Maybe even just
[GvR]
- Before anybody asks, I really do think the reason this is
requested
at all is really just to save typing; there isn't the avoid double
evaluation argument that helped acceptance for assignment operators
(+= etc.), and I find redability is actually improved with 'for'.
{Neil
[Guido van Rossum]
- the identity (defaulting to 0) if the sequence is empty
- the first and only element if the sequence only has one element
- (...(((A + B) + C) + D) + ...) if the sequence has more than one element
[Greg Ewing]
While this might be reasonable if the identity
argument
Martin v. Löwis [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I downloaded the 2.4.1c1 installer to the desktop and clicked on it.
It complained that it couldn't access the installer.
Do you happen to remember the precise error message?
This installation package could not be opened.
I then clicked on the
That is like Lisp's +, must be good :P
Michael
On Sun, 13 Mar 2005 08:38:42 -0800, Guido van Rossum
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
There are a few design choices we could have made for sum(); in
particular, for non-empty sequences we could not have used the
identity element (the optional second
16 matches
Mail list logo
