On 13 September 2013 22:23, Steven D'Aprano st...@pearwood.info wrote:
On Fri, Sep 13, 2013 at 08:42:46PM +1000, Nick Coghlan wrote:
Perhaps __getdescriptor__ would work as the method name? Yes, it can
technically return a non-descriptor,
So technically that name is, um, what's the term... oh
On 09/13/2013 09:53 PM, Joao S. O. Bueno wrote:
On 13 September 2013 22:40, Ethan Furman et...@stoneleaf.us wrote:
On 09/13/2013 06:25 PM, MRAB wrote:
On 14/09/2013 01:49, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
Is it more common to want both the canonical key and value at the same
time, or to just want
As will become evident, I disagree with Steven at almost every point.
However, I think his point about users not reading documentation is
well-taken. Due to hyperlinking, users are very likely to skip past
module docstrings. I suggest two (perhaps informal) additions to the
documentation policy
On Fri, 13 Sep 2013 21:59:11 -0700
Ethan Furman et...@stoneleaf.us wrote:
I mean - given no function to retrieve the canonical key,
one would have to resort to:
my_key = data.__transform__(given_key)
for key, value in data.items():
if data.__transform__(key) == my_key:
On Sat, 14 Sep 2013 14:33:56 +0900
Larry Hastings la...@hastings.org wrote:
On 09/14/2013 03:40 AM, Antoine Pitrou wrote:
Hello,
Following the python-dev discussion, I've written a PEP to recap the
proposal and the various arguments. It's inlined below, and it will
probably appear soon
On 14 September 2013 12:44, Steven D'Aprano st...@pearwood.info wrote:
On Fri, Sep 13, 2013 at 06:00:18PM -0700, Ethan Furman wrote:
Personally, if there's a bunch of push-back against just adding
TransformDict directly, why don't we make it provisional? I thought that
was what provisional
On 14 September 2013 12:44, Steven D'Aprano st...@pearwood.info wrote:
On Fri, Sep 13, 2013 at 06:00:18PM -0700, Ethan Furman wrote:
Personally, if there's a bunch of push-back against just adding
TransformDict directly, why don't we make it provisional? I thought that
was what provisional
On 14/09/2013 05:47, Ethan Furman wrote:
On 09/13/2013 08:18 PM, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
You're missing that I'm not iterating over the entire dict, just some
subset (data) that I got from elsewhere.
Ah, okay. Between you and Antoine I am convinced that .getitem() is a good
thing. So have
On 09/14/2013 03:27 AM, Antoine Pitrou wrote:
On Fri, 13 Sep 2013 21:59:11 -0700
Ethan Furman et...@stoneleaf.us wrote:
I mean - given no function to retrieve the canonical key,
one would have to resort to:
my_key = data.__transform__(given_key)
for key, value in data.items():
if
On Sat, 14 Sep 2013 09:43:13 -0700
Ethan Furman et...@stoneleaf.us wrote:
On 09/14/2013 03:27 AM, Antoine Pitrou wrote:
On Fri, 13 Sep 2013 21:59:11 -0700
Ethan Furman et...@stoneleaf.us wrote:
I mean - given no function to retrieve the canonical key,
one would have to resort to:
On 09/14/2013 10:41 AM, Antoine Pitrou wrote:
On Sat, 14 Sep 2013 09:43:13 -0700 Ethan Furman wrote:
Still, I think it would be useful to expose the transform function.
Any good reason not to?
No good reason. What's the name? transform_func?
I had originally thought transform_key, but
14.09.13 20:41, Antoine Pitrou написав(ла):
On Sat, 14 Sep 2013 09:43:13 -0700
Ethan Furman et...@stoneleaf.us wrote:
Still, I think it would be useful to expose the transform function.
Any good reason not to?
No good reason. What's the name? transform_func?
There is one reason --
On Sat, 14 Sep 2013 22:07:50 +0300
Serhiy Storchaka storch...@gmail.com wrote:
14.09.13 20:41, Antoine Pitrou написав(ла):
On Sat, 14 Sep 2013 09:43:13 -0700
Ethan Furman et...@stoneleaf.us wrote:
Still, I think it would be useful to expose the transform function.
Any good reason not to?
On 9/14/2013 1:45 PM, antoine.pitrou wrote:
http://hg.python.org/cpython/rev/4f5815747f58
changeset: 85701:4f5815747f58
user:Antoine Pitrou solip...@pitrou.net
date:Sat Sep 14 19:45:47 2013 +0200
summary:
Issue #18937: Add an assertLogs() context manager to unittest.TestCase
On Fri, Sep 13, 2013 at 11:40 AM, Antoine Pitrou solip...@pitrou.netwrote:
Following the python-dev discussion, I've written a PEP to recap the
proposal and the various arguments. It's inlined below, and it will
probably appear soon at http://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0455/, too.
Thanks,
I was exercising the alpha two release of 3.4 and noticed that
it is still being built under GCC 4.2.1.
Is there any reason we have to use an old compiler?
I would like to see it built under the latest version of Clang
(like the other tools on the Mac) or under GCC 4.8.1.
I've better using the
In article 70c99f87-e9a5-4838-a1e9-4739fbf2e...@gmail.com,
Raymond Hettinger raymond.hettin...@gmail.com wrote:
I was exercising the alpha two release of 3.4 and noticed that
it is still being built under GCC 4.2.1.
Is there any reason we have to use an old compiler?
Yes, kinda. It's
On Sat, 14 Sep 2013 12:31:36 -0700
Guido van Rossum gu...@python.org wrote:
On Fri, Sep 13, 2013 at 11:40 AM, Antoine Pitrou solip...@pitrou.netwrote:
Following the python-dev discussion, I've written a PEP to recap the
proposal and the various arguments. It's inlined below, and it will
On Sep 14, 2013, at 1:32 PM, Ned Deily n...@acm.org wrote:
The
most recent Developer Tools for 10.8 and 10.7 systems, Xcode 4.6.x, have
a mature clang but do not provide a 10.6 SDK. Even with using an SDK,
it's still possible to end up inadvertently linking with the wrong
versions of
14.09.13 20:41, Antoine Pitrou написав(ла):
No good reason. What's the name? transform_func?
transform_func looks... truncated. Why not transform_function or trans_func?
___
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python.org
On Sun, 15 Sep 2013 00:55:35 +0300
Serhiy Storchaka storch...@gmail.com wrote:
14.09.13 20:41, Antoine Pitrou написав(ла):
No good reason. What's the name? transform_func?
transform_func looks... truncated. Why not transform_function or trans_func?
The stdlib commonly uses func rather than
On Sat, Sep 14, 2013 at 2:55 PM, Serhiy Storchaka storch...@gmail.comwrote:
14.09.13 20:41, Antoine Pitrou написав(ла):
No good reason. What's the name? transform_func?
transform_func looks... truncated. Why not transform_function or
trans_func?
transform_λ
On 14/09/13 23:31, Eli Bendersky wrote:
On Sat, Sep 14, 2013 at 2:55 PM, Serhiy Storchaka storch...@gmail.com
mailto:storch...@gmail.com wrote:
14.09.13 20:41, Antoine Pitrou написав(ла):
No good reason. What's the name? transform_func?
transform_func looks... truncated.
+1. A 10.6-only build makes sense.
If you aren't having problems with GCC 4.8, then Clang shouldn't give any
trouble. Honestly, I still think Clang should be a compiler option in Windows
distutils...
Raymond Hettinger raymond.hettin...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sep 14, 2013, at 1:32 PM, Ned Deily
15.09.13 00:58, Antoine Pitrou написав(ла):
On Sun, 15 Sep 2013 00:55:35 +0300
Serhiy Storchaka storch...@gmail.com wrote:
14.09.13 20:41, Antoine Pitrou написав(ла):
No good reason. What's the name? transform_func?
transform_func looks... truncated. Why not transform_function or trans_func?
On 09/14/2013 05:32 PM, Serhiy Storchaka wrote:
15.09.13 00:58, Antoine Pitrou написав(ла):
On Sun, 15 Sep 2013 00:55:35 +0300
Serhiy Storchaka storch...@gmail.com wrote:
14.09.13 20:41, Antoine Pitrou написав(ла):
No good reason. What's the name? transform_func?
transform_func looks...
On 09/14/2013 07:30 PM, Antoine Pitrou wrote:
On Sat, 14 Sep 2013 14:33:56 +0900
Larry Hastings la...@hastings.org wrote:
Whenever I read a discussion about the dict, I always wonder whether the
same thing applies to a set. Have you considered the utility of a
TransformSet? Or is it YAGNI?
27 matches
Mail list logo
