Ethan Furman writes:
On 08/11/2014 08:50 PM, Stephen J. Turnbull wrote:
Chris Barker - NOAA Federal writes:
It seems pretty pedantic to say: we could make this work well,
but we'd rather chide you for not knowing the proper way to do
it.
Nobody disagrees. But backward
On 12 Aug 2014 11:21, Chris Barker - NOAA Federal chris.bar...@noaa.gov
wrote:
Sorry for the bike shedding here, but:
The quadratic behaviour of repeated str summation is a subtle, silent
error.
OK, fair enough. I suppose it would be hard and ugly to catch those
instances and raise an
Hi all,
The core of the matter is that if we repeatedly __add__ strings from a
long list, we get O(n**2) behavior. For one point of view, the
reason is that the additions proceed in left-to-right order. Indeed,
sum() could proceed in a more balanced tree-like order: from [x0, x1,
x2, x3, ...],
I think this thread is probably Python-Ideas territory...
On Mon, Aug 11, 2014 at 4:08 PM, Allen Li cyberdup...@gmail.com wrote:
Currently, this works with explicit line continuation, but as all style
guides favor implicit line continuation over explicit, it would be nice
if you could do the
On Tue, Aug 12, 2014 at 10:28:14AM +1000, Nick Coghlan wrote:
On 12 Aug 2014 09:09, Allen Li cyberdup...@gmail.com wrote:
This is a problem I sometimes run into when working with a lot of files
simultaneously, where I need three or more `with` statements:
with open('foo') as foo:
On Tue, Aug 12, 2014 at 7:15 AM, Steven D'Aprano st...@pearwood.info wrote:
On Tue, Aug 12, 2014 at 10:28:14AM +1000, Nick Coghlan wrote:
On 12 Aug 2014 09:09, Allen Li cyberdup...@gmail.com wrote:
This is a problem I sometimes run into when working with a lot of files
simultaneously,
On Tue, Aug 12, 2014 at 3:43 AM, Devin Jeanpierre jeanpierr...@gmail.com
wrote:
I think this thread is probably Python-Ideas territory...
On Mon, Aug 11, 2014 at 4:08 PM, Allen Li cyberdup...@gmail.com wrote:
Currently, this works with explicit line continuation, but as all style
guides
Hi,
On 12 August 2014 01:08, Allen Li cyberdup...@gmail.com wrote:
with (open('foo') as foo,
open('bar') as bar,
open('baz') as baz,
open('spam') as spam,
open('eggs') as eggs):
pass
+1. It's exactly the same grammar extension as for
On 08/12/2014 06:57 PM, Armin Rigo wrote:
Hi,
On 12 August 2014 01:08, Allen Li cyberdup...@gmail.com wrote:
with (open('foo') as foo,
open('bar') as bar,
open('baz') as baz,
open('spam') as spam,
open('eggs') as eggs):
pass
+1.
On Mon, Aug 11, 2014 at 11:07 PM, Stephen J. Turnbull step...@xemacs.org
wrote:
I'm referring to removing the unnecessary information that there's a
better way to do it, and simply raising an error (as in Python 3.2,
say) which is all a RealProgrammer[tm] should ever need!
I can't imagine
I know, I have nothing to decide here, since Im no contributer and just a silent watcher on this list.
However I just wanted to point out I fully agree with Chris Barkers position. Couldnt have stated
it better. Performance should be interpreter implementation issue, not language issue.
2)
On Tue, Aug 12, 2014 at 8:12 AM, Guido van Rossum gu...@python.org wrote:
On Tue, Aug 12, 2014 at 3:43 AM, Devin Jeanpierre jeanpierr...@gmail.com
wrote:
The parentheses seem unnecessary/redundant/weird. Why not allow
newlines in-between with and the terminating :?
with open('foo') as foo,
Chris Barker chris.bar...@noaa.gov writes:
What I fail to see is why it's better to raise an exception and point users
to a better way, than to simply provide an optimization so that it's a mute
issue.
The only justification offered here is that will teach people that summing
strings (and
On Tue, Aug 12, 2014 at 08:04:35AM -0500, Ian Cordasco wrote:
I think by introducing parentheses we are going to risk seriously
confusing users who may then try to write an assignment like
a = (open('spam') as spam, open('eggs') as eggs)
Seriously?
If they try it, they will get a syntax
14 matches
Mail list logo
