Boris Borcic wrote:
I believe that in this case native linguistic intuition made the decision...
The reason has nothing to do with language. Guido didn't
want sum() to become an attractive nuisance by *appearing*
to be an obvious way of joining a list of strings, while
actually being a very
(Attention conservation notice: the following is concerned almost entirely
with exegesis of an old python-dev thread. Those interested in improving Python
and not in history and exegesis should probably ignore it.)
On Tuesday 2006-07-11 13:43, Boris Borcic wrote:
I believe that in this case
Gareth McCaughan wrote:
(Attention conservation notice: the following is concerned almost entirely
with exegesis of an old python-dev thread. Those interested in improving
Python
and not in history and exegesis should probably ignore it.)
On Tuesday 2006-07-11 13:43, Boris Borcic wrote:
I wish to apologize for mistakenly pushing the send button on an untouched
copy of Gereth McGaughan's reply, in the case my early cancel at gmane did not
stop the propagation.
I'll profit just to add (bringing this to a conclusion)
Gareth McCaughan wrote:
(...was not Guido's first
Fredrik Lundh wrote:
in what language the word sum an appropriate synonym for concatenate ?
any that admits a+b to mean ''.join([a,b]), I'd say.
- BB
___
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python.org
Boris Borcic wrote:
in what language [is] the word sum an appropriate synonym for
concatenate ?
any that admits a+b to mean ''.join([a,b]), I'd say.
and what human language would that be ?
/F
___
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python.org
Fredrik Lundh wrote:
Boris Borcic wrote:
in what language [is] the word sum an appropriate synonym for
concatenate ?
any that admits a+b to mean ''.join([a,b]), I'd say.
and what human language would that be ?
Let's admit the answer is 'none' (and I apologize for accusing only
Please end this thread. Now. Really.
--
--Guido van Rossum (home page: http://www.python.org/~guido/)
___
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe:
Fredrik Lundh wrote:
Boris Borcic wrote:
in what language [is] the word sum an appropriate synonym for
concatenate ?
any that admits a+b to mean ''.join([a,b]), I'd say.
and what human language would that be ?
Python :)
Sure-computers-can-speak-it-but-so-can-humans'ly yours,
Nick.
--
Boris Borcic wrote:
sum() *is* exactly an attractive nuisance by *appearing* to be an obvious way
of
chaining strings in a list (without actually being one).
But at least it fails immediately, prompting you to
look in another direction.
I admit that there is a step of arguable
Gareth McCaughan wrote:
(I agree that Greg's interpretation is also not well supported
by that thread;
I was perhaps a bit excessive in claiming that language
had nothing to do with it. What I meant was that it
wasn't the *only* consideration. If there hadn't been
any disadvantages, quite
Boris Borcic wrote:
Fredrik Lundh wrote:
in what language the word sum an appropriate synonym for concatenate ?
any that admits a+b to mean ''.join([a,b]), I'd say.
Not the same thing. a + b is usually pronounced
a plus b. Now, plus has a somewhat wider meaning
than sum. It sounds quite in
Guido van Rossum wrote:
On 7/5/06, Michael Chermside [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Guido writes:
[discussion of how to fix the can't-bind-outer-scope-vars wart]
...
Are there any other native speakers who side with Michael?
A bit OT, but why should native speakers (eg of English) have
Boris Borcic wrote:
I believe that in this case native linguistic intuition made the decision...
The reason has nothing to do with language. Guido didn't
want sum() to become an attractive nuisance by *appearing*
to be an obvious way of joining a list of strings, while
actually being a very
14 matches
Mail list logo
