On 14 March 2018 at 15:20, Chris Billington
wrote:
>
> I wonder if there's any reason something like this shouldn't be built into
> Python's default import system.
>
There are two main challenges with enforcing such a check, one affecting
end users in general, one affecting standard library maint
I'd just do this, which works today:
==
import numpy
import io
ar = numpy.loadtxt(io.StringIO("""
1 5 9 155
53 44 44 34
"""))
==
Of course, this is only worth the trouble if you
are somehow loading a very large matrix.
(And then, are you sure you want to
2018-03-13 13:17 GMT+01:00 Steven D'Aprano :
> On Mon, Mar 12, 2018 at 09:57:32PM +0100, George Fischhof wrote:
>
> > Right now we have several modules that contain functions related
> > to file-system operations mainly the os, pathlib and shutil.
> > For beginners it is quite hard to remember whe
On Thu, Mar 15, 2018 at 6:15 AM, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 15, 2018 at 01:32:35AM +0100, Mikhail V wrote:
>
> Using spaces to separate items has the fatal flaw that it cannot
> distinguish
>
> x - y 0 # two items, the expression `x - y` and the integer 0
>
> from:
>
>x - y 0
On Fri, Mar 16, 2018 at 12:38 AM, George Fischhof wrote:
>
>
> " if new file functions are added, they will go only in pathlib,
> which makes pathlib effectively mandatory;"
> Yes but I think this part of the evolution: slowly everyone will shift to
> pathlib,
> and being mandatory is true for t
On Fri, 16 Mar 2018 04:15:11 +1100
Chris Angelico wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 16, 2018 at 12:38 AM, George Fischhof wrote:
> >
> >
> > " if new file functions are added, they will go only in pathlib,
> > which makes pathlib effectively mandatory;"
> > Yes but I think this part of the evolution: slowly
On Fri, Mar 16, 2018 at 4:48 AM, Antoine Pitrou wrote:
> On Fri, 16 Mar 2018 04:15:11 +1100
> Chris Angelico wrote:
>> On Fri, Mar 16, 2018 at 12:38 AM, George Fischhof wrote:
>> >
>> >
>> > " if new file functions are added, they will go only in pathlib,
>> > which makes pathlib effectively m
Hello everyone,
Sorry if this subject has already been covered in the mailing list but I
could not find it.
My question is very simple: should the `quantile` function be added to
python `statistics` module.
I was very happy to learn the existence of this module in python3 only to
later be forced
On Thu, Mar 15, 2018 at 12:39 PM, PLIQUE Guillaume
wrote:
> Hello everyone,
>
> Sorry if this subject has already been covered in the mailing list but I
> could not find it.
>
> My question is very simple: should the `quantile` function be added to
> python `statistics` module.
This seems like a
On Thu, Mar 15, 2018 at 02:42:01PM -0700, Nathaniel Smith wrote:
> This seems like a reasonable idea to me -- but be warned that there
> are actually quite a few slightly-different definitions of "quantile"
> in use. R supports 9 different methods of calculating quantiles
Indeed. I've been consid
On 14/03/2018 17:57, Chris Angelico wrote:
On Thu, Mar 15, 2018 at 12:40 AM, Søren Pilgård wrote:
Of course you can always make error, even in a single letter.
But I think there is a big difference between mixing up +-/* and **
where the operator is in "focus" and the implicit concatenation w
Steven D'Aprano writes:
> Indeed. I've been considering quantiles and quartiles for a long time,
> and I've found at least ten different definitions for quantiles and
> sixteen for quartiles.
My take is "don't let the perfect be the enemy of the good."
Quantiles are used a lot for "governmen
12 matches
Mail list logo
