-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Martin v. Lowis
Sent: Thursday, September 22, 2005 9:18 PM
To: Python-Dev
Subject: [Python-Dev] Compressing MSI files: 2.4.2 candidate?
I just found that I can save somewhat more than 1MiB in
That's great - thanks alot.
Cheers,
Max
On 9/23/05, Michael Hudson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Michael Hudson [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Jeremy Maxfield
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Sorry I think you're 'much mistaken'... The revision of PyState.c in the rc242c1looks like 2.38.22 (should be
2.42) and
Moscow, Russia, September 23th, 2005
We are happy to spread good news about `Key Solutions'
http://keysolutions.ru/`_ new initiative. We have created a new public
repository for python developers. The ulitimate goal of this project is
to unite companies and people under the umbrella of
Gregory P. Smith [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Mon, Sep 19, 2005 at 09:12:05PM +0100, Michael Hudson wrote:
Martin Blais [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
http://www.gotw.ca/publications/concurrency-ddj.htm
The Free Lunch Is Over: A Fundamental Turn Toward Concurrency in Software
Herb Sutter
The reason I like a if b else c is because it has the
most natural word order. In English,
My dog is happy if he has a bone, else sad.
sounds much more natural than
My dog is, if he has a bone, happy, else sad.
Neither sounds very natural to me; conditional
expressions don't occur much
On Thursday 2005-09-22 20:00, Josiah Carlson wrote:
[Alexander Myodov:]
But for the performance-oriented/human-friendliness factor, Python
is anyway not a rival to C and similar lowlevellers. C has
pseudo-namespaces, though.
C does not have pseudo-namespaces or variable encapsulation in
On 9/21/05, Josiah Carlson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Antoine Pitrou [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The best way to make people stop complaining about the GIL and start
using
process-based multiprogramming is to provide solid, standardized support
for process-based multiprogramming.
On 9/20/05, Nick Coghlan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Basically, I'm +1 on the original PEP 308 form because it reads more naturally
(and more like LC's and GE's) to me in expression contexts, and +0 on the
if/then/elif/else form (because I would like a real conditional operator).
I agree that
Gareth McCaughan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
[seems to have gone off list with a portion of the discussion]
The reason I like a if b else c is because it has the
most natural word order. In English,
My dog is happy if he has a bone, else sad.
sounds much more natural than
My dog is,
Vincent Wehren wrote:
The LZX:21-compressed package worked absolutely fine for me (Windows XP
Professional Build 2600.xpsp_sp2_gdr).
Thanks for all the confirmations; I'm going to use it then for 2.4.2.
Regards,
Martin
___
Python-Dev mailing list
Need I continue? Or is the dead still dead?
Since 'a if b else c' is not obviously dead, I will summarize my argument
against it thusly:
It is ambiguous to people because it is can be parsed (by people, who are
not automatons) as either '(a if) b (else c)' or 'a (if b) (else c)'. The
first
Jim Jewett [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
A nice summary, to which I will add just a little.
For a conditional expression, I think the choices are really down
to the following, which was already way too much freedom last
(http://www.python.org/peps/pep-0308.html)
Andrew Koenig wrote:
Interestingly enough, not all C++ compilers (Microsoft) hid variables
created in for loops
(http://www.devx.com/cplus/10MinuteSolution/28908/0/page/2).
That's because the C++ spec changed during standardization, when the
standards committee realized the original idea was
Nick Coghlan wrote:
Python, however, uses a dynamic name binding system and scopes are expensive
because they require setting up all of the machinery to support nested
visibility.
Scopes within a function needn't be anywhere near as expensive
as scopes for nested functions are. The compiler
Greg Ewing [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Terry Reedy wrote:
Many people, perhaps most, including me, read
exp1 if exp2 else exp3 # as
cond if etrue else efalse # in direct analogy with
cond ? etrue : efalse # from C
I'd have thought only Forth
Terry Reedy wrote:
During the c.l.p debate, someone counted about 100 correct uses of 'a and b
or c' in the standard library. But one real misuse edged Guido toward
replacing it. So I think the replacement should be as clear as reasonably
possible and clearly an improvement.
But I think
On 9/23/05, Nick Coghlan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
But I think there's a difference in kind here - to *fix* Raymond's example
required a fundamental change to the structure of the line, none of which
looked as clean as the original. There is no way to get the and/or construct
to gracefully
Nick Coghlan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
snip discussion indicating that our brains work different on this issue
I am reminded of how some people seem to react to fingernails on a
blackboard, while the screech is just another noise to me, except that I am
in the
18 matches
Mail list logo
