Re: running python 2 vs 3
On 2014-03-20, Terry Reedy wrote: > That must be the only one you imported. So it is. Thank you. nb -- https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: running python 2 vs 3
On 2014-03-20, Ned Batchelder wrote: > On 3/20/14 3:07 PM, Eric Jacoboni wrote: >> With Arch-Linux, python is python3... >> > Yes, and they have been told many times that this was foolish and wrong, > but it persists, much to our pain. I've read that 2.7 is the defacto std for python (default on Slack 14.1). I installed py3 on Slack box cuz I'd gotten the little "Programming the Raspberry Pi" book, which is a pretty good lil' book, clarifying many confusing (to me) python issues. Only prob is, it's fer python 3x. I guess I coulda kept the two platforms separate, but then raspi has 2X and 3x, also, so I guess I need to get this issue straight in my feeble geezer head, right outta the gate. I'm plum grateful to all you kind folks who are taking the time to educate this slow ol' curmudgeon. ;) nb -- https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: running python 2 vs 3
On 2014-03-20, Mark H Harris wrote: > When I call python2 that means python2.7.6 / > > When I call python3 that means python3.3.4 / > > I can also call python2.7, which is 2.7.2 / > > You get the idea. There is no one set rule, because there are many > distros (gnu/linux) that use python at various versions, and they all us > different setups. Really , you need an install script to snoop out the > configurables. Weeping Chryst on the cross!!. No wonder the latest O'Reilly book, Learning Python, 5th ed, is 1600 pgs. I coulda swore someone sed python is easy. ;) nb -- https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: running python 2 vs 3
On 2014-03-20, Mark H Harris wrote: > not) there really is no problem. The reason is that the .pyc files > created for python2.x are only used by python2. Lordy, what hath I wrought!? ;) What the heck is a .pyc file and how are they created? Actually, I can see it's a compiled binary, but I where did it come from? I went back to my ~/python/ dir and noticed one .pyc file out of 15 .py files I created from following Learning Python the Hard Way. No one said anything about creating a binary. I know I discovered how to create/edit python scripts from IDLE. Is that it? I've been using gedit and emacs up till now. Seems the file with the .pyc file is the one I edited in IDLE. Is that why LPtHW eschews IDLE for gedit? Why do I feel like I've really stepped in it? ;) nb -- https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: running python 2 vs 3
On 2014-03-20, Zachary Ware wrote: > If you're specifying the interpreter in your command (by calling > "python .py", etc), the shebang won't mean anything > anyway. DOH! I was following you, fine, until that last sentence. Then how should I invoke the scripts? as your example is exactly how I've been doing it with 2.7, as per Learn Python the Hard Way. Simply ./.py from the appropriate directory (assuming I keep both vers in separate dirs)? nb -- https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: running python 2 vs 3
On 2014-03-20, Marko Rauhamaa wrote: > That's a bit of a sore spot. > > On a linux box, the initial line of the script indicates the > interpreter: > >#!/usr/bin/env python2 > > for Python 2.x > >#!/usr/bin/env python3 > > for Python 3.x. > > All tutorials will tell you to start it with > >#!/usr/bin/env python > > which will start python2 on all (?) existing linux distros, but is > expected to start python3 within the next decade. Ahhh! now a shabang I understand. So, I guess the only way, short of looking at the actual file, is to include the version in the filename. Can I safely assume I can run all 2.7 files w/o a shebang (which I have not, so far, and was wondering how I got away with that) and only include a py3 shebang in the py3 files, yes/no? nb -- https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
running python 2 vs 3
Dumb noob questions: I've installed python 3.3 on my Slack box, which by default comes with python 2.7. I know how to fire up the different IDLE environments, but how do I differentiate between the scripts? IOW, up till now, I've used .py on all my 2.7 files. How do I know not to run a .py in python3 or visa versa? Or do I? What's the excepted convention for differentiating between the two? nb -- https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Geezer learns python
I'm trying to learn python. I'm doing it via Zed Shaw's Learn Python the Hard Way. Sure enough, 16 lessons in and I've run aground. Is it OK for a painfully stupid ol' fart to ask painfully stupid noob questions, here? I'm a long time usenet fan and prefer it to irc. I've run Slackware for many yrs and know jes enough bash to get the drift of a slack script, but am no programmer, not by any stretch of the imagination. I really wanna succeed on this one and have signed up for an online python class from Rice U. I'd like to finish Zed's tutorial by the 24th of this month. I'm retired, so have the time to burn. Thnx. ;) nb -- https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Diving in to Python - Best resources?
On 2014-01-20, Matt Watson wrote: > My question to you guys is... for someone like me, what route would > you take to learning Python? "Learn Python the Hard Way" sounds like > a good route, but I prefer some testimony before I make a > purchase. You sound a lot like myself, in that you are easily frustrated. I discovered long ago I'm NOT a programmer. I've dipped a toe into basic, html, C, bash script, lisp, etc, but have never gotten beyond the "pissed" and/or "bored-to-tears" level. Much of this is due to almost every single book/tutorial/howto/etc having either mistakes in the code or crippling omissions, requiring a 30 min search on the web, jes like you sed. I hate that! So, Learning Python the Hard way. I love it!! No mistakes. No omissions. Everthing explained. I'm about a doz lessons in and the author has me chuckling (he has a sense of humor) with pleased delight after I successfully complete a lesson. I also use the 2.7.6 Python Standard Library as a reference in case I wanna know more. I'm enrolled in an online python course starting in Mar and I'm hoping LPtHW will get me sufficiently primed. I think it will. I highly recommend it. nb -- https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Do you feel bad because of the Python docs?
On 2013-02-26, Tim Chase wrote: > which suggests that they've been actively maintained since 1999-2000 > or so. in various guises, dating back to the man pages. Not all as thorough as the latest "manual". Perhaps I shoulda qualified usable docs. ;) nb -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Do you feel bad because of the Python docs?
On 2013-02-26, Andrew Berg wrote: > On 2013.02.26 10:19, notbob wrote: >> zsh? What docs!? > You mean other than the gigantic user manual? > http://zsh.sourceforge.net/Doc/ "This document was generated by Simon Ruderich on July 24, 2012" 'bout damn time!! ;) nb -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Do you feel bad because of the Python docs?
On 2013-02-26, Steven D'Aprano wrote: > "The Python documentation is bad, and you should feel bad". Ahh! A point at which I can interject. As a rank green python noob, I definitely hava an opinion on python documentation and it's not entirely flattering. OTOH, it's hard to toss any other single linux based documentation up as a sterling example. IOW, I've seen worse. How am I learning about python? Several sources. The "Non-Programmer's Tutorial" docs from wikibooks was a false start. It goes for about 2 pages before I realized they've snuck in some python syntax without explaining it. So, I jump over to "The Python Tutorial", which immediately leaves me submerged, as it's waaay over my clueless head. I flounder around and desperately grab onto "Basic Python" over at About.com. Finally, I'm rescued! Whoda thunk it? I usta despise About.com. But, they've matured greatly since their early days. I'm not a programmer. In fact I really dislike programming. But, as a long time linux user, I really need to learn a useful higher language. And here is this website that takes me by the hand and speaks to me like what I am. Dumb as a post and disinterested. But, they are patient. They explain basic programming concepts before launching into specifics. When they do get specific, they use simple examples that make sense. The don't toss in syntax they haven't fully explained. Great site and the one I'm now using to progress. I'm sure the other sites I've named will become helpful, eventually, but now I can move forward with confidence. Are python doc sites perfect? No. I've yet to come upon anything that clarifies why's and wherefores and the differences between the CMI IDLE and the GUI IDLE. And boy, are they different! OTOH, as I said, I've seen worse Linux docs. BitchX or zsh? What docs!? Even the man pages took me a long time to figure out. Bluefish? Krita? Puh-leeze! emacs? It's a wonder I can use it at all. ;) Despite all that, I'd say python documentation is better than a poke in the eye with a sharp stick. I'm sure the official pages will make more sense to me when I understand more. As it is, they jes toss out "lc-letter" like I know what they're talking about. They explain it a little bit, but I still hadda wiki it to get the full story. As a person with some technical writing experience, I know how difficult it can be. I had to be careful about who I was writing for, engineers or laymen. It's the same with programming docs. Writing tutorials about python as if I jes came from 5 yrs as a C programmer is not in the least bit helpful to a beginner like myself. Sometimes, one jes hasta hunt for the right flavor. nb -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: php vs python
On 2008-05-21, Paul Rubin wrote: > Knowing lots of languages is good for you. php is probably your > quickest route to getting a rudimentary web app running. Python > is a longer term project. Do both. Good advice. Thank you. nb -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: php vs python
On 2008-05-22, Larry Bates <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Check out the Pylons blog tutorial. You will have a simple blog up and > running > in less than 30 minutes and have a platform to extend it with as much > functionality as you want later on. > > Larry Bates > > Pylons blog tutorial: > > http://wiki.pylonshq.com/display/pylonscookbook/Making+a+Pylons+Blog Thnx, Larry. FYI: the above page doesn't exist: "The page you were trying to reach does not exist. You may want to try a search, or browse the site to find the page you were looking for." but, there's a link to a pylons cookbook, which I will explore. nb -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: php vs python
On 2008-05-21, Damon Getsman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > My suggestion, if you want to keep that gray meat sparking, is to go > with only html & php. You could have the php dumping your entries > into date/time named textfiles on there when you're writing, and when > someone is reading, it just orders them sequentially by the date & > time in their filenames. > > Then again, you learn the HTML+PHP+MySQL thing and you've got a skill > that you can market on Craigslist to a bunch of people for $20/hr > +. :) That certainly couldn't hurt. Thank you for your advice. nb -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: php vs python
On 2008-05-21, Carl Banks <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > If you just want to write a simple blog, PHP is probably good enough. > It's undeniably easier to jump into web programming with PHP-- > partially because of it's widespread support and straightforward > usage, partially because Python web solutions tend to aim for > separability of content and presenation which raises the bar for > entry--and that could easily outweigh your concerns over quality of > the language. > > (Incidentally: if you didn't want to start a religious war, it would > have been better if you had posted it separately to the two groups. > Lots of flamewars start by one person posting a cutdown not intended > for the ears of the other group.) Yeah, but years of usenet have taught me how to navigate the battlefield. Your top paragraph above is the kind of advice I'm looking for. Thank you. nb -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: php vs python
On 2008-05-21, Michael Vilain <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > your site. They may even have a blogging package you can administer > entries without any programming. > > What's your end-goal here? If you can't program, you may be better off > with a package or tool that does all the heavy lifting for you. I said I didn't want to do that, but that's not entirely true. I figured I'd use one of the CMSs while learning how it works, much like linux. I hate doing something without knowing why. Windows and Dreamweaver are good examples. Nope. I want to get under the hood. nb -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
php vs python
I'm not posting this just to initiate some religious flame war, though it's the perfect subject to do so. No, I actaully want some serious advice about these two languages and since I think usenet is the best arena to find it, here ya' go. So, here's my delimna: I want to start a blog. Yeah, who doesn't. Yet, I want learn the guts of it instead of just booting up some wordwank or whatever. I started to learn python, but heard php was easier or faster or more like shell scripting or... fill in the blank. Anyway, so I change over to learning php. Then I run across that blog, Coding Horror, and start reading articles like this: http://www.codinghorror.com/blog/archives/001119.html Now what? Go back to python. Soldier on with php? What do I know? Not much. I can setup mysql and apache,, but don't know how to use 'em, really. I use emacs and run slackware and can fumble my way through bash scripts, but I can't really write them or do lisp. I've taken basic basic and basic C, but am barely literate in html. Sometimes it seems overwhelming, but I persevere because it's more fun/challenging than video games, which bore me to tears. Well, that's my actual question, then. Is php really so bad I'm just wasting my time? Or is it really the quickest way to blog functionality? Would I be better served in the long run learning python, which claims to be easy as pie to learn/program (still looks hard to me). I admit I'm no code geek. But, I'm not completely brain dead, either, and I need something to keep my geezer brain sparking. What say ye? nb -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Learning Python for no reason
On 2008-05-12, John Salerno <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > language, I can't help but feel that I will be mostly unable to use what I > learn simply because I have no reason to use it. > The *process* of learning is enough fun for me, and every now and then I do > find a small use for Python that really pays off, You're contradicting yourself. Which is it? You can or can't use it? I suspect the more you learn of it, the more you will be able to do with it. I hope so, as I'm just doing it now, like you, for the sake of learning. nb -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Now what!?
On 2008-05-11, Dennis Lee Bieber <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > on the Amiga, it could be any of those applications). ahhh the Amiga, the demise of which was one of the great calamaties of our cyber time. (sniff) nb -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Now what!?
On 2008-05-10, Dennis Lee Bieber <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > So... in short, you'd need to have been reading a tutorial specific > to "shell" scripting... I have been. I'm also trying to learn bash shell scripting, not to mention sed/awk, php, etc. I should have started this a long time ago, but I'm lazy and, like I said, I'm not particularly fond of coding. Yes, I have learned basic C and basic , but never beyond intro. Now, I'm doing it because I'm a geezer and I figure my brain needs more exercise then just blabbing on usenet. Besides, I've been cruising while using linux for too long and have remained low end intermediate. Time to get serious. Pass the cheat sheets! nb -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Now what!?
On 2008-05-10, notbob <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > BTW, anyone know a better cli news client/editor combo than slrn/jed (don't > even think vi!)? When I cp/past code (or most anything else) to jed, all > the lines become stair-stepped. This is no biggie for a most stuff, but for > idented code, it's unacceptable. Whoo-hoo! I just got emacs config'd to do python. Let's see how that works. nb -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Now what!?
On 2008-05-10, Ivan Illarionov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Shebang is certainly broken, possible causes: > 1. Wrong line endings (should be \n) Nope. Not it. > 2. Whitespace before the shebang BINGO! we have a winner. ;) I thought for sure that was not correct. No white space before the sheba Wait a minute! Howzabout a blank line above the shebang? D0H!! These are the minute details that bedevil the poor noob. I've read dozens of tutorials on different prog langs and have never read a single thing on white space or blank lines preceding a shebang. Till now. I always get frustrated and give up on learning programming, not really caring much for coding, anyway. But, dammit, I'm gonna stick with it this time. I'll learn python if it kills me! that is, if you folks can stand all my dumb questinons. ;) Thank you, Ivan, and other repondents. nb back to while loops -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Now what!?
On 2008-05-10, Diez B. Roggisch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > notbob schrieb: >> script the same way ($ ./helloworld) and it works fine. Same shebang, same >> dir, same permission, etc. > > I'm pretty sure you misse the correct shebang - Sorry. Both exactly the same. I checked 5 times. helloworld shebang: #!/usr/bin/python while shebang: #!/usr/bin/python (above yanked from respective scripts) nb -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Now what!?
Grrr
I'm following A Byte of Python and into the while loops chap. I cp/paste
while.py to a file and give 777 perms. I mv while.py to while and run it
(./while)
as a standalone script. I get errors.
Here is the script:
while.py
http://www.ibiblio.org/swaroopch/byteofpython/read/while-statement.html
When I run it as.
$ python while
.it works perfect. But, if I run it simply as.
$ ./while
.I get this:
$ ./while
number: illegal number: =
./while: line 6: running: command not found
./while: line 9: syntax error near unexpected token ('
./while: line 9: guess = int(raw_input('Enter an integer : '))'
Why does it work one way and not the other. If I run the simple hello world
script the same way ($ ./helloworld) and it works fine. Same shebang, same
dir, same permission, etc. I even meticulously indented everything
perfectly by hand. What am I missing?
BTW, anyone know a better cli news client/editor combo than slrn/jed (don't
even think vi!)? When I cp/past code (or most anything else) to jed, all
the lines become stair-stepped. This is no biggie for a most stuff, but for
idented code, it's unacceptable.
nb
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: How to kill Python interpreter from the command line?
On 2008-05-08, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I am running Fedora Linux and KDE, using the Konsole command line. I also run python from Konsole. > When coding Python, I regularly make a bug causing my program to not > terminate. But how do I kill the non-terminating Python interpreter > without killing the entire Konsole? Are you refering to the python editor? If so, try cntrl-d. > The default way of killing the current process on the command line is > Ctrl+C, but that doesn't work with Python. Neither do the "terminate > task", "suspend task" or "interrupt task" commands (available from > right-click in Konsole). If you want to completely kill python, open another Konsole session and kill it from there. There are several ways. The simplist is: killall python which will kill python without killing the Konsole session. This will find the python pid number and kill it with -15 which cleans everything up nicely before killing. If that doesn't work, you may need to use kill -9, which is kill with extreme prejudice and leaves all the bodies lying around to crap up the works. To do that, try: ps aux | grep python .which will give you the pid number and then you plug it into: kill -9 pid_number If all that doesn't work, change to Slackware! ;) nb -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Are rank noobs tolerated, here?
On 2008-05-06, hdante <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> When you have a problem with your code, always post here the complete
> code and a complete execution. For example:
I'll keep this example. Thnx.
> /--\ glued
> | bruce | --> 42
> \--/
>
> When you use a stamp, it returns what it's glued on:
>
> >>> bruce = 42 # glue a stamp
> >>> print bruce # use the stamp
> 42
> 'bruce' is a string (notice the quotes). In this case bruce is glued
> to 'bruce':
>
> /--\ glued
> | bruce | --> 'bruce'
> \--/
The light is dawning.
> Stupid. Not really. :-) I'd rather say that the problem is the book.
Well, me too, of course. ;)
> The book is just another introduction to programming. There's no
> special attempt to make the reader learn to think like a computer
> scientist.
Apparently, and I understand. It's hard for someone who is very
knowledgable on a subject to remain in "explain it like they're 5 yrs old"
mode. It's tedious and time consuming.
>> How am I supposed to get the original def to work? I've yet to figure out
> file myfile.py:
> ---
> def print_twice(bruce):
> print bruce, bruce
>
> print_twice('bruce')
> print_twice(2)
> ---
>
> execution:
> ---
> $ python myfile.py
> bruce bruce
> 2 2
BINGO! (and it worked (after I got the indents right))
> Finally, you don't understand something, ask again.
Thank you. I really do appreciate your taking the time to break it down
so completely. I found another python book (A Byte of Python) that keeps it
simple enough for me. I'm not really a programmer, but I decided to do
something to challenge this old geezer brain and figured this would keep it
awake.
I'd also like to thank all you other folks who responded. I got some good
info and tips from all of you.
nb
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Are rank noobs tolerated, here?
On 2008-05-06, Jeffrey Froman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Nice to see another Slackware user around here! Likewise. ;) > That's correct. A function doesn't generally *do* anything until it is > called. Here, it is only defined. The only thing this function does when > called is to print the value of bruce twice. I suspected as much. It was a bit confusing, but I get it now. > Functions are objects too, and this is a printed representation of that > function object. It still hasn't been "called" at this point. Good to know. Thnx. > other python "special" attributes, it starts and ends with TWO underscores. ...as Alex also pointed out. I didn't notice that. Thnx. > You are correct to create this script yourself from scratch. Do python scripts require the: #!/usr/bin/env python line at the beginning of every script or just the .py file extension? I see examples both ways, with and without. > Your module files, i.e., chap03.py, should be in one of the directories on > that path. Gotchya. > "from" modifies a *module* name, not a path component. So "from module > import one_function, another_function". This allows you to use one_function > without referencing it through the imported module name. In other words, > these two are equivalent: > import chap03 chap03.print_twice() > > and: > from chap03 import print_twice print_twice() > > In the above examples, "chap03" is the *module* file, chap03.py. m. that's still a bit much to wrap my feeble brain around, but I get your drift. I'm still working on the basic function concept as python uses it. But, I found two more websites that explain it better and I think I pretty much get it, now. Thank you, and the others, for your help. It's very much appreciated. nb Slackware: simplicity through transparency -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Are rank noobs tolerated, here?
On 2008-05-04, notbob <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I'm trying to learn how to program. I'm using:
>
> How to Think Like a Computer Scientist
>
> Learning with Python
> 2nd Edition
http://openbookproject.net//thinkCSpy/index.xhtml
OK then, using the above, I get everything up till chap 3 and functions and
then it all falls apart. I try using his code and nothing. I'm running
vers 2.5.1 on slackware 12. Here's what I don't get:
--
"Here is an example of a user-defined function that has a parameter:
def print_twice(bruce):
print bruce, bruce
This function takes a single argument and assigns it to the parameter named
bruce. The value of the parameter (at this point we have no idea what it
will be) is printed twice, followed by a newline. The name bruce was chosen
to suggest that the name you give a parameter is up to you, but in general,
you want to choose something more illustrative than bruce.
ME
is this just an example of how the def should be written and it doesn't
really do anthing... yet? I read another newb explanation here:
http://www.codepedia.com/1/BeginnersGuideToPython_Functions
...and it doesn't work, either. I define myfirstfunction in the pyth editor
and give the command print myfirstfuntion and I get back this:
when I add the ._doc_, it get this:
Traceback (most recent call last):
File "", line 1, in
AttributeError: 'function' object has no attribute '_doc_'
so, there is a no go there, too.
ME
The interactive Python shell provides us with a convenient way to test
our functions. We can use the import statement to bring the functions
we have defined in a script into the interpreter session. To see how this
works, assume the print_twice function is defined in a script
named chap03.py. We can now test it interactively by
importing it into our Python shell session:
ME
ok, I try and follow the above, but where is he getting the script? So, I
make a script called chap03.py and put it in ~/pyth/chap03/.
ME
>>> from chap03 import *
>>> print_twice('Spam')
Spam Spam
>>> print_twice(5)
5 5
>>> print_twice(3.14159)
3.14159 3.14159
ME
I then try an do the import thing above, but the pyth ed accepts none of it.
not from:
from ~/pyth/chap03/ import *
from chap03 import *#taken from ~/pyth/
nor from any other configuration I can imagine, so that "from" command
makes no sense.
ME
In a function call, the value of the argument is assigned to the
corresponding parameter in the function definition. In effect, it is if
bruce = 'Spam' is executed when print_twice('Spam')
is called, bruce = 5 in print_twice(5), and
bruce = 3.14159 in print_twice(3.14159)."
ME
OK, I'm totally lost. Neither the above or the other link works or make any
sense at all. Is the above print_twice(5), etc, supposed to work like the
original print_twice(bruce) function (which still doesn't!), just with a
different parameter? Call me stupid, but I'd sure like to get past this.
How am I supposed to get the original def to work? I've yet to figure out
how to get plain ol':
bruce bruce
Yes, I've indented 4 spaces where I should.
ME
--
I feel dumber'n a bag 0' hammers and in need of clarification.
Thank you
nb
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Are rank noobs tolerated, here?
I'm trying to learn how to program. I'm using: How to Think Like a Computer Scientist Learning with Python 2nd Edition Am I likely to receive any help, here, or is there another irc, forum, etc, that might better serve a complete amateur such as myself. Thnx. nb -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: The Modernization of Emacs: terminology buffer and keybinding
On 2007-06-27, Twisted <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > irritating was the necessary frequent trips to the help. Even when the > help was easy to use (itself rare) that's a load of additional task > switching and crap. Of course, lots of the time the help was not easy > to use. Man pages and anything else viewed on a console, for example On the plus side, you only have to learn it once. With new releases of Windows/Office, more often than not, Bill n' The Boys rename functions and hide them somewhere else in an attempt to make it look like they actually did something, so you end up wasting a lot of time relearning what you already knew. Talk about irritating! nb -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: The Modernization of Emacs: terminology buffer and keybinding
On 2007-06-25, Giorgos Keramidas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > X11 interface. I don't see why Notepad is special in any way here. It's not. I discovered, quite by accident, wordpad is the superior text editor in windows. It even properly formats those cryptic brag pages crackers put in cracked software. nb -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: The Modernization of Emacs: terminology buffer and keybinding
On 2007-06-21, Kaldrenon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Feel free to disagree with what I'm about to say. [...] > And if you disagree with me, or if you think I expressed my point > poorly I think you expressed it well. I'll add that using one does not necessarilly exclude using the other. I tend to use whatever makes the job easiest FOR ME! ...be it a gui or the command line. Also, ease of learning emacs has absolutely zero to do with mental prowess and not everyone using it is a code whiz. Except for some html and shell scripting, I do almost zero developement because it bores me to freakin' tears. That's not to say I can't like the command line and emacs. All types of user interface have their pros and cons and it's senseless to limit one's self to one or the other. Some tasks benefit from using both simultaneously, acad and gimp/p-shop being prime examples. Sure, everyone loves the camaraderie of belonging to a group. That's just being human. But, choosing a preference doesn't require fanatical loyalty to the exclusion of all other options, or at least it shouldn't. Use the one that's best for the job. nb -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: The Modernization of Emacs: terminology buffer and keybinding
["Followup-To:" header set to comp.emacs.] > If you'd spent half an hour using the tutorial (helpfully displayed > right there when you start emacs), you could have saved three and a half > hours of wasted time. And you'd now be using an actual text editor, > which is often helpful. Your statement is obviously based on your assumption everyone has as good a memory as you. Unfortunately, this is not always the case. I came to emacs as a geezer with a less than sterling short term memory. I got about 8 keystrokes into the tutorial before I was lost. I finally had to start a cheat sheet. It's also a PIA to read a tutorial and practice in another window until you know how to open/close/juggle said windows. I never did get much from emacs' tutorial. It also took me awhile to train my pinkies to reach for that until-now-unused Ctrl key. No, using emacs is not trivial. It's a learned skill that requires some effort. More for some than others. In emacs', defense, it's a helluva lot more intuitive than vi, which is a nightmare straight from Hell! nb -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: The Modernization of Emacs
On 2007-06-21, Lew <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Your comment reads like you've missed most of this thread. This may be due to the fact I've missed most of this thread. nb -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: The Modernization of Emacs
On 2007-06-21, David Kastrup <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I should think that version 2.3.1 would not even try ftp. Is that on > Multics? Slackware 10.1 nb -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: The Modernization of Emacs
On 2007-06-21, Lew <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > To the claim that "emacs is too hard for the beginner" we have a mounting > pile > of steaming evidence that refutes. It may still be true that it is too hard > for some beginners.. I point them to jed. I, too, was overwhelmed by emacs, initially, but can't stand vi so I had to do something. jed was my savior. It uses many standard keys like backspace and the arrows, so newbs aren't so confused. When I finally became comfortable with the std emacs keystrokes I got O'Reilly's great book and ventured into emacs. Love it. But, still a rank newb and still use jed and slrn a lot till I can learn to configure emacs like I want it. vi, the heart of evil! nb -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: The Modernization of Emacs
On 2007-06-21, David Kastrup <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > You know you can use something like > C-x C-f /su::/etc/fstab RET > (or /sudo::/etc/fstab) in order to edit files as root in a normal > Emacs session? As I understand it, this will only work for ver 22 and later or if you have tramp(?) installed. I have 2.3.1 (no tramp) and all I get is: ftp> open su ftp: su: Unknown host I'm looking at upgrading to 22 for a couple other features, too. nb -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: The Modernization of Emacs
On 2007-06-21, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > You can have Emacs when you pry it from my cold hypertrophied > escape-pressing pinky! LOL! nb -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: OMG BRITNEYS AT IT AGAIN AGAIN!!!!!!
On 2007-05-11, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > http://britneyboobs.blogspot.com/2007/05/britney-spears-slips-up-again-exposes.html > - Exclusive pics of Britney Spears.. Britneyboobs what?... you take pride in being one? nb -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
