On 7 Dec 2006, at 02:01, Josiah Carlson wrote:
Alastair Houghton [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 7 Dec 2006, at 01:01, Josiah Carlson wrote:
If we don't want
slicing, or if prodicing a slice would produce a semantically
questionable state, then lets not do it.
...if you return match objects
On 7 Dec 2006, at 07:15, Fredrik Lundh wrote:
Michael Urman wrote:
The idea that slicing a match object should produce a match object
sounds like a foolish consistency to me.
well, the idea that adding m[x] as a convenience alias for m.group(x)
automatically turns m into a list-style
On 12/7/06, Fredrik Lundh [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
(and while you guys are waiting, I suggest you start a new thread where
you discuss some other inconsistency that would be easy to solve with
more code in the interpreter, like why -, /, and ** doesn't work
for strings, lists don't have a copy
On 12/6/06, Josiah Carlson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Special cases aren't special enough to break the rules.
Sure, but where is this rule that would be broken? I've seen it
invoked, but I've never felt it myself. I seriously thought of slicing
as returning a list of elements per
Michael Urman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 12/7/06, Fredrik Lundh [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
(and while you guys are waiting, I suggest you start a new thread where
you discuss some other inconsistency that would be easy to solve with
more code in the interpreter, like why -, /, and **
Fredrik Lundh wrote:
Michael Urman wrote:
The idea that slicing a match object should produce a match object
sounds like a foolish consistency to me.
well, the idea that adding m[x] as a convenience alias for m.group(x)
automatically turns m into a list-style sequence that also has to
Talin wrote:
Maybe instead of considering a match object to be a sequence, a match
object should be considered a map?
sure, except for one small thing. from earlier in this thread:
Ka-Ping Yee wrote:
I'd say, don't pretend m is a sequence. Pretend it's a mapping.
Then the
Maybe instead of considering a match object to be a sequence, a match
object should be considered a map? After all, we do have named, as well
as numbered, groups...?
To me, that makes a lot more sense.
Bill
___
Python-Dev mailing list
Fredrik Lundh wrote:
Talin wrote:
Maybe instead of considering a match object to be a sequence, a match
object should be considered a map?
sure, except for one small thing. from earlier in this thread:
Ka-Ping Yee wrote:
I'd say, don't pretend m is a sequence. Pretend it's a
On Thu, Dec 07, 2006, Alastair Houghton wrote:
An example where it might be useful:
m = re.match('(?:([0-9]+) ([0-9]+) ([0-9]+) ([0-9]+) (?Prectrect)'
'|([0-9]+) ([0-9]+) ([0-9]+) (?Pcirclecircle))',
lineFromFile)
if m['rect']:
On 7 Dec 2006, at 18:54, Martin v. Löwis wrote:
Alastair Houghton schrieb:
How about we remove the word foolish from the debate?
We should table the debate. If you really want that feature,
write a PEP. You want it, some people are opposed; a PEP is
the procedure to settle the difference.
#1610575 suggests to introduce the 't' code to support the _Bool
type where available, and uses char if it isn't available.
Any objections to adding it?
Regards,
Martin
___
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python.org
On 12/4/06, Josiah Carlson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
With the proper mapping, this is trivial...
class namelookup:
[...snip...]
foo = foo()
print %(foo.b)i + %(foo.a)i%namelookup(locals())
2 + 1
It can even be simpler and more powerful:
class evallookup:
def __init__(self, nsg,
Martin v. Löwis schrieb:
#1610575 suggests to introduce the 't' code to support the _Bool
type where available, and uses char if it isn't available.
Any objections to adding it?
Not from me, although the patch should probably be extended to add a
ctypes.c99_bool
(or how it would be named)
Alastair Houghton [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 7 Dec 2006, at 02:01, Josiah Carlson wrote:
Alastair Houghton [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 7 Dec 2006, at 01:01, Josiah Carlson wrote:
If we don't want
slicing, or if prodicing a slice would produce a semantically
questionable state, then
Michael Urman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 12/6/06, Josiah Carlson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Special cases aren't special enough to break the rules.
Sure, but where is this rule that would be broken? I've seen it
invoked, but I've never felt it myself. I seriously thought of slicing
as
Alexey Borzenkov [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
It can even be simpler and more powerful:
class evallookup:
def __init__(self, nsg, nsl):
self.nsg = nsg
self.nsl = nsl
def __getitem__(self, name):
return eval(name, self.nsg, self.nsl)
Never use eval in any code where
Martin v. Löwis wrote:
Also, if the interpreter invokes, say, threading._shutdown():
that's also user-screwable, as a user may put something else
into threading._shutdown.
Although it would require being somewhat more deliberate,
since threading._shutdown clearly has something to do
with
Karen Treanor [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Unfortunately this won't work for me, not by clicking on it or by
cutting and pasting it.
The url below is wrapped, I assume you fixed the wrap?
-Original Message- From: Kurt B. Kaiser [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, 8 December 2006
Karen Treanor [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
More and more people seem to be having a selection of email addresses,
some for general contact, some for business, and one private one for
only a select few contacts. This isn't possible in business, as your
email address is by necessity public, it
Kurt B. Kaiser [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Don't ever do that!
Ahhh... sorry about that!!
--
KBK
___
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe:
I'm looking for advice on stripping down Python for an SBC to run Numpy
and Scipy. I have the following notes on the system
We have code that requires recent versions of Numpy and Scipy.
The processor is a 32 bit Sharp ARM Sharp LH7A404 32 bit ARM922TDMI with
32MB of SDRAM.
512 MB flash
Talin wrote:
The original proposal was to make m[n] a synonym for m.group(n).
group() is clearly map-like in its behavior.
so have you checked what exception m.group(n) raises when you try to
access a group that doesn't exist ?
frankly, speaking as the original SRE author, I will now flip
a Fred [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'm looking for advice on stripping down Python for an SBC to run Numpy
and Scipy. I have the following notes on the system
We have code that requires recent versions of Numpy and Scipy.
The processor is a 32 bit Sharp ARM Sharp LH7A404 32 bit ARM922TDMI
24 matches
Mail list logo
