ion - should PEP8 push regular,
> not-Python-implementation code to use is for singletons in cases where
> == works perfectly? Seeing how effortless it is for programmers to use
> == as their first choice, I think PEP8 should allow that practice.
>
> Best,
>
> Nick
> __
__
> Python-ideas mailing list -- python-ideas@python.org
> To unsubscribe send an email to python-ideas-le...@python.org
> https://mail.python.org/mailman3/lists/python-ideas.python.org/
> Message archived at
> https://mail.python.org/archives/list/pyth
> Cheers everyone :)
> ___
> Python-ideas mailing list -- python-ideas@python.org
> To unsubscribe send an email to python-ideas-le...@python.org
> https://mail.python.org/mailman3/lists/python-ideas.python.org/
> Message archived
SE7RQ5EL2EFLYY6LTZRY5FARKN2XZW4/
> Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/
>
>
--
CALVIN SPEALMAN
SENIOR QUALITY ENGINEER
calvin.speal...@redhat.com M: +1.336.210.5107
[image: https://red.ht/sig] <https://red.ht/sig>
TRIED. TESTED. TRUSTED. <https://redhat.com/trusted&
@python.org
> To unsubscribe send an email to python-ideas-le...@python.org
> https://mail.python.org/mailman3/lists/python-ideas.python.org/
> Message archived at
> https://mail.python.org/archives/list/python-ideas@python.org/message/SRHBSWZEUGLZG55DGRHQZ4X7VOEPY6XC/
> Code of Conduct:
mensional DFT reduces
> n-dimensional circular convolution to element-wise multiplication.
>
> ___
> Python-ideas mailing list -- python-ideas@python.org
> To unsubscribe send an email to python-ideas-le...@python.org
> https://mail.python.org/ma
thing that the
> f-string could produce as an expression, then we'd still raise a
> ValueError:
>
> >>> f"{x:.02f}" = "0.12345"
> Traceback (most recent call last):
> File "", line 1, in
> f"{x:.02f}"
n-ideas.python.org/
> Message archived at
> https://mail.python.org/archives/list/python-ideas@python.org/message/ZGTZNKOSTNTEA3NLJWERIGC3IHG7WU5B/
> Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/
>
>
--
CALVIN SPEALMAN
SENIOR QUALITY ENGINEER
cspea...@redhat.com M: +1.336.210.510
today,
EOL be damned.
What message do we send if we undo one of the most visible changes *now*?
We'd send a message that it was all a mistake, and because of the
visibility of such a quintessential line of Python
print "Hello, World!"
It wouldn't just send a message that this
Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/
>
--
CALVIN SPEALMAN
SENIOR QUALITY ENGINEER
cspea...@redhat.com M: +1.336.210.5107
[image: https://red.ht/sig] <https://red.ht/sig>
TRIED. TESTED. TRUSTED. <https://redhat.com/trusted>
___
Python-
rg
> https://mail.python.org/mailman3/lists/python-ideas.python.org/
> Message archived at
> https://mail.python.org/archives/list/python-ideas@python.org/message/VCCQ6BOVEQZ4ZWLKVDTVUCMAWD2VQL7B/
> Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/
>
>
--
CALVIN SPEALMAN
SE
ython.org
> To unsubscribe send an email to python-ideas-le...@python.org
> https://mail.python.org/mailman3/lists/python-ideas.python.org/
> Message archived at
> https://mail.python.org/archives/list/python-ideas@python.org/message/KFTJ6QRCTICL4NDUURNY35D7JIDM3VWY/
> Code of Conduct: http:/
tps://mail.python.org/mailman3/lists/python-ideas.python.org/
> Message archived at
> https://mail.python.org/archives/list/python-ideas@python.org/message/UUFFAI3FZMQRVPDCUPZEOAZCRNXKWFDE/
> Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/
>
>
--
CALVIN SPEAL
/
>> Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/
>>
>
>
> --
> --Guido van Rossum (python.org/~guido)
> *Pronouns: he/him/his **(why is my pronoun here?)*
> <http://feministing.com/2015/02/03/how-using-they-as-a-singular-pronoun-can-change-the-world/>
```
> opposite = not regular
> ```
>
> 2. as a sort of ".is_falsy()" checker; when used with an if statement.
>
> like the first example.
>
>
> This PEP would make the difference between the two usecases explicit.
>
> Thoughts?
>
> Best Intentions,
>
YKJUGZKWSVZVAOGBPLZVKQG/
> Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/
>
--
CALVIN SPEALMAN
SENIOR QUALITY ENGINEER
cspea...@redhat.com M: +1.336.210.5107
[image: https://red.ht/sig] <https://red.ht/sig>
TRIED. TESTED. TRUSTED. <https://redhat.com/trusted>
__
without RETURN.
>> _______
>> Python-ideas mailing list
>> Python-ideas@python.org
>> https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-ideas
>> Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/
>>
> --
> --Guido (mob
2 subscribe to python-ideas and they have not brought it forward for
> discussion yet, so there's no guarantee of a response.
>
> On Mon, Apr 1, 2019 at 5:27 AM Calvin Spealman
> wrote:
>
>> While the PEP does show the version number as part of the path to the
>> ac
nything like that already exists to uniquely identify a Python
build or installation.
--
CALVIN SPEALMAN
SENIOR QUALITY ENGINEER
cspea...@redhat.com M: +1.336.210.5107
<https://red.ht/sig>
TRIED. TESTED. TRUSTED. <https://redhat.com/trusted>
___
27;:2 }
> >>> d3 = d1 <- d2
> >>> d3
> {'a':2, 'b':1 }
>
> Or on bools as Modus Ponens [1]
>
> Or your idea/imagination here :-)
>
>
>
> Regards,
> --francis
>
> [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Modus_ponens
>
trongly against to unnecessary syntactical additions to the language.
> This though, I think I can except. It introduces no new concepts and
> requires no special knowledge to use. There's no question about what
> is going on when you read it.
>
> --
> Paul Ferrell
> pfl...@gmail.com
> __
erently discourages or makes that impossible!
I can't say if I'm -0 or +0 but it is one of those.
> ___
> Python-ideas mailing list
> Python-ideas@python.org
> https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-ideas
> Code of Condu
First, this list is not appropriate. You should ask such a question in
python-list.
Second, JSON is a specific serialization format that explicitly rejects
datetime objects in *all* the languages with JSON libraries. You can only
use date objects in JSON if you control or understand both serializa
I'm very curious about the idea, but can't come up with any use cases based
just one your explanation. Maybe you could give some examples where this
would be useful? In particular, what are some cases that are really hard to
handle now and how would those cases be improved like this?
On Wed, Oct 3
On Thu, Oct 25, 2018 at 9:28 AM Anders Hovmöller
wrote:
>
> > The point is not saving a line or typing, but saving a thought.
> Expressing the intent of the factory function more clearly.
>
> Could you give some other usage examples?
>
> To me it seems like a nicer and less confusing way to creat
On Wed, Oct 24, 2018 at 4:41 PM Steven D'Aprano wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 24, 2018 at 09:18:14AM -0400, Calvin Spealman wrote:
> > I'd like to suggest what I think would be a simple addition to `def` and
> > `class` blocks. I don't know if calling those "Assignment
elp?
>
> If my assumption above is correct this just looks like a bit of syntactic
> sugar that IMO isn't really neccessary. It doesn't really improve
> readability or save many characters. The existing way to do this is totally
> fine.
>
> Benedikt
>
> Am 24.10.201
I'd like to suggest what I think would be a simple addition to `def` and
`class` blocks. I don't know if calling those "Assignment Blocks" is
accurate, but I just mean to refer to block syntaxes that assign to a name.
Anyway, I propose a combined return-def structure, and optionally also
allowing a
Absolutely -1 on this. Consider the following example:
def encode(s, *args):
"""Force UTF 8 no matter what!"""
return s.encode('utf8')
text = "Hello, there!"
text .= encode('latin1')
Do you see how this creates an ambiguous situation? Implicit attribute
lookup like this is really confusi
I am very disappointed in the existence of this thread. Mocking discourse
is extremely unpythonic.
On Mon, Sep 17, 2018 at 2:54 AM Jacco van Dorp wrote:
> Yeah, sounds about as sensible as the recent "ban ugly" campaign.
> +1.
>
> Op zo 16 sep. 2018 om 15:49 schreef Wes Turner :
>
>> Anyways, sp
Samantha,
I came into this thread reading the subject and thinking "over my dead
body!" until I read your well-thought reasoning and gave even a little bit
of thought to the idea.
You're absolutely right and while I think its very unlikely to get enough
support I do think it is a very good sugges
On Thu, Sep 6, 2018 at 9:11 AM Steven D'Aprano wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 06, 2018 at 12:15:46PM +0200, Anders Hovmöller wrote:
>
> > I have a working implementation for a new syntax which would make
> > using keyword arguments a lot nicer. Wouldn't it be awesome if instead
> > of:
> >
> > foo(a=
If its treated as a missing parameter, and currently doesn't do anything,
then it wouldn't be used... right? and it could be safe to add behavior for
it... right?
On Thu, Jul 19, 2018 at 11:17 AM, Eric V. Smith wrote:
> On 7/19/2018 10:01 AM, Calvin Spealman wrote:
>
>
gt;
> a = b ifnone c
>
> Although the assignment version looks unusual:
>
> b ifnone= c
>
> Then with the "default b = c" would look like this:
>
> ifnone b = c
>
> Le jeu. 19 juil. 2018 à 15:30, Calvin Spealman a
> écrit :
>
>> Operators that onl
It would be consistent to apply it to other functions and I'd be in favour
of that, yes.
On Thu, Jul 19, 2018 at 10:06 AM, Eric Fahlgren
wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 19, 2018 at 7:01 AM Calvin Spealman
> wrote:
>
>> As an alternative suggestion: What if the count parameter to
>
As an alternative suggestion: What if the count parameter to str.replace()
counted from the right with negative values? That would be consistent with
other things like indexing and slicing.
On Thu, Jul 19, 2018 at 9:47 AM, Eric Fahlgren
wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 18, 2018 at 8:20 PM Graham Gott com>
Operators that only vary by case would be... confusing. I'm not super keen
on the other syntax (either the ?? or .? operators) but I do think they
read well in C# where they come from. Different things work in different
languages, some times.
What about a new keyword: default
So you'd write the a
37 matches
Mail list logo
