On Fri, 2006-02-03 at 11:56 -0800, Josiah Carlson wrote:
Donovan Baarda [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
[...]
Nuff was a fairy... though I guess it depends on where you draw the
line; should [1,2,3] be list(1,2,3)?
Who is Nuff?
fairynuff... :-)
Along the lines of not every x line function
On Fri, 2006-02-03 at 20:02 +0100, Martin v. Löwis wrote:
Donovan Baarda wrote:
Before set() the standard way to do them was to use dicts with None
Values... to me the {1,2,3} syntax would have been a logical extension
of the a set is a dict with no values, only keys mindset. I don't know
On Mon, 6 Feb 2006 09:05:01 +0100, Thomas Wouters [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Mon, Feb 06, 2006 at 05:33:57AM +, Bengt Richter wrote:
Perhaps I missed a py3k assumption in this thread (where I see in the PEP
that Remove distinction between int and long types is core item number
one)?
On Mon, 2006-02-06 at 15:36 +0100, Ronald Oussoren wrote:
On Monday, February 06, 2006, at 03:12PM, Donovan Baarda [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
On Fri, 2006-02-03 at 20:02 +0100, Martin v. Löwis wrote:
Donovan Baarda wrote:
Before set() the standard way to do them was to use dicts with
On 2/6/06, Bengt Richter [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Is PEP 237 phase C to be implemented sooner than py3k,
making isinstance(something, int) a transparently distinction-hiding alias
for
isinstance(something, integer), or outright illegal? IOW, will
isinstance(something, int)
be _guaranteed_
Donovan Baarda [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Fri, 2006-02-03 at 11:56 -0800, Josiah Carlson wrote:
Along the lines of not every x line function should be a builtin, not
every builtin should have syntax. I think that sets have particular
uses, but I don't believe those uses are
On 2/6/06, Guido van Rossum [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 2/6/06, Donovan Baarda [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
yeah... the problem is differentiating the empty set from an empty dict.
The only alternative that occured to me was the not-so-nice and
not-backwards-compatible {:} for an empty dict and
On 2/6/06, Guido van Rossum [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
...
What we should do in 3.0 is not entirely clear to me. It would be nice
if there was only a single type (named 'int', of course) with two
run-time representations, one similar to the current int and one
similar to the current long. But
On Mon, Feb 06, 2006, Chris or Leslie Smith wrote:
Aahz:
Alex:
|| def areclose(x,y,rtol=1.e-5,atol=1.e-8):
|| return abs(x-y)atol+rtol*abs(y)
|
| Looks interesting. I don't quite understand what atol/rtol are,
| though.
Does it help to spell it like this?
def areclose(x, y,
After so many attempts to come up with an alternative for lambda,
perhaps we should admit defeat. I've not had the time to follow the
most recent rounds, but I propose that we keep lambda, so as to stop
wasting everybody's talent and time on an impossible quest.
+1.
This would remove my
On 2/6/06, Aahz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
...
def areclose(x, y, relative_err = 1.e-5, absolute_err=1.e-8):
diff = abs(x - y)
ave = (abs(x) + abs(y))/2
return diff absolute_err or diff/ave relative_err
Also, separating the two terms with 'or' rather than '+' makes the
two
Steven Bethard wrote:
Guido van Rossum wrote:
After so many attempts to come up with an alternative for lambda,
perhaps we should admit defeat. I've not had the time to follow the most
recent rounds, but I propose that we keep lambda, so as to stop wasting
everybody's talent and time on an
[Chris Smith]
Does it help to spell it like this?
def areclose(x, y, relative_err = 1.e-5, absolute_err=1.e-8):
diff = abs(x - y)
ave = (abs(x) + abs(y))/2
return diff absolute_err or diff/ave relative_err
There is a certain beauty and clarity to this presentation; however, it
2006/2/6, Raymond Hettinger [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
The original Numeric definition is likely to be better for people who know
what they're doing; however, I still question whether it is an appropriate
remedy for the beginner issue
of why 1.1 + 1.1 + 1.1 doesn't equal 3.3.
Beginners won't know
Alex Martelli wrote:
On 2/6/06, Aahz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
...
def areclose(x, y, relative_err = 1.e-5, absolute_err=1.e-8):
diff = abs(x - y)
ave = (abs(x) + abs(y))/2
return diff absolute_err or diff/ave relative_err
Also, separating the two terms with 'or' rather than '+'
Patch / Bug Summary
___
Patches : 391 open ( +0) / 3038 closed (+10) / 3429 total (+10)
Bugs: 915 open ( +9) / 5540 closed (+21) / 6455 total (+30)
RFE : 209 open ( +2) / 197 closed ( +0) / 406 total ( +2)
New / Reopened Patches
__
difflib
Does anyone have any comments about applying the following patch to
asynchat? It should not affect the behavior of the module in any way
for those who do not want to use the feature provided by the patch. The
point of the patch is to make it easy to use asynchat in a multithreaded
Guido van Rossum wrote:
After so many attempts to come up with an alternative for lambda,
perhaps we should admit defeat. I've not had the time to follow the
most recent rounds, but I propose that we keep lambda, so as to stop
wasting everybody's talent and time on an impossible quest.
The
On 2/5/06, Guido van Rossum [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
After so many attempts to come up with an alternative for lambda,
perhaps we should admit defeat. I've not had the time to follow the
most recent rounds, but I propose that we keep lambda, so as to stop
wasting everybody's talent and time on
Mark Edgington wrote:
Does anyone have any comments about applying the following patch to
asynchat?
That patch looks wrong. What does it mean to run in a thread?
All code runs in a thread, all the time: sometime, that thread
is the main thread.
Furthermore, I can't see any presumed
Brett Cannon wrote:
But I know that everyone and their email client is against me on this
one, so I am not going to really try to tear into this. But I do
think that lambda needs a renaming. Speaking as someone who still
forgets that Python's lambda is not the same as those found in
On 2/7/06, Martin v. Löwis [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Brett Cannon wrote:
But I know that everyone and their email client is against me on this
one, so I am not going to really try to tear into this. But I do
think that lambda needs a renaming. Speaking as someone who still
forgets that
22 matches
Mail list logo
