It's hard to overstate how "normal" a non-match is. A typical program might
examine thousands of strings to identify the ten that match a pattern.
Exceptions shouldn't be used for cases that are in no way exceptional.
On Sun, Oct 22, 2023, 7:27 PM Greg Ewing wrote:
> On 23/10/23 1:36 am,
I feel like this is all example of "not every one line function needs to be
in the standard library."
You can easily write your own 'match_or_raise()'... I guess it would take
two lines, actually.
On Sat, Oct 21, 2023, 2:42 PM Ram Rachum wrote:
> Hey,
>
> I bet this has been discussed before
hours earlier than that announcement was about a talk I
gave back then.
On Mon, Jul 17, 2023 at 5:23 PM David Mertz, Ph.D.
wrote:
> This ship has sailed and the ternary operator isn't going to change.
> Seriously, let it go.
>
> I forget the PEP, but this was well discussed l
This ship has sailed and the ternary operator isn't going to change.
Seriously, let it go.
I forget the PEP, but this was well discussed long ago when the ternary was
added. In general, Python prefers words to punctuation symbols for most of
its constructs. So the decision was consistent with
This is basically PEP 505 – None-aware operators (
https://peps.python.org/pep-0505/).
I've generally been opposed to that, but clearly some serious and smart
Pythonistas have supported it. That PEP is a bigger lift than your
suggestion, but correspondingly more general.
On Mon, Jul 10, 2023,
Dom:
I'd recommend you simply start a GitHub project for "Curated PyPI", find a
catchy domain name, and publish that via GH Pages. That's a few hours of
work to get a skeleton. But no, I'm not quite volunteering to create and
maintain it myself today.
After there is a concrete site existing,
I would go a bit further: DAOs are absolutely terrible for EVERYTHING, and
anything that remotely mentions the acronym is a scam.
Let's please, please, please not go down some cryptoscam, blockchain,
rabbit hole here. Drop it, burn the remains, try to forget it ever
happened.
On Wed, Jul 5,
Every Python idea that has ever been proposed "for the sake of
completeness" has been rejected... at least in the 24 years I've been
following such closely.
Do you have an actual compelling use case? An abstract symmetry isn't going
to do it.
On Wed, Jul 5, 2023 at 6:17 AM wrote:
>
> Python
I've also been a Python user for 24 years now. Since long before iterators
were a feature of Python. I wrote quite a few widely read articles about
iterators when they were introduced, including the first about leverageing
iterators for coroutines.
I can't say I've NEVER encountered a glitch
https://peps.python.org/pep-0661/
On Thu, Jun 8, 2023 at 9:58 AM Dom Grigonis wrote:
> This has been bugging me for a long time. It seems that python doesn’t
> have a convention for “Undefined” type.
>
> When I started using python I naturally used None for it (as advised).
>
> However, the
more_itertools.interleave(*iterables)[source]
Return a new iterable yielding from each iterable in turn, until the
shortest is exhausted.
>>> list(interleave([1, 2, 3], [4, 5], [6, 7, 8]))
[1, 4, 6, 2, 5, 7]
For a version that doesn’t terminate after the shortest iterable is
exhausted, see
lowercase letters (and
newline as I did it). A more diverse alphabet might tip the timing
slightly, but it's going to be a small matter either way.
On Fri, Jun 2, 2023 at 7:49 PM Chris Angelico wrote:
>
> On Sat, 3 Jun 2023 at 09:42, David Mertz, Ph.D. wrote:
> >
> > Yeah
Yeah... oops. Obviously I typed the version in email. Should have done it
in the shell. But you got the intention of set-ifying the characters in the
large string.
Yes on lies, damn lies, and benchmarks.
On Fri, Jun 2, 2023, 7:29 PM Chris Angelico wrote:
> On Sat, 3 Jun 2023 at 08:28, Da
care about one category, then you still have to
ask `'Sc' in set(unicodedata.category(set(ch)) for ch in s)`. Which
is fine, that's not a hard question to ask.
On Fri, Jun 2, 2023 at 5:36 PM Chris Angelico wrote:
>
> On Sat, 3 Jun 2023 at 07:28, David Mertz, Ph.D. wrote:
> >
>
Sure. That's fine. With a sufficiently long strings my code is faster, but
for "typical" strings yours will be.
On Fri, Jun 2, 2023, 5:20 PM Chris Angelico wrote:
> On Sat, 3 Jun 2023 at 07:08, David Mertz, Ph.D.
> wrote:
> >
> > def does_string_have_currency_mark(s
rote:
>
> On Sat, 3 Jun 2023 at 06:54, David Mertz, Ph.D. wrote:
> >
> > If we're talking PyPI, it would be nice to have:
> >
> > unicode_categories = {"Zs": [...], "Ll": [...], ...}
> >
> > For all the various categories. It w
her hand, it's a few lines of code
with a lazy import. Probably not enough code to put on PyPI.
On Fri, Jun 2, 2023 at 4:32 PM Marc-Andre Lemburg wrote:
>
> On 01.06.2023 20:06, David Mertz, Ph.D. wrote:
> > I guess this is pretty general for the described need:
> >
> >
I guess this is pretty general for the described need:
>>> %time unicode_whitespace = [chr(c) for c in range(0x) if
>>> unicodedata.category(chr(c)) == "Zs"]
CPU times: user 19.2 ms, sys: 0 ns, total: 19.2 ms
Wall time: 18.7 ms
>>> unicode_whitespace
[' ', '\xa0', '\u1680', '\u2000',
OK, fair enough. What about "has whitespace (including Unicode beyond ASCII)"?
On Thu, Jun 1, 2023 at 1:08 PM Chris Angelico wrote:
>
> On Fri, 2 Jun 2023 at 02:27, David Mertz, Ph.D. wrote:
> >
> > It feels to me like "split on whitespace" or "remove
It feels to me like "split on whitespace" or "remove whitespace" are
quite common operations. I've been frustrated a number of times by
settling for the ASCII whitespace class when I really wanted the
Unicode whitespace class.
On Thu, Jun 1, 2023 at 12:20 PM Paul Moore wrote:
>
> On Thu, 1 Jun
On Wed, May 17, 2023 at 2:22 PM Daniel Guffey
wrote:
> I'm a bit dubious about the pypi suggestion as packages are being
> regularly poisoned with malware ( e.g. New KEKW malware infects
> open-source Python Wheel files via a PyPI distribution | SC Media
> (scmagazine.com)
>
Moreover, I have worked on a lot of code where ellipsis is used to mean
"this branch isn't implemented yet, but doing nothing isn't terrible."
I don't love that code. I'd rather it use `pass` and a clarifying comment.
But this change would make all that existing code much more broken.
On Sat,
It's actually much worse than making obviously buggy code pass silently. It
can also make uncommon bugs almost impossible to detect.
Some code looks like `mystring.format(**values)`. Whether values contains
the needed keys can vary at runtime now. It might be fine under most code
paths, but fail
In a similar vein, I'm guessing that if XML were new today, we'd have zero
APIs in the standard library to support it... rather than SIX!
On Mon, Mar 13, 2023 at 12:23 PM Christopher Barker
wrote:
> I think the answer is that yaml is a pretty complex specification --
> powerful and flexible,
Is it really that much longer to write `f"{s1} {s2}"` when you want that?
Maybe a couple characters more total, but once you are in an f-string, you
can also do a zillion other things at the same time.
On Sun, Mar 5, 2023 at 10:42 PM Rob Cliffe via Python-ideas <
python-ideas@python.org> wrote:
Wow! That would break SO MUCH of the code I've written! E.g.:
translate = {"el": "ἐπιστήμη", "en": "Knowledge", "zh": "知识"}
On Thu, Feb 16, 2023 at 9:54 AM Arusekk wrote:
> Hi all!
>
> I was writing a tutorial on the distinction between bytes and strings
> and why it is important, when I
distinction
of post 10th century CE that modern Greek inherited. I feel like
`s.upper(locale='koine')` might sensibly account for this.
On Wed, Dec 21, 2022, 1:23 AM Chris Angelico wrote:
> On Wed, 21 Dec 2022 at 17:20, David Mertz, Ph.D.
> wrote:
> >
> > I'm on my tabl
I'm on my tablet, so cannot test at the moment. But is `str.upper()` REALLY
wrong about the Turkish dotless I (and dotted capital I) currently?!
That feels like a BPO needed if true.
On Wed, Dec 21, 2022, 1:04 AM Steven D'Aprano wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 21, 2022 at 09:42:51AM +1100, Cameron
On Sun, Dec 18, 2022 at 8:29 PM Steven D'Aprano wrote:
> > However, if you want to allow these types to possibly *do* something with
> > the strings inside (validate them, canonicalize them, do a security
> check,
> > etc), I think I like the other way:
> > class html(str): pass
> > class
On Sun, Dec 18, 2022 at 5:24 PM Paul Moore wrote:
> On Sun, 18 Dec 2022 at 21:42, Christopher Barker
> wrote:
>
>> On Sun, Dec 18, 2022 at 9:48 AM David Mertz, Ph.D.
>> wrote:
>>
>>> In general, I find any proposal to change Python "because then my t
Well, obviously I have to come to the defense of vim as well :-). I'm not
sure what year vim got the capability, but I suspect around as long as
emacs.
This isn't for exactly the same language use case, but finding a quick
example on the internet:
unlet b:current_syntaxsyntax include @srcBash
Just to be clear on my opinion. I think Emil's idea was 100% appropriate to
share on python-ideas, and he does a good job of showing where it works be
useful. Sure, a background search is nice, but not required.
That doesn't mean I *support* the idea. I take a very conservative attitude
towards
On Sat, Dec 17, 2022, 1:03 PM wrote:
> > Moreover, there is no reason an editor could not have a capability to
> > "colorize any string passed to a function named foo()." Perhaps with
> some
> > sort of configuration file that indicates which function names correspond
> > to which languages,
My impression whenever this idea is proposed is like Barry's. The "win"
isn't big enough not simply to use named functions.
Balancing out the slight "win" is the much larger loss of adding additional
complexity to the Python language. New grammar, new parser, possibly new
semantics if tagged
t especially helpful. But for other purposes, it absolutely
is. And yes, most certainly these two techniques could be complementary,
they need not be mutually exclusive.
On Tue, Dec 6, 2022 at 8:45 PM Matthias Görgens
wrote:
> On Tue, 15 Nov 2022 at 00:14, David Mertz, Ph.D.
> wrote:
>
>> In g
On Sun, Dec 4, 2022, 2:08 PM Chris Angelico wrote:
> You're not the first to try to use globals() for this, but it means that
> the context manager works ONLY at top-level.
True. I know that. But if you're inside a function, you already have scope
containment, so the issue feels like "so
Like most commenters, I think the whole "create an anonymous function then
call it" scoping thing is too complex and has too many edge cases to be a
good idea.
That said, I decided to play around with what I can do to serve the general
purpose within existing Python:
>>> @contextmanager
... def
I entirely agree with all of Steven's points. I was going to reply with
similar comments, but his are precisely spot-on, and probably more detailed
than I would have provided.
In particular, the Avdi Grimm essay that Steven linked too is one of the
main references I would have provided as well.
This is very, very deliberately a design goal of Python.
Ruby is a largely similar language that deliberately made the decision you
advocate here. It's a good language, but also one in which monkey patching
by imported modules creates a huge amount of chaos.
Most large Ruby projects have adopted
to find, and trying to find your own is certainly going to be less good
than that source which `secrets` utilizes.
On Mon, Nov 14, 2022 at 11:13 AM David Mertz, Ph.D.
wrote:
> In concept, what James suggests, is similar to the Random123 library,
> written at D.E.Shaw Research by my sadl
In concept, what James suggests, is similar to the Random123 library,
written at D.E.Shaw Research by my sadly late colleague John Salmon. See
https://github.com/DEShawResearch/random123 and the linked academic
publications. E.g. https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/2063384.2063405
In general, all
I happen to give a talk just yesterday that was about pretty much this (
https://github.com/DavidMertz/PythonRuntimeTyping; hopefully PyCon MEA
publishes video after a bit).
I illustrate checking the same program using mypy, pytype, and pyright.
There is a lot of overlap in what they flag as
On Thu, Sep 1, 2022, 9:12 PM Chris Angelico
> > It depends on context whether it makes sense to define a custom
> exception, and I agree that I frequently should define a custom exception.
> In that case though, it would still be nice to have an appropriate generic
> exception for that to inherit
I've seen this thread, and also wondered why anyone could EVER want a
dataclass that is an enum. Nothing I've seen in the thread gives me any
hint about that, really.
On Sun, Jul 10, 2022 at 7:44 AM Barry Scott wrote:
>
>
> > On 9 Jul 2022, at 22:53, Steve Jorgensen wrote:
> >
> > I don't
On Fri, Jun 24, 2022 at 10:52 AM Stephen J. Turnbull <
stephenjturnb...@gmail.com> wrote:
> We (not sure how much help I'll be, but I'm in) need to deal with
> Chris A's point that a pure memoizing object doesn't help with the
> mutable defaults problem. That is with
>
> def
On Fri, Jun 24, 2022 at 3:50 AM Stephen J. Turnbull <
stephenjturnb...@gmail.com> wrote:
> That's true in David's proposed semantics, where the runtime does that
> check. I'm suggesting modified semantics where deferreds can be a
> proxy object, whose normal reaction to *any* operation (possibly
object but a different concept
> in Twisted, I think calling it something else would be better to avoid
> confusion.
>
> Best wishes
> Rob Cliffe
>
>
> On 21/06/2022 21:53, David Mertz, Ph.D. wrote:
>
> Here is a very rough draft of an idea I've floated often, but not with
On Wed, Jun 22, 2022 at 2:17 PM Eric V. Smith wrote:
> Every time I’ve looked at this, I come back to: other than the clunky
> syntax, how is explicit evaluation different from a zero-argument lambda?
The difference is in composition of operations. I can write a dozen
zero-argument lambdas
On Wed, Jun 22, 2022 at 10:47 AM Martin Di Paola
wrote:
> Hi David, I read the PEP and I think it would be useful to expand the
> Motivation and Examples sections.
> While indeed Dask uses lazy evaluation to build a complex computation
> without executing it, I don't think that it is the whole
, they plan and execute the computation differently).
>
> Would those libs (and probably others) do benefit from the PEP? How?
>
> Thanks,
> Martin.
>
> On Tue, Jun 21, 2022 at 04:53:44PM -0400, David Mertz, Ph.D. wrote:
> >Here is a very rough draft of an idea I've float
Thanks Carl and Chris. After reading your comments, and thinking some more
about it, I agree you are both correct that it only makes sense to have a
DeferredObject act like a closure in the scope of its creation. That
really should suffice for anything I could sensibly want; it's enough for
I haven't gotten to writing that into the PEP yet, but I think the rule has
to be to take the scope of evaluation not the scope of definition. I know
it needs to be there, and I'm just thinking about helpful examples.
Which is to say the semantics are more like `eval()` than like a lambda
On Tue, Jun 21, 2022 at 5:53 PM Brendan Barnwell
wrote:
> > In the example, we assume that the built-in function `type()` is special
> > in not counting as a reference to the binding for purpose of realizing a
> > computation. Alternately, some new special function like `isdeferred()`
> might be
oning them in this thread.
PEP:
Title: Generalized deferred computation
Author: David Mertz
Discussions-To:
https://mail.python.org/archives/list/python-ideas@python.org/thread/
Status: Draft
Type: Standards Track
Content-Type: text/x-rst
Created: 21-Jun-2022
Python-Version: 3.12
Post-History:
I will post to a different thread for my actual semi-proposal. But to
answer the claim that late-bound arg defaults and late-bound
everything-else are unrelated, and to start with an early version of what
I'd actually want, I wrote this:
It seems like this is all an occasion to use itertools.tee() ... But with a
consciousness that implicit caching uses memory.
On Mon, Jun 20, 2022, 11:36 PM Steven D'Aprano wrote:
> On Sun, Jun 19, 2022 at 01:34:35AM +0100, Rob Cliffe via Python-ideas
> wrote:
>
> > To me, the natural
On Sun, Jun 19, 2022 at 2:24 PM Chris Angelico wrote:
> > def frobnicate(data,
> verbose=os.environ.get('LEVEL')==loglevel.DEBUG): ...
>
> Is there any value in not putting that into a global constant?
>
Probably not. I was just inventing an ad hoc example to show what I
meant. I didn't
>
> > I guess '>=' also looks "confusable", but it's far less common in
> signatures, and the meaning is further away.
>
> It's no less valid than your other examples, nor less common (why
> would you have "==" in a function signature, for instance?).
>
I guess I probably use `==` more often in
On Sun, Jun 19, 2022, 12:02 PM Chris Angelico
> I've no idea what you mean by "sophistical" here. Please explain?
>
1. of or characteristic of sophists or sophistry
2. clever and plausible, but unsound and tending to mislead
a sophistical argument
3. using sophistry
Plato's dialog _The
Mon, 20 Jun 2022 at 00:06, David Mertz, Ph.D.
> wrote:
> >
> > On Sun, Jun 19, 2022, 3:27 AM Chris Angelico
> >>
> >> > I'm still -1 because I don't think the purpose alone is close to
> worth the cost of new syntax... And especially not using sigils that a
On Sun, Jun 19, 2022, 3:27 AM Chris Angelico
> > I'm still -1 because I don't think the purpose alone is close to worth
> the cost of new syntax... And especially not using sigils that are
> confusing to read in code.
> >
> > The topic of "late binding in function signatures" simply isn't
>
On Sat, Jun 18, 2022, 9:21 PM Rob Cliffe
> Sorry again, but IMO discussing any model except one where late-bound
> defaults are evaluated at function call time is just adding FUD.
>
It's definitely rude to repeatedly state that anyone who's opinion is
different from yours is "adding FUD" and
I think the example that Steven gave, and Stephen approximately repeats is
good.
def func(items=[], n=later len(items)):
items.append("Hello")
print(n)
func()
> I guess Chris will say 0 and David will say 1, but I might be wrong about
either of them.
This is correct.
I've been scolded that I'm not allowed to post unless I support the PEP.
Nonetheless, I reiterate that I oppose it. There is no "preponderance" of
support, but perhaps a slim majority of the small number who have commented
(5 vs 3, I think).
On Thu, Jun 16, 2022, 10:38 PM Steve Jorgensen wrote:
As well as all the matters Steven raises, I continue to dislike the
proposal for the same reason I did on earlier rounds. I believe a general
"deferred computation" mechanism is useful, but that one limited to the
context of function parameters does more harm than good is scoped narrowly
to that
This is really nice, but I think you have a negation wrong in there
somewhere:
In [1]: from collections import deque
...:
...: def partition(pred, iterable):
...: results = deque([]), deque([])
...:
...: def gen_split(only):
...: for thing in iterable:
...:
As Chris Angelico notes, that's only good for finite iterables.
The recipe in the itertools docs is unbounded, but it's also unbounded in
the cache needed if you get long strings of things the do (or don't)
confirm the predicate.
On Mon, Jun 6, 2022 at 7:06 AM Stephen J. Turnbull <
These are all far too easy to do with comprehensions to merit new methods
or stdlib functions.
m = {'a': 123, 'b': 456, 'c': 789}
>
m.except(('a', 'c')) # {'b': 456}
> m.only(('b', 'c')) # {'b': 456, 'c': 789}
> m.values_at(('a', 'b')) # [123, 456]
>
{k:m[v] for k in m if k not in ['a','c']}
On Sun, Jun 5, 2022, 12:08 PM MRAB wrote:
> On 2022-06-05 16:12, David Mertz, Ph.D. wrote:
> > This is exactly the problem solved by set difference. E.g. `{a, b, c}
> - {a, c}`.
> >
> > This operation is linear on the size of the removed set.
> >
> You don't ha
This is exactly the problem solved by set difference. E.g. `{a, b, c} - {a,
c}`.
This operation is linear on the size of the removed set.
On Sun, Jun 5, 2022, 11:01 AM John Carter wrote:
> I’d like to propose a simple addition to the 'fnmatch' module. Specificity
> a function that returns a
Using `dct -= key` is WAAAYY too cryptic. A method would be okay, but since
that is just `dct.pop(key, None)` without the second argument, it's not
worth the trouble.
-1
On Thu, Apr 28, 2022, 12:03 PM Zach Victor wrote:
> Good points, Antoine!
>
> The intent is to mutate the dictionary with no
R has changed a bit since 2005. My article was from then:
https://gnosis.cx/publish/programming/R3.html
I'm not trying to quibble about R, but simple to point out that what often
mystified as "deep" about OOP is actually banal and fairly trivial.
That might be how Alan Kay originally saw OOP. He
On Sat, Apr 16, 2022, 12:26 PM Chris Angelico > wrote:
> A button IS a widget.
> A horizontal box IS a box.
> A box IS a container.
> A container IS a widget.
>
> Class hierarchies in graphical systems are just as much based on those
> is-a relationships as any of those "horrible metaphors" you
I don't really care what terms like "Full MI" or "True MI" are intended to
mean. Python and MANY other programming languages that allow classes to
have multiple parents, use a method resolution order (MRO) to decide which
same-named method from a complex inheritance tree to use in a given call.
On Tue, Apr 12, 2022, 4:31 PM Steven D'Aprano
> Except the most important one: why are you using multiple inheritence when
> you clearly don't want multiple inheritence, instead you want delegation?
>
I'll note that hundreds of posts ago, I made the FIRST reply to this
silliness, and that it
arentheses makes no
difference.
On Sun, Apr 10, 2022, 1:23 PM malmiteria wrote:
> David Mertz, Ph.D. writes:
> > Are you likewise "confused" by the fact that `a = b - c` is generally
> > different from `a = c - b`?!
>
> Why do you always quote confused?
>
&g
On Sun, Apr 10, 2022, 11:51 AM malmiteria
> "class A(B)" feels very different from "class B(A)"
> but "class A(B,C)" doesn't feel so obviously different from "class A(C,B)"
>
Are you likewise "confused" by the fact that `a = b - c` is generally
different from `a = c - b`?!
>
On Sun, Apr 10, 2022, 10:35 AM Steven D'Aprano
> I don't believe that David's denials that people are confused by super()
> are even a little bit reasonable.
I take the words "unconcerned" and "confused" to be distinct.
___
Python-ideas mailing list
On Sat, Apr 9, 2022, 7:31 AM malmiteria wrote:
> Joao S. O. Bueno writes:
> > You are still repeating this:
> > "more in line with the expectation of the majority, "
> > Though, as already asked, there is zero (nothing) to support that.
>
Here's some more evidence of a sort: I've taught
On Thu, Apr 7, 2022 at 2:47 PM Marc-Andre Lemburg wrote:
> In high finance, I've never seen decimals being used, only floats.
> Excel is omnipresent, sets the standards and uses IEEE 754 floats
> as well (plus some black magic which sometimes helps, but often
> makes things worse):
>
In forex,
Because the module implements http://speleotrove.com/decimal/decarith.html
On Thu, Apr 7, 2022 at 2:03 AM Greg Ewing
wrote:
> On 7/04/22 9:53 am, Chris Angelico wrote:
> > how else would you do variable-precision in the standard library?
>
> Maybe the mistake was in thinking that we need
On Thu, Apr 7, 2022 at 10:51 AM Stephen J. Turnbull <
stephenjturnb...@gmail.com> wrote:
> NOTE: The big problem I see with this is that I don't see any
> practical way to use syntax for non-numeric types like ndarray.
> The problem is that in, say, economics we use a lot of m x 2
>
On Mon, Apr 4, 2022 at 7:45 PM Ethan Furman wrote:
> On 4/4/22 13:31, David Mertz, Ph.D. wrote:
>
> > You should probably change the thread subject to "All-and-only 7 SI
> units" if that's what you mean.
>
> While I'm sure SI would be very useful, I susp
You should probably change the thread subject to "All-and-only 7 SI units"
if that's what you mean.
On Mon, Apr 4, 2022 at 1:46 PM Brian McCall
wrote:
> > I drove 20 minutes up the road to by a bushel (US, not British) of U.S.
> No. 1. apples, to make apple cider. On my return trip, I stopped
>
> Units have infinite precision, so grades and tolerances are also
> irrelevant.
>
Not if you believe in Planck lengths (or quantum states) :-).
--
Keeping medicines from the bloodstreams of the sick; food
from the bellies of the hungry; books from the hands of the
uneducated; technology from
Just to elaborate on units I use, here's a hypothetical (not stuff that
actually happened today, but very commonplace nature):
I drove 20 minutes up the road to by a bushel (US, not British) of U.S. No.
> 1. apples, to make apple cider. On my return trip, I stopped at the
> hardware store to buy
On Mon, Apr 4, 2022 at 3:53 AM Chris Angelico wrote:
> The 160 units would be more likely to have collisions though. Also,
> the base and derived SI units will be used with magnitude prefixes,
>
The supposed 160 are far fewer than I use on a daily (or at least weekly)
basis. Yes, all the rest
On Mon, Apr 4, 2022, 2:17 AM Brian McCall
> For instance, I don't think there would be much uproar if "teaspoons"
were left out of any kind of implementation.
Apparently someone other than you does the cooking in you household!
___
Python-ideas mailing
On Mon, Apr 4, 2022, 12:53 AM Brian McCall
> > An electron volt is a unit of energy. Or of mass. Or of momentum.
> An electron volt is a unit of energy and only a unit of energy. Knowing a
> particle's energy (in certain situations) means that you also know other
> physical quantities about that
While units are certainly useful, I think this is FAR too large to add to
Python syntax. A library like "units" is great, but it really needs to be a
library, and not a small one.
There are thousands of units in use in sciences, commerce, engineering,
ordinary life, etc. In all of them, it is not
If you want to explicitly delegate a method to a class, you should
explicitly delegate a method to a class.
This is exactly why a lot of folks feel composition is better than
inheritance (at least often so).
You don't need `super()` to call `SomeSpecificClass.method(self, other,
args)`
On Sat,
Are you speaking of how to generalize modulo to negative numbers (about
which programming languages vary)?
The bar for adding new syntax to Python is VERY high. Probably easier is
getting a function in the `math` module. But even there, you'll need to
explain what behavior you want AND why that
I just do this myself in my text editor (vim):
[image: sets-py.png]
But this is just cosmetic because I like to look at it this way. The
actual file on disk contains `set()`, `<=`, `in`, `not in` and wouldn't be
a problem for anyone without the same fonts installed, or require anyone to
know odd
On Mon, Mar 14, 2022, 7:52 PM Steven D'Aprano
> I got "No results matched your query" on the second URL, at which point I
> didn't bother with the first.
>
Hmm... while I don't support the proposal, I saw results at both links.
Those links were the first good faith comments I saw from OP.
A
On Mon, Mar 14, 2022 at 8:33 AM wrote:
> Possible solution:
> s = {} # new empty set
> d = {:} # new empty dictionary (the ":" is a reference to key-value pairs)
>
I have suggested over the years—as have probably dozens of other people
(maybe thousands)—that that would be a great spelling if
On Fri, Mar 11, 2022, 6:19 PM wfdc wrote:
> > Likewise this which you wrote in another post: "Do you see why it's
> useful to have immutability?"
>
> That's not insulting at all. It's a perfectly valid question to address to
> a post that seems to be contesting the purpose of immutable types in
e immutability criterion.
>
> Saying "just be careful not to mutate the original datastructure" isn't a
> solution. There's a reason we have immutable types: To *enforce*
> immutability. Otherwise, why aren't you proposing getting rid of the tuple
> type entirely?
>
&
*
> immutability. Otherwise, why aren't you proposing getting rid of the tuple
> type entirely?
>
> --- Original Message ---
> On Friday, March 11th, 2022 at 4:29 PM, David Mertz, Ph.D. <
> david.me...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On Fri, Mar 11, 2022, 4:16 PM wfdc via
On Fri, Mar 11, 2022, 4:16 PM wfdc via Python-ideas
wrote:
> > why haven't you used a list
> 2. I don't want to modify the original sequence.
>
There's a really easy solution for you that will even be more perfomant.
Use a list and DON'T modify the original!
This is ABSOLUTELY an
On Fri, Mar 11, 2022, 2:39 PM wfdc wrote:
> > Not every one line function needs to be a method on a built-in type.
>
> Not every one line function needs to *not* be a method on a built-in type.
> See tuple's count method for an example.
>
Again, if users find themselves re-implementing the same
1 - 100 of 1105 matches
Mail list logo
