Re: [Python-ideas] Add a __cite__ method for scientific packages

On Fri, Jun 29, 2018, 17:14 Andrei Kucharavy wrote: > One more thing. There's precedent for this: when you start an interactive >> Python interpreter it tells you how to get help, but also how to get >> copyright, credits and license information: >> >> $ python3 >> Python 3.6.6

Re: [Python-ideas] Fwd: Trigonometry in degrees

On Mon, Jun 18, 2018, 19:25 Chris Barker via Python-ideas < python-ideas@python.org> wrote: > On Sat, Jun 16, 2018 at 10:57 PM, Tim Peters wrote: > > Ya, decimal fp doesn't really solve anything except the shallow surprise >> that decimal fractions generally aren't exactly representable as

Re: [Python-ideas] Link accepted PEPs to their whatsnew section?

On Wed, Jun 13, 2018, 06:51 Nick Coghlan wrote: > On 13 June 2018 at 11:06, Michael Selik wrote: > >> Google will probably fix this problem for you after dataclasses become >> popular. The docs will gain a bunch of inbound links and the issue will >> (probably) solve itself as time passes. >> >

Re: [Python-ideas] Fwd: Trigonometry in degrees

Sorry for top posting, but these aren't really opinions for the debate, just information. I haven't seen them mentioned, and none grouped nicely under someone's reply. Number representation:: IEEE-754 doubles cannot represent pi correctly at any bit-depth (i mean, obviously, but more seriously).

Re: [Python-ideas] Reuse "for" to express "given"

On Thu, May 24, 2018, 14:48 Alexander Belopolsky < alexander.belopol...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > On Thu, May 24, 2018 at 4:59 PM Matt Arcidy <marc...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> >> >> On Thu, May 24, 2018, 11:47 Alexander Belopolsky < >> alexander.

Re: [Python-ideas] Reuse "for" to express "given"

On Thu, May 24, 2018, 11:47 Alexander Belopolsky < alexander.belopol...@gmail.com> wrote: > > But I do have a mathematics background, and I don't remember ever seeing > > "for x = value" used in the sense you mean. > > That's so because in mathematics, "for" is spelled ":" as in > > {2*a* :

Re: [Python-ideas] Modern language design survey for "assign and compare" statements

On Mon, May 21, 2018, 03:58 Rhodri James <rho...@kynesim.co.uk> wrote: > On 20/05/18 06:19, Matt Arcidy wrote: > > On Sat, May 19, 2018, 11:07 Kirill Balunov <kirillbalu...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > >> > >> > >> I think I have a ve

Re: [Python-ideas] Modern language design survey for "assign and compare" statements

Anyone can trivially construct a scope that limits applicable cases to support a specific point. This thread is pointless without full context. On Sun, May 20, 2018, 11:05 Mike Miller wrote: > For more background, this is the thread that inspired this one: > >

Re: [Python-ideas] Modern language design survey for "assign and compare" statements

On Sat, May 19, 2018, 11:07 Kirill Balunov wrote: > > > I think I have a very strong argument "why are not others valid" - Because > already three months have passed and among 1300+ messages there was not a > single real example where assignment expression would be

Re: [Python-ideas] Inline assignments using "given" clauses

On Sun, May 13, 2018, 11:28 Brendan Barnwell wrote: > On 2018-05-13 04:23, Steven D'Aprano wrote: > > In my experience mathematicians put the given *before* the statement: > > > > Given a, b, c three sides of a triangle, then > > > > Area =

Re: [Python-ideas] Inline assignments using "given" clauses

On Fri, May 11, 2018, 17:04 Tim Peters <tim.pet...@gmail.com> wrote: > [Matt Arcidy] > >> Note Tim came up with a real metric: > >> 2 * count(":=")/len(statement). > >> It's objective. it's just unclear if a higher score is better or worse. > >

Re: [Python-ideas] Inline assignments using "given" clauses

Apology for top post, but this is a general statement about Readability and not a response to an individual. it would be nice to list the objective parts separate from the "argument" (i.e. debate, not fight), perhaps list them then make a case for which metric is a more important, and which

Re: [Python-ideas] A comprehension scope issue in PEP 572

On Sun, May 6, 2018 at 7:37 PM, Matt Arcidy <marc...@gmail.com> wrote: >> Personally, I'd still like to go back to := creating a statement-local >> name, one that won't leak out of ANY statement. But the tide was >> against that one, so I gave up on it. > > yes. >

Re: [Python-ideas] A comprehension scope issue in PEP 572

> Personally, I'd still like to go back to := creating a statement-local > name, one that won't leak out of ANY statement. But the tide was > against that one, so I gave up on it. yes. I have some probably tangential to bad arguments but I'm going to make them anyways, because I think := makes

Re: [Python-ideas] Inline assignments using "given" clauses

On Fri, May 4, 2018, 11:35 Guido van Rossum wrote: > On Fri, May 4, 2018 at 11:11 AM, Tim Peters wrote: > >> [Nick Coghlan ] >> > ... >> > Using a new keyword (rather than a symbol) would make the new construct >> > easier to identify

Re: [Python-ideas] Objectively Quantifying Readability

On Tue, May 1, 2018 at 5:35 PM, Mikhail V wrote: > to be pedantic - ReallyLongDescriptiveIdentifierNames > has also an issue with "I" which might confuse because it > looks same as little L. Just to illustrate that choice of > comparison samples is very sensitive thing. >

Re: [Python-ideas] Objectively Quantifying Readability

On Tue, May 1, 2018 at 1:29 AM, Nathaniel Smith <n...@pobox.com> wrote: > On Mon, Apr 30, 2018 at 8:46 PM, Matt Arcidy <marc...@gmail.com> wrote: >> On Mon, Apr 30, 2018 at 5:42 PM, Steven D'Aprano <st...@pearwood.info> wrote: >

Re: [Python-ideas] Objectively Quantifying Readability

On Mon, Apr 30, 2018 at 5:42 PM, Steven D'Aprano <st...@pearwood.info> wrote: > On Mon, Apr 30, 2018 at 11:28:17AM -0700, Matt Arcidy wrote: > >> A study has been done regarding readability in code which may serve as >> insight into this issue. Please see page 8

[Python-ideas] Objectively Quantifying Readability

The number and type of arguments about readability as a justification, or an opinion, or an opinion about an opinion seems counter-productive to reaching conclusions efficiently. I think they are very important either way, but the justifications used are not rich enough in information to be very

Re: [Python-ideas] Sublocal scoping at its simplest

On Sat, Apr 28, 2018, 20:16 Chris Angelico wrote: > There's been a lot of talk about sublocal scopes, within and without > the context of PEP 572. I'd like to propose what I believe is the > simplest form of sublocal scopes, and use it to simplify one specific > special case in

Re: [Python-ideas] Descouraging the implicit string concatenation

On Thu, Mar 15, 2018 at 8:58 PM, Rob Cliffe via Python-ideas wrote: > > > 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

Re: [Python-ideas] Medium for discussion potential changes to python (was: PEP 572: Statement-Local Name Bindings)

if Linux kernel can handle it, there is no argument for it being factually superior or inferior. It is only preference. There is nothing stopping a forum link being created and posted to the list as an alternative right now. The result of that experiment would be the answer. On Wed, Feb 28,

Re: [Python-ideas] PEP 572: Statement-Local Name Bindings

-0 unless archived appropriately. List is the standard for decades. but I guess things change and I get old. On Wed, Feb 28, 2018, 13:49 Robert Vanden Eynde wrote: > We are currently like a dozen of people talking about multiple sections of > a single subject. > > Isn't

Re: [Python-ideas] PEP 572: Statement-Local Name Bindings

Angelico <ros...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Wed, Feb 28, 2018 at 6:46 PM, Matt Arcidy <marc...@gmail.com> wrote: >> I have been struggling to justify the need based on what I have read. I >> hope this isn't a dupe, I only saw caching mentioned in passing. >> >&g

Re: [Python-ideas] PEP 572: Statement-Local Name Bindings

I have been struggling to justify the need based on what I have read. I hope this isn't a dupe, I only saw caching mentioned in passing. Also please excuse some of the naive generalizations below for illustrative purposes. Is there a reason memoization doesn't work? If f is truly expensive,