Re: Python -Vs- Ruby: A regexp match to the death!
On Aug 8, 8:15 pm, Steven D'Aprano wrote: > On Sun, 08 Aug 2010 17:43:03 -0700, rantingrick wrote: > > Ruby has what they > > call a "Here Doc". Besides picking the most boneheaded name for such an > > object > > It's standard terminology that has been around for a long time in many > different languages. Just because something has been around around for a long time does not necessarily mean it's was a good idea to begin with. STRAWMAN! > > As you can see it is another example of tacked on functionality that was > > not carefully considered before hand. > > I disagree. It's an old and venerable technique, and very useful on the > rare occasion that you have lots of quotation marks in a string. (...snip...) > Python strings have four delimiters: > (1) single quote ' > (2) double quote " > (3) single-quote here-doc ''' > (4) double-quote here-doc """ > > plus equivalent raw-strings of each kind. > > Trying writing that as a single literal in Python without escapes. There > are work-arounds, of course, like using implicit concatenation, but > they're ugly. Yes, with the choices we have today writing strings like you mention is terribly asinine. And don't forget about filepaths and regexps too with all the backslashing nonsense! However, there is a simple solution to this mess. Python "double quote strings" and Python """multiline strings"""(that are delimited by leading and trailing double quote triplets) should behave as they do today. However Python 'single quote strings' and Python '''multiline strings'''(that are delimited by leading and trailing single quote triplets) should be raw so that they do not interpret escape sequences. Yes i know this would break backwards compatibility *again* but this functionality should have been made available in Py3000 since we were already breaking it anyhow. Why do we need both """X""" AND '''X''' this if they do exactly the same thing? Also why do we need both "X" AND 'X' if they do exactly the same thing. A real chance to make something special was missed and i hope one day we come to the realization that this proposed functionality of strings (raw and normal) is sorely needed in Python. > In Ruby they decided to be more general, so you can define whatever > heredoc you need to quote whatever literal string you need. That's not > bone-headed. The fact that Ruby has multi line strings (*ahem*... HEREDOC's) is not at all the point i take issue with. I take issue with the boneheaded syntax. Have you ever tried to grep Ruby heredocs? It would have been so much easier if they had made a spec like this... mystring = :{ blah blah blah blahblah blah blah blah blah }: Or at least *some* static token instead of just creating something on the fly each time now thats boneheaded! -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Python -Vs- Ruby: A regexp match to the death!
On Aug 9, 8:19 am, Mike Kent wrote: > On Aug 8, 8:43 pm, rantingrick wrote: > Xah, this is really you, isn't it. Come on, confess. *MOI*, How could *I* be xah. I really don't like Ruby however he gushes over it all the time. And he does not like Python that much either. We are total opposites, really. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Python -Vs- Ruby: A regexp match to the death!
On 8/9/10 4:43 PM, Stefan Schwarzer wrote: Hi Robert, On 2010-08-09 22:23, Robert Kern wrote: On 2010-08-09 06:42 , Stefan Schwarzer wrote: Unfortunatey, when I enter In [2]: %paste at the prompt it gives me (before I pasted anything) In [2]: %paste File "", line 1 http://pypi.python.org/pypi/ipython/0.10 ^ SyntaxError: invalid syntax Yes, that's because you had that URL in your clipboard, not Python code. What were you expecting to happen? I got that traceback as soon as I typed in "%paste" and pressed enter, without pasting anything in the terminal. I had assumed it works like :paste in Vim, activating a kind of "paste mode" where everything pasted into the terminal is modified as the help text suggests. %cpaste will do that. I implemented %paste because not all terminals will correctly paste arbitrary amounts of code correctly. Grabbing the text directly from the clipboard is less error-prone and removes redundant user interaction. -- Robert Kern "I have come to believe that the whole world is an enigma, a harmless enigma that is made terrible by our own mad attempt to interpret it as though it had an underlying truth." -- Umberto Eco -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Python -Vs- Ruby: A regexp match to the death!
On 9 Aug, 10:21, Steven D'Aprano wrote: > And that it's quite finicky about blank lines between methods and inside > functions. Makes it hard to paste code directly into the interpreter. The combination of editor, debugger and interpreter is what I miss most from Matlab. In Matlab we can have a function or script open in an editor, and use it directly from the interpreter. No need to reimport or anything: edit and invoke. It is also possible to paste data directly from the clipboard into variables in the interpreter. ipython does not have that annoying >>> prompt. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Python -Vs- Ruby: A regexp match to the death!
On 2010-08-09 23:43, Stefan Schwarzer wrote: > I got that traceback as soon as I typed in "%paste" and > pressed enter, without pasting anything in the terminal. > I had assumed it works like :paste in Vim, activating a I meant ":set paste" of course. Stefan -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Python -Vs- Ruby: A regexp match to the death!
Hi Robert, On 2010-08-09 22:23, Robert Kern wrote: > On 2010-08-09 06:42 , Stefan Schwarzer wrote: >> Unfortunatey, when I enter >> >>In [2]: %paste >> >> at the prompt it gives me (before I pasted anything) >> >>In [2]: %paste >> >> File "", line 1 >> http://pypi.python.org/pypi/ipython/0.10 >> ^ >>SyntaxError: invalid syntax > > Yes, that's because you had that URL in your clipboard, not Python code. What > were you expecting to happen? I got that traceback as soon as I typed in "%paste" and pressed enter, without pasting anything in the terminal. I had assumed it works like :paste in Vim, activating a kind of "paste mode" where everything pasted into the terminal is modified as the help text suggests. Ok, I just noticed I should have actually _read_ the help text, not just scanned it. ;-) Sorry for the confusion. Stefan -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Python -Vs- Ruby: A regexp match to the death!
On 2010-08-09 06:42 , Stefan Schwarzer wrote: Hi Steven, On 2010-08-09 10:21, Steven D'Aprano wrote: And that it's quite finicky about blank lines between methods and inside functions. Makes it hard to paste code directly into the interpreter. And that pasting doesn't strip out any leading prompts. It needs a good doctest mode. ipython [1] should help here: IPython 0.10 -- An enhanced Interactive Python. ? -> Introduction and overview of IPython's features. %quickref -> Quick reference. help -> Python's own help system. object? -> Details about 'object'. ?object also works, ?? prints more. In [1]: %paste? Type: Magic function Base Class: String Form:> Namespace: IPython internal File: /usr/lib/pymodules/python2.6/IPython/Magic.py Definition: %paste(self, parameter_s='') Docstring: Allows you to paste& execute a pre-formatted code block from clipboard. The text is pulled directly from the clipboard without user intervention. The block is dedented prior to execution to enable execution of method definitions. '>' and '+' characters at the beginning of a line are ignored, to allow pasting directly from e-mails, diff files and doctests (the '...' continuation prompt is also stripped). The executed block is also assigned to variable named 'pasted_block' for later editing with '%edit pasted_block'. You can also pass a variable name as an argument, e.g. '%paste foo'. This assigns the pasted block to variable 'foo' as string, without dedenting or executing it (preceding>>> and + is still stripped) '%paste -r' re-executes the block previously entered by cpaste. IPython statements (magics, shell escapes) are not supported (yet). See also cpaste: manually paste code into terminal until you mark its end. Unfortunatey, when I enter In [2]: %paste at the prompt it gives me (before I pasted anything) In [2]: %paste File "", line 1 http://pypi.python.org/pypi/ipython/0.10 ^ SyntaxError: invalid syntax Yes, that's because you had that URL in your clipboard, not Python code. What were you expecting to happen? -- Robert Kern "I have come to believe that the whole world is an enigma, a harmless enigma that is made terrible by our own mad attempt to interpret it as though it had an underlying truth." -- Umberto Eco -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Python -Vs- Ruby: A regexp match to the death!
On Aug 8, 8:43 pm, rantingrick wrote: > Hello folks, > > You all know i been forced to use Ruby and i am not happy about that. ***Blablabla cut long rant*** Xah, this is really you, isn't it. Come on, confess. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Python -Vs- Ruby: A regexp match to the death!
Hi Steven, On 2010-08-09 10:21, Steven D'Aprano wrote: > And that it's quite finicky about blank lines between methods and inside > functions. Makes it hard to paste code directly into the interpreter. > > And that pasting doesn't strip out any leading prompts. It needs a good > doctest mode. ipython [1] should help here: IPython 0.10 -- An enhanced Interactive Python. ? -> Introduction and overview of IPython's features. %quickref -> Quick reference. help -> Python's own help system. object? -> Details about 'object'. ?object also works, ?? prints more. In [1]: %paste? Type: Magic function Base Class: String Form:> Namespace: IPython internal File: /usr/lib/pymodules/python2.6/IPython/Magic.py Definition: %paste(self, parameter_s='') Docstring: Allows you to paste & execute a pre-formatted code block from clipboard. The text is pulled directly from the clipboard without user intervention. The block is dedented prior to execution to enable execution of method definitions. '>' and '+' characters at the beginning of a line are ignored, to allow pasting directly from e-mails, diff files and doctests (the '...' continuation prompt is also stripped). The executed block is also assigned to variable named 'pasted_block' for later editing with '%edit pasted_block'. You can also pass a variable name as an argument, e.g. '%paste foo'. This assigns the pasted block to variable 'foo' as string, without dedenting or executing it (preceding >>> and + is still stripped) '%paste -r' re-executes the block previously entered by cpaste. IPython statements (magics, shell escapes) are not supported (yet). See also cpaste: manually paste code into terminal until you mark its end. Unfortunatey, when I enter In [2]: %paste at the prompt it gives me (before I pasted anything) In [2]: %paste File "", line 1 http://pypi.python.org/pypi/ipython/0.10 ^ SyntaxError: invalid syntax So far, I couldn't find anything on the net on this. [1] http://pypi.python.org/pypi/ipython Stefan -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Python -Vs- Ruby: A regexp match to the death!
On Mon, 09 Aug 2010 00:29:19 -0700, rantingrick wrote: > On Aug 8, 8:15 pm, Steven D'Aprano cybersource.com.au> wrote: > >> In Ruby they decided to be more general, so you can define whatever >> heredoc you need to quote whatever literal string you need. That's not >> bone-headed. > > Devils Advocate! > > PS: Man you're irb main was so full of cobweb i could barley see the > code... haa... h... hachew!. ;-) irb's default prompt is a bit too verbose for my tastes, but Python allows you to customise its prompt too. You'll often see people here posting copy/pastes with a customised prompt, so obviously some people like that sort of thing. Me, my biggest gripe with the interactive interpreter is that using >>> as a prompt clashes with > as the standard quoting character in email and news, but Guido has refused to even consider changing it. And that it's quite finicky about blank lines between methods and inside functions. Makes it hard to paste code directly into the interpreter. And that pasting doesn't strip out any leading prompts. It needs a good doctest mode. -- Steven -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Python -Vs- Ruby: A regexp match to the death!
On Aug 8, 8:15 pm, Steven D'Aprano wrote: > In Ruby they decided to be more general, so you can define whatever > heredoc you need to quote whatever literal string you need. That's not > bone-headed. Devils Advocate! PS: Man you're irb main was so full of cobweb i could barley see the code... haa... h... hachew!. ;-) -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Python -Vs- Ruby: A regexp match to the death!
On Sun, 08 Aug 2010 17:43:03 -0700, rantingrick wrote: > Ha. Ruby does not really have multi line strings. Except, of course, it does, as you go on to show. > Ruby has what they > call a "Here Doc". Besides picking the most boneheaded name for such an > object It's standard terminology that has been around for a long time in many different languages. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Here_document > they also introduced and even more boneheaded syntax. To define a > "Here Doc" (god i hate that name!) you start with double greater than > ">>" and immediately follow with an identifier token of you choice (it > can be anything your dirty little mind can come up with. > >>>HEREDOC > this is the body > of a > here doc. Why the > hell did they not just > use triple quotes like Python did. > Now i will need to remember some token to know where' i stopped > HEREDOC Incorrect. [st...@sylar ~]$ irb irb(main):001:0> s = >>END SyntaxError: compile error (irb):1: syntax error s = >>END ^ from (irb):1 irb(main):002:0> s = <<-END irb(main):003:0" Multi-line text irb(main):004:0" goes here irb(main):005:0" END => "Multi-line text\ngoes here\n" irb(main):006:0> puts s Multi-line text goes here => nil irb(main):007:0> > As you can see it is another example of tacked on functionality that was > not carefully considered before hand. I disagree. It's an old and venerable technique, and very useful on the rare occasion that you have lots of quotation marks in a string. Whether those rare occasions are common enough to require specialist syntax is another question. In Python, the idea is that two heredocs (''' and """) is enough for anybody. That makes it difficult to write a string literal like, e.g.: Python strings have four delimiters: (1) single quote ' (2) double quote " (3) single-quote here-doc ''' (4) double-quote here-doc """ plus equivalent raw-strings of each kind. Trying writing that as a single literal in Python without escapes. There are work-arounds, of course, like using implicit concatenation, but they're ugly. In Ruby they decided to be more general, so you can define whatever heredoc you need to quote whatever literal string you need. That's not bone-headed. -- Steven -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Python -Vs- Ruby: A regexp match to the death!
rantingrick wrote: Hello folks, [snip] - Strings - Single line strings are exactly the same in both languages except in Ruby double quoted strings are backslash interpreted and single quote strings are basically raw. Except Ruby introduces more cruft (as usual) in the form of what i call "lazy man" stings a = %w{ one two three} ["one", "two", "three"] s = %{one two three} one two three repat = %r{one two three} /one two three/ ... only good for hand coding! From Perl. -- Multi Line Strings -- Ha. Ruby does not really have multi line strings. Ruby has what they call a "Here Doc". Besides picking the most boneheaded name for such an object they also introduced and even more boneheaded syntax. To define a "Here Doc" (god i hate that name!) you start with double greater than ">>" and immediately follow with an identifier token of you choice (it can be anything your dirty little mind can come up with. HEREDOC this is the body of a here doc. Why the hell did they not just use triple quotes like Python did. Now i will need to remember some token to know where' i stopped HEREDOC As you can see it is another example of tacked on functionality that was not carefully considered before hand. Anyway here are the regexp's... Python: r'""".*?"""' Python: r"'''.*?'''" Ruby: r'<<(\w+).*?(\1)' Also from Perl. I don't know what the point of your post was. We already know that we prefer Python; that's why we're here! :-) And anyway, being nasty about other languages feels unPythonic to me... -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Python -Vs- Ruby: A regexp match to the death!
Hello folks, You all know i been forced to use Ruby and i am not happy about that. But i thought i would share more compelling evidence of the moronicity of the Ruby language syntax from the perspective of regexp's. I recently built myself a nice little Ruby script editor because i hate everything else out there. Whist writing the Colorizer i realized (again) just how beautifully elegant Python is and how crufty and asinine Ruby is. Anyhow my point is that by looking at the regexp's you can clearly see that parsing Ruby syntax is BF and Python syntax is elegant! Here are a few examples: Note i used look back assertions for clarity. Modules Python does not have a module syntax (an thank Guido for that!) because we have a much better system of using the file as a module and not introducing more cruft into our scripts. Anyway if Python *did* have a module syntax it would look better than this crap! Python: N/A Ruby: r'(?<=module )(::)?(\w+(::)?)*' Classes Python and Ruby class definitions are almost the same except for the module cruft getting in the way again. Python: r'(?<=class )\w+' Ruby: r'(?<=class )(::)?(\w+(::)?)*' - Defs - HaHa, you're going to poop yourself when you see this! No introduction needed :-D. Python: r'(?<=def )\w+' Ruby: r'(?<=def )(self\.)?((\w+::\w+)|(\w+\.\w+)|(\w+))([?|!])?' - Strings - Single line strings are exactly the same in both languages except in Ruby double quoted strings are backslash interpreted and single quote strings are basically raw. Except Ruby introduces more cruft (as usual) in the form of what i call "lazy man" stings >>> a = %w{ one two three} ["one", "two", "three"] >>> s = %{one two three} one two three >>> repat = %r{one two three} /one two three/ ... only good for hand coding! -- Multi Line Strings -- Ha. Ruby does not really have multi line strings. Ruby has what they call a "Here Doc". Besides picking the most boneheaded name for such an object they also introduced and even more boneheaded syntax. To define a "Here Doc" (god i hate that name!) you start with double greater than ">>" and immediately follow with an identifier token of you choice (it can be anything your dirty little mind can come up with. >>HEREDOC this is the body of a here doc. Why the hell did they not just use triple quotes like Python did. Now i will need to remember some token to know where' i stopped HEREDOC As you can see it is another example of tacked on functionality that was not carefully considered before hand. Anyway here are the regexp's... Python: r'""".*?"""' Python: r"'''.*?'''" Ruby: r'<<(\w+).*?(\1)' -- Comments -- Ruby and Python single line comments are the same. Use the hash char. However Ruby introduces multi line comment blocks delimited by the tokens "=begin" and "=end". Python: r"#.*" Ruby: r"=begin.*?=end" Ruby: r"#.*" - Conculsion - I just want to take this opportunity to thank Mr. Van Rossum and the Python dev team for creating a truly revolutionary 21st century language that no other language can hold a candle to. Without Python we would be force to use these "other" monstrosities" on a daily basis -- and i just don't think i could bear it! Keep up the good work! -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list