On Thursday, June 23, 2016 at 10:17:16 AM UTC+5:30, Lawrence D’Oliveiro wrote:
> On Thursday, June 23, 2016 at 3:12:52 PM UTC+12, Larry Hudson wrote:
> > On 06/22/2016 12:42 AM, Lawrence D’Oliveiro wrote:
> >> * boolean operators don’t have to operate on boolean values. The
> >> language spec
>
On Tuesday, June 21, 2016 at 7:27:00 PM UTC+5:30, Rustom Mody wrote:
> >https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Keyboard_configuration_i
> >n_Xorg> -- no good
You probably want this:
https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/X_KeyBoard_extension#Editing_the_layout
> > S
On Wednesday, June 22, 2016 at 9:20:35 AM UTC+5:30, Elizabeth Weiss wrote:
> i=1
> while i<=5:
>print(i)
>i=i+1
>
> The result is:
> 1
> 2
> 3
> 4
> 5
>
> Why is one of the results 5 since i=i+1? Should the maximum result be 4 since
> 4 +1=5?
>
Not sure what your question is
But I
On Tuesday, June 21, 2016 at 6:38:19 PM UTC+5:30, Marko Rauhamaa wrote:
> A coworker of mine went through the trouble of doing the xmodmap
> equivalent with setxkbmap. Thought of interviewing him about it one day.
>
> How-to's are really hard to come by:
>
>
On Tuesday, June 21, 2016 at 7:27:00 PM UTC+5:30, Rustom Mody wrote:
> Emacs:
:
> Math: So far Ive used tex input method -- Not satisfactory
After "Random832" pointed me to RFC1345 I checked that emacs has an
RFC1345 input method. It may be nicer than tex input method -- need
On Tuesday, June 21, 2016 at 6:38:19 PM UTC+5:30, Marko Rauhamaa wrote:
> Rustom Mody :
>
> > On Tuesday, June 21, 2016 at 2:05:55 PM UTC+5:30, Marko Rauhamaa wrote:
> >> (On the other hand, I have always specified my preferred keyboard
> >> layout with .Xmodmap.)
On Tuesday, June 21, 2016 at 2:05:55 PM UTC+5:30, Marko Rauhamaa wrote:
> Larry Hudson :
> > It sounds like you are almost, but not quite, describing the Linux
> > Compose key.
>
> I have used Linux since the 1990's but don't know anything about "the
> Linux Compose key."
It used to be a real
On Monday, June 20, 2016 at 8:30:25 PM UTC+5:30, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
> On Tue, 21 Jun 2016 12:23 am, Grant Edwards wrote:
>
> > On 2016-06-20, Phil Boutros wrote:
> [...]
> >> Ctrl-K, =, ! (last two steps interchangeable). Done. Result: ≠
> >
> > On any non-broken X11 system it's: = /
>
On Monday, June 20, 2016 at 11:34:36 AM UTC+5:30, Random832 wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 20, 2016, at 01:03, Rustom Mody wrote:
> > > Ctrl-K, =, ! (last two steps interchangeable). Done. Result: ≠
> >
> > Are these 'shortcuts' parameterizable?
>
> They originate fro
On Monday, June 20, 2016 at 7:06:57 PM UTC+5:30, Christian Gollwitzer wrote:
> Am 20.06.16 um 15:26 schrieb Random832:
> > The point is that in vim you
> > can't position the normal-mode cursor in such a way that inserted
> > characters are inserted at the end of the line.
>
> But you can press i
On Monday, June 20, 2016 at 10:01:00 AM UTC+5:30, Phil Boutros wrote:
> Steven D'Aprano wrote:
> >
> > Quote:
> >
> > "Why do we have to write x!=y then argue about the status of x<>y when we
> > can simply write x≠y?"
> >
> > "Simply"?
> >
> > This is how I write x≠y from scratch:
>
>
> To
On Monday, June 20, 2016 at 10:06:41 AM UTC+5:30, Rustom Mody wrote:
> I have greater horror-stories to describe if you like
> On my recent ubuntu upgrade my keyboard broke -- totally ie cant type
> anything.
> Here's a detailed rundown...
>
> Upgrade complete; reboot -- NO
On Monday, June 20, 2016 at 8:59:44 AM UTC+5:30, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
> Without better tooling and more discoverability, non-ASCII characters as
> syntax are an anti-feature.
You need to decide which hat you have on
- idealist
- pragmatist
From a pragmatic pov nothing you are saying below is
On Monday, June 20, 2016 at 7:03:01 AM UTC+5:30, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
> On Mon, 20 Jun 2016 04:58 am, Michael Torrie wrote:
>
> > When the cursor is over character, do command "ga" and it will show you
> > the hex code for that character.
> >
> >
On Sunday, June 19, 2016 at 11:36:17 PM UTC+5:30, Christian Gollwitzer wrote:
> Am 19.06.16 um 18:20 schrieb Rustom Mody:
> > I gave an emacs solution to the issue not because I find editor-wars
> > engaging
> > but because I dont know how to do *this* with vi.
> > I'd
On Sunday, June 19, 2016 at 6:49:55 PM UTC+5:30, Michael Torrie wrote:
> On 06/19/2016 04:41 AM, Pete Forman wrote:
> > Both emacs and vim are powerful tools in the hands of experienced users
> > but I would recommend neither to someone starting out who is just
> > looking for a code-aware editor.
On Sunday, June 19, 2016 at 9:26:54 PM UTC+5:30, Ethan Furman wrote:
> On 06/19/2016 08:14 AM, Michael Torrie wrote:
> > On 06/19/2016 09:01 AM, Ethan Furman wrote:
> >> On 06/19/2016 04:56 AM, Joonas Liik wrote:
> >>> On 18 June 2016 at 23:47, Ethan Furman wrote:
> On 06/18/2016 07:05 AM,
On Sunday, June 19, 2016 at 1:04:37 PM UTC+5:30, Lawrence D’Oliveiro wrote:
> On Sunday, June 19, 2016 at 7:13:26 PM UTC+12, Christian Gollwitzer wrote:
>
> > Am 19.06.16 um 02:12 schrieb Lawrence D’Oliveiro:
> >
> >> But not vi/vim. It only lets you place your cursor *on* a character,
> >> not
On Saturday, June 18, 2016 at 3:10:23 PM UTC+5:30, Marko Rauhamaa wrote:
> Michael Vilain :
>
> > "best" is subjective. Anytime someone wants the "best", I ask "what
> > features are important to you that would make it the best" because I'm
> > pretty sure what I find important wouldn't be what
On Saturday, June 18, 2016 at 5:34:30 PM UTC+5:30, Pete Forman wrote:
> Rustom Mody writes:
>
> > On Friday, June 17, 2016 at 2:58:19 PM UTC+5:30, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
> >> On Fri, 17 Jun 2016 06:13 pm, Ned Batchelder wrote:
> >>
> >> > To me, i
On Friday, June 17, 2016 at 2:58:19 PM UTC+5:30, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
> On Fri, 17 Jun 2016 06:13 pm, Ned Batchelder wrote:
>
> > To me, it's a toss-up. The chained version is nice in that it removes the
> > repetition of "g". But the unchained version is more explicit, and avoids
> > the
On Friday, June 17, 2016 at 7:23:27 AM UTC+5:30, Lawrence D’Oliveiro wrote:
> On Thursday, June 16, 2016 at 11:13:14 PM UTC+12, Rustom Mody wrote:
>
> > Please see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nassi%E2%80%93Shneiderman_diagram
> >
> > | Nassi–Shneiderman diagrams
On Thursday, June 16, 2016 at 11:27:15 AM UTC+5:30, Lawrence D’Oliveiro wrote:
> On Thursday, June 16, 2016 at 5:48:48 PM UTC+12, Rustom Mody wrote:
> > On Thursday, June 16, 2016 at 8:25:10 AM UTC+5:30, Lawrence D’Oliveiro
> > wrote:
> > So here is the formal definition I
On Thursday, June 16, 2016 at 8:25:10 AM UTC+5:30, Lawrence D’Oliveiro wrote:
> On Thursday, June 16, 2016 at 1:51:54 AM UTC+12, Random832 wrote:
> > ... and in particular it does not establish that break is in any way
> > less structured than any other constructs that have keywords.
>
>
On Wednesday, June 15, 2016 at 9:24:21 PM UTC+5:30, Random832 wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 15, 2016, at 10:20, Rustom Mody wrote:
> > Claim is that the damaging propensities of goto are replicable with
> > break.
>
> The "damaging propensity" in this particular case simply
On Wednesday, June 15, 2016 at 7:21:54 PM UTC+5:30, Random832 wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 15, 2016, at 07:19, Rustom Mody wrote:
> > I thought there'd be many examples for showing that break is just goto in
> > disguise... Evidently not
> >
> > So here is an example in more
On Wednesday, June 15, 2016 at 7:21:54 PM UTC+5:30, Random832 wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 15, 2016, at 07:19, Rustom Mody wrote:
> > I thought there'd be many examples for showing that break is just goto in
> > disguise... Evidently not
> >
> > So here is an example in more
On Wednesday, June 15, 2016 at 5:57:51 PM UTC+5:30, BartC wrote:
> On 15/06/2016 12:19, Rustom Mody wrote:
> > On Wednesday, June 15, 2016 at 8:42:33 AM UTC+5:30, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
>
> >> Sort of. A break is a jump, and a goto is a jump, but apart from that,
> >&g
On Wednesday, June 15, 2016 at 8:42:33 AM UTC+5:30, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
> On Wed, 15 Jun 2016 01:33 am, Rustom Mody wrote:
>
> > On Tuesday, June 14, 2016 at 8:13:53 AM UTC+5:30, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
> >> No. The sun exploding was me gently mocking you for your c
On Wednesday, June 15, 2016 at 8:42:33 AM UTC+5:30, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
> On Wed, 15 Jun 2016 01:33 am, Rustom Mody wrote:
>
> > On Tuesday, June 14, 2016 at 8:13:53 AM UTC+5:30, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
> >> No. The sun exploding was me gently mocking you for your c
On Wednesday, June 15, 2016 at 4:58:05 AM UTC+5:30, Lawrence D’Oliveiro wrote:
> On Wednesday, June 15, 2016 at 3:34:14 AM UTC+12, Rustom Mody wrote:
>
> > And break is a euphemism for goto
>
> Is this the old
> “structured-programming-is-mathematically-equivalent-to-gotos”
On Tuesday, June 14, 2016 at 8:13:53 AM UTC+5:30, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
> No. The sun exploding was me gently mocking you for your comment disputing
> the "unconditional" part. Yes, you are technically right that technically
> the "else" block will only run if no "break" is reached, and no
On Monday, June 13, 2016 at 10:48:33 PM UTC+5:30, Michael Selik wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 13, 2016, 10:36 AM Rustom Mody wrote:
>
> > On Monday, June 13, 2016 at 7:41:33 PM UTC+5:30, MRAB wrote:
> > > On 2016-06-13 14:24, Long Yang wrote:
> > > > The p
On Monday, June 13, 2016 at 7:41:33 PM UTC+5:30, MRAB wrote:
> On 2016-06-13 14:24, Long Yang wrote:
> > The python 2.x command is as following:
> > ---
> > info = {}
> > execfile(join('chaco', '__init__.py'), info)
> > --
> >
> > But execfile
On Monday, June 13, 2016 at 7:42:25 AM UTC+5:30, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
> On Mon, 13 Jun 2016 04:44 am, Michael Selik wrote:
>
> > On Sun, Jun 12, 2016 at 6:11 AM Steven D'Aprano wrote:
> >
> >> - run the for block
> >> - THEN unconditionally run the "else" block
> >>
> >
> > Saying
On Wednesday, June 8, 2016 at 4:32:33 PM UTC+5:30, Antoon Pardon wrote:
> It means that if you mutate the object through one variable,
> you can see the result of that mutation through the other variable. But if the
> assignment doesn't mutate, you can't have such effect through assignment.
>
On Monday, June 6, 2016 at 7:27:18 PM UTC+5:30, Random832 wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 6, 2016, at 01:46, Lawrence D’Oliveiro wrote:
> > On Monday, June 6, 2016 at 4:06:20 AM UTC+12, Uri Even-Chen wrote:
> > > Never write expressions, such as 2 ** 3 ** 2 or even 2 * 4
> > > + 5, without parentheses.
> >
Just came across this new data (for me) to this old question:
On Monday, February 29, 2016 at 8:05:33 AM UTC+5:30, Ben Finney wrote:
> Rustom Mody writes:
>
> > On Monday, February 29, 2016 at 7:33:18 AM UTC+5:30, Chris Angelico wrote:
> > > Never has for any of my proj
On Monday, May 30, 2016 at 12:16:55 AM UTC+5:30, Terry Reedy wrote:
> On 5/29/2016 2:12 AM, Rustom Mody wrote:
>
> > In short that a € costs more than a $ is a combination of the factors
> > - a natural cause -- there are a million chars to encode (lets assume that
> > th
On Sunday, May 29, 2016 at 11:07:51 AM UTC+5:30, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
> On Sat, 28 May 2016 02:46 pm, Rustom Mody wrote:
>
> [...]
> > In idealized, simplified models like Turing models where
> > 3 is 111
> > 7 is 111
> > 100, 8364 etc I wont try to write bu
On Friday, May 27, 2016 at 9:39:19 PM UTC+5:30, Random832 wrote:
> On Fri, May 27, 2016, at 11:53, Rustom Mody wrote:
> > And coding systems are VERY political.
> > Sure what characters are put in (and not) is political
> > But more invisible but equally political i
On Saturday, May 28, 2016 at 12:34:14 AM UTC+5:30, Marko Rauhamaa wrote:
> Random832 :
>
> > On Fri, May 27, 2016, at 05:56, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
> >> On Fri, 27 May 2016 05:04 pm, Marko Rauhamaa wrote:
> >> > They are all ASCII derivatives. Those that aren't don't exist.
> >> *plonk*
> >
> >
On Friday, May 27, 2016 at 7:21:41 PM UTC+5:30, Random832 wrote:
> On Fri, May 27, 2016, at 05:56, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
> > On Fri, 27 May 2016 05:04 pm, Marko Rauhamaa wrote:
> >
> > > They are all ASCII derivatives. Those that aren't don't exist.
> >
> > *plonk*
>
> That's a bit harsh,
On Thursday, May 26, 2016 at 1:41:41 PM UTC+5:30, Erik wrote:
> On 26/05/16 02:28, Dennis Lee Bieber wrote:
> > On Wed, 25 May 2016 22:03:34 +0100, Erik
> > declaimed the following:
> >
> >> Indeed - at that time, I was working with COBOL on an IBM S/370. On that
> >> system, we used EBCDIC ASCII.
On Thursday, May 26, 2016 at 12:24:28 PM UTC+5:30, Jussi Piitulainen wrote:
> Rustom Mody writes:
>
> > On Wednesday, May 25, 2016 at 4:18:02 PM UTC+5:30, Marko Rauhamaa wrote:
> ...
> >> instead of ASCII, national 7-bit character set variants were being
> >>
On Thursday, May 26, 2016 at 12:52:09 PM UTC+5:30, Jussi Piitulainen wrote:
> UTF-16 ASCII is weird. Wierd. Probably all right in an environment that
> is otherwise set to use UTF-16.
In http://blog.languager.org/2015/03/whimsical-unicode.html
are some examples of why UTF-16 is bug-inviting
[
On Thursday, May 26, 2016 at 11:17:56 AM UTC+5:30, San wrote:
> On Wednesday, May 25, 2016 at 6:00:07 PM UTC+5:30, San wrote:
> > Hi Gorup,
> >
> > why i am getting "ValueError: I/O operation on closed file" this error.
> > Pls let me know.
> >
> > Thanks in Advance.
> > san
>
> Hello,
>
On Wednesday, May 25, 2016 at 4:18:02 PM UTC+5:30, Marko Rauhamaa wrote:
> Christopher Reimer:
>
> > Back in the early 1980's, I grew up on 8-bit processors and latin-1 was
> > all we had for ASCII.
>
> You really were very advanced. According to
On Tuesday, May 24, 2016 at 4:10:59 AM UTC+5:30, Ian wrote:
> On Mon, May 23, 2016 at 9:30 AM, Rustom Mody wrote:
> > Yes the point is being missed but in a different direction:
> > The SET (as a completed whole) of real numbers (ℝ) is no more than a 100
> > years
> &g
On Monday, May 23, 2016 at 7:59:47 PM UTC+5:30, Ben Bacarisse wrote:
> Ian Kelly writes:
>
> > On Mon, May 23, 2016 at 2:09 AM, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
> >> Are you saying that the Egyptians, Babylonians and Greeks didn't know how
> >> to
> >> work with fractions?
> >>
> >>
On Monday, May 23, 2016 at 1:38:41 PM UTC+5:30, rocky wrote:
> On Monday, May 23, 2016 at 2:17:07 AM UTC-4, Pete Forman wrote:
> > rocky writes:
> >
> > > I'm looking for a good name for a relatively new project I'll put on pypy.
> > >
> > > I've been working on a module to disassemble Python
On Monday, May 23, 2016 at 12:01:08 PM UTC+5:30, Marko Rauhamaa wrote:
> Rustom Mody :
>
> > Haskell has (almost) what I learnt at school:
> >
> > Prelude> let (q,r) = 7 `divMod` 3
> > Prelude> (q,r)
> > (2,1)
>
> Python:
>
>>>&
On Monday, May 23, 2016 at 9:59:27 AM UTC+5:30, Ben Finney wrote:
> Jon Ribbens writes:
>
> > OK, I'm bored of you now. You clearly are not willing to imagine
> > a world beyond your own preconceptions.
>
> Steven has, in the message to which you responded, asked for you to
> *describe* this
On Sunday, May 22, 2016 at 10:55:43 PM UTC+5:30, Random832 wrote:
> Values are more important than types. Types are less important than
> values.
A stronger version that I occasionally tell my students:
Values are in reality
Types are in our heads
Unfortunately we only know how to think thoughts
On Sunday, May 22, 2016 at 10:20:11 PM UTC+5:30, Jon Ribbens wrote:
> On 2016-05-22, Chris Angelico wrote:
> > Python's int and float types are both approximations to a
> > non-representable type called a "real number".
>
> Sorry, I have to stop you there as the entire premise of your post is
>
On Sunday, May 22, 2016 at 8:28:39 PM UTC+5:30, Marko Rauhamaa wrote:
> Python ought to be the perfect language for seasoned experts. It doesn't
> need to be dumbed down for noobs.
There's a language you may have heard of that you'll LOVE -- C++
Or maybe Haskell
On a somewhat more serious note:
On Saturday, May 21, 2016 at 1:51:19 AM UTC+5:30, Christopher Reimer wrote:
> On 5/20/2016 8:59 AM, Zachary Ware wrote:
>
> > On Fri, May 20, 2016 at 3:09 AM, Erik wrote:
> >> On 20/05/16 00:51, Gregory Ewing wrote:
> >>> It's not so bad with "else" because you need to look back
> >>> to find
On Thursday, May 19, 2016 at 9:26:39 AM UTC+5:30, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
> On Thursday 19 May 2016 13:31, Rustom Mody wrote:
>
> > On Thursday, May 19, 2016 at 6:26:26 AM UTC+5:30, Ben Finney wrote:
>
> >> Code Like A Pythonista was written in the Python 2 era
> >
On Thursday, May 19, 2016 at 6:26:26 AM UTC+5:30, Ben Finney wrote:
> Jacob Scott writes:
>
> > Today, I'm happily writing primarily Python (unfortunately, 2.7 -- but I'm
> > not sure it makes that much of a difference)
>
> Python 2.7 is still viable, but is certainly a dead end. The difference
On Thursday, May 19, 2016 at 3:13:44 AM UTC+5:30, bream wrote:
> On Wednesday, May 18, 2016 at 6:47:42 PM UTC+1, Chris Kaynor wrote:
> > On Wed, May 18, 2016 at 10:15 AM, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
> >
> > > I don't really understand why the system can't track the current top of
> > > the
> > >
On Friday, May 13, 2016 at 10:37:34 AM UTC+5:30, Ben Finney wrote:
> Howdy all,
>
> Ever since Python's much-celebrated Grand Unification of classes and
> types, I have used those terms interchangeably: every class is a type,
> and every type is a class.
>
> That may be an unwise conflation.
On Thursday, May 12, 2016 at 9:18:08 PM UTC+5:30, Jake Kobs wrote:
> Hello all, I have been struggling with this code for 3 hours now and I'm
> still stumped. My problem is that when I run the following code:
> --
> #this
On Tuesday, May 10, 2016 at 9:46:45 PM UTC+5:30, DFS wrote:
> On 5/9/2016 3:53 AM, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
> > On Monday 09 May 2016 09:10, DFS wrote:
> >
> >> sSQL = "line 1\n"
> >> sSQL += "line 2\n"
> >> sSQL += "line 3"
> >
> > Pointlessly provocative subject line edited.
>
>
> huh? You
On Tuesday, May 10, 2016 at 7:43:17 AM UTC+5:30, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
> On Tue, 10 May 2016 09:07 am, Terry Reedy wrote:
>
> > Editorial: Programming classes should teach basic debugging better. I
> > have seen numerous newbie Stackoverflow questions where the person
> > should have started
On Tuesday, May 10, 2016 at 2:52:13 AM UTC+5:30, Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn
wrote:
> Chris Angelico wrote:
>
> > On Mon, May 9, 2016 at 10:44 AM, Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn wrote:
> >> Also, it would be a good idea if you posted under your real name.
> >> Internet is the thing with cables; Usenet
On Sunday, May 8, 2016 at 3:52:12 PM UTC+5:30, Cai Gengyang wrote:
> I just "clicked" through the lesson on Conditionals and Control Flows and am
> on the lesson "PygLatin" .
>
> This will hopefully be a more interesting and interactive lesson because I
> will be building a PygLatin Translator
On Sunday, May 8, 2016 at 5:38:18 PM UTC+5:30, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
> On Sun, 8 May 2016 01:57 am, Marko Rauhamaa wrote:
>
> > A functional, enlightened, prosperous democracy is a very recent
> > historical anomaly. You don't want to jeopardize it naïvely.
>
> Perhaps by implementing
On Saturday, May 7, 2016 at 12:13:59 PM UTC+5:30, Gregory Ewing wrote:
> Steven D'Aprano wrote:
> > Who is setting and enforcing this quota, and given that only about 1 in 20
> > Python programmers is a woman, do you think men are seriously missing out
> > on any opportunities?
>
> Suppose there
On Friday, May 6, 2016 at 8:23:27 AM UTC+5:30, Chris Angelico wrote:
> On Fri, May 6, 2016 at 12:49 PM, Michael Torrie wrote:
> > On 05/04/2016 02:59 AM, Steven D'Aprano wrote
> >> A year ago, Gavin Vickery decided to move away from Python and give
> >> Javascript with Node.js a try. Twelve
Your code (below) is too garbled to be able to read
On Monday, May 2, 2016 at 12:00:59 AM UTC+5:30, David Shi wrote:
> Hello, I am back. Thank you very much for your positive response.
> I am trying to use Pandas apply to execute a lookup function, so that we can
> put abbreviation in a new
On Saturday, April 30, 2016 at 9:36:42 AM UTC+5:30, Paul Rubin wrote:
> Rustom Mody writes:
> > As with all things rms, its taking him decades to realize this defeat
> > [Latest makeinfo is 18 times slower than previous version!!
> > https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/bug-tex
On Saturday, April 30, 2016 at 9:46:19 AM UTC+5:30, Random832 wrote:
> On Sat, Apr 30, 2016, at 00:06, Ben Finney wrote:
> > Steven D'Aprano writes:
> >
> > > So they want the PAGER environment variable to specify what pager they
> > > want...
> > >
> > > ...so long as applications don't
On Saturday, April 30, 2016 at 7:55:47 AM UTC+5:30, Ben Finney wrote:
> "Martin A. Brown" writes:
>
> > Hello [Steven D'Aprano],
> >
> > >What is a good place where I can find out more about writing manpage?
>
> Writing them directly in GNU troff markup is easy enough
>
On Saturday, April 30, 2016 at 8:06:46 AM UTC+5:30, Random832 wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 29, 2016, at 22:27, Rustom Mody wrote:
> > On Saturday, April 30, 2016 at 7:47:11 AM UTC+5:30, Random832 wrote:
> > > On Fri, Apr 29, 2016, at 22:09, Ethan Furman wrote:
> > > > So I h
On Saturday, April 30, 2016 at 7:47:11 AM UTC+5:30, Random832 wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 29, 2016, at 22:09, Ethan Furman wrote:
> > So I have to cripple my shell to get pydoc help to work nicely? Neat!
> > Actually, not so much. :(
>
> If you don't want a pager with pydoc, when exactly do you want
On Friday, April 29, 2016 at 7:35:55 PM UTC+5:30, Ethan Furman wrote:
> Wow. Thank you for that very informative post!
>
> --
> ~Ethan~
For emacs junkies there is also org-e-man
[1] http://orgmode.org/worg/org-tutorials/org-e-man-documentation.html
[2]
On Friday, April 29, 2016 at 3:07:09 PM UTC+5:30, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
> On Fri, 29 Apr 2016 03:00 pm, Rustom Mody wafted information-rich pheromones
> into the air, where they diffused rapidly:
> > Why replicate and cause annoyance?
>
> If you don't want to use the function
On Friday, April 29, 2016 at 7:45:35 AM UTC+5:30, Paul Rubin wrote:
> Steven D'Aprano writes:
> > (1) print the help text to stdout;
> > (2) run the help text through a pager;
>
> Stdout unless the PAGER env var is set. Otherwise, I'd say still stdout
> since the person can pipe it through a
On Thursday, April 28, 2016 at 7:45:22 PM UTC+5:30, ldomp...@casema.nl wrote:
> I am follows on this moment two online pythoncourses from code.tutsplus.com
> But I am interested in following more online pythoncourses.
> Maby someone have some links to websites for me what handles python online
>
On Thursday, April 28, 2016 at 8:11:26 PM UTC+5:30, Dan Strohl wrote:
> In addition to Peter's points,
> - I would suggest breaking out the list comprehensions into standard for
> loops and/or functions. That makes it easier to read and troubleshoot. (you
> can always re-optimize It if
On Thursday, April 28, 2016 at 4:46:43 PM UTC+5:30, MRAB wrote:
> On 2016-04-28 06:16, Rustom Mody wrote:
> > On Thursday, April 28, 2016 at 9:26:21 AM UTC+5:30, Chris Angelico wrote:
> >> My rule of thumb is: Dunders are for defining, not for calling. It's
> >> not a ha
On Thursday, April 28, 2016 at 1:57:40 PM UTC+5:30, jf...@ms4.hinet.net wrote:
> I have a dictionary like this:
>
> >>> dct ={1: 'D', 5: 'A', 2: 'B', 3: 'B', 4: 'E'}
>
> The following code works:
>
> >>> for k in dct: print(k, dct[k])
> ...
> 1 D
> 2 B
> 3 B
> 4 E
> 5 A
>
> and this one too:
>
On Thursday, April 28, 2016 at 9:26:21 AM UTC+5:30, Chris Angelico wrote:
> My rule of thumb is: Dunders are for defining, not for calling. It's
> not a hard-and-fast rule, but it'll get you through 99%+ of
> situations.
Neat and clever.
Should get in the docs somewhere
--
On Wednesday, April 20, 2016 at 6:33:33 AM UTC+5:30, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
> Anyone who thinks that we're heading back to hieroglyphics simply isn't
> paying attention.
Which are just text in the range 13000-1342F:
http://unicode.org/charts/PDF/U13000.pdf
--
On Wednesday, April 20, 2016 at 12:25:09 AM UTC+5:30, Random832 wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 19, 2016, at 13:43, Tim Chase wrote:
> > Well, let's take a look at their native file formats:
> >
> > Inkscape: SVG
> >
> > Libreoffice: compressed XML
> >
> > Firefox: HTML+CSS+JS
> >
> > Musescore:
On Tuesday, April 19, 2016 at 11:17:23 PM UTC+5:30, Tim Chase wrote:
> On 2016-04-19 09:46, Rustom Mody wrote:
> > inkscape
> > gimp
> > blender
> > libreoffice writer/calc/prese
> > wireshark
> > skype
> > firefox
> > audacity
> > musesc
On Tuesday, April 19, 2016 at 9:44:39 PM UTC+5:30, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
> On Tue, 19 Apr 2016 01:04 pm, Rustom Mody wrote:
>
> > And more generally that programmers sticking to text when rest of world
> > has moved on is rather backward:
>
> I'm pretty sure that t
On Tuesday, April 19, 2016 at 7:46:21 PM UTC+5:30, Grant Edwards wrote:
> On 2016-04-19, Pete Forman wrote:
>
> > My question asks why monospace is used for the text.
>
> Well, I always use a monospaced font for code because I find it helps
> readability for things like tables of data, block
On Tuesday, April 19, 2016 at 7:30:18 PM UTC+5:30, Tim Chase wrote:
> On 2016-04-19 04:37, Rustom Mody wrote:
> > > No, they will not, because they'll make your code proprietary.
> >
> > Pragmatically yes; theoretically no because its like saying
> > "
On Tuesday, April 19, 2016 at 9:41:24 AM UTC+5:30, Random832 wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 18, 2016, at 23:54, Rustom Mody wrote:
> > Start no tabs:
> > if foo# comment that is aligned
> > do some stuff# across multiple indent levels
> >
> > Add tabs as leading indent
On Tuesday, April 19, 2016 at 5:18:07 PM UTC+5:30, Marko Rauhamaa wrote:
> Paul Rudin :
>
> > Pete Forman writes:
> >> Why is it that Python continues to use a fixed width font and
> >> therefore specifies the maximum line width as a character count?
> >
> > Python doesn't require the use of any
On Tuesday, April 19, 2016 at 1:47:48 PM UTC+5:30, Chris Angelico wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 19, 2016 at 6:09 PM, Marko Rauhamaa wrote:
> > Now, descending back on earth, I don't believe the advantages of rich
> > source code will outweigh those of plain text in the foreseeable future.
>
> No, they
On Tuesday, April 19, 2016 at 9:00:12 AM UTC+5:30, Random832 wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 18, 2016, at 23:04, Rustom Mody wrote:
> > See elastic tabstops: http://nickgravgaard.com/elastic-tabstops/
>
> >From there:
> >A column block is a run of uninterrupted vertically ad
On Tuesday, April 19, 2016 at 6:49:34 AM UTC+5:30, sohcatoa wrote:
> On Monday, April 18, 2016 at 2:14:17 PM UTC-7, Pete Forman wrote:
> > Why is it that Python continues to use a fixed width font and therefore
> > specifies the maximum line width as a character count?
> >
> > An essential part
On Monday, April 18, 2016 at 2:34:10 PM UTC+5:30, Gregory Ewing wrote:
> Rustom Mody wrote:
> > Come to think of it take an SQL DBMS browser.
> > Should we say: Horizontal scrolls are BAD; just reformat the table after
> > reaching 80 columns?
>
> I would say, yes, ho
On Sunday, April 17, 2016 at 3:34:56 PM UTC+5:30, BartC wrote:
> On 17/04/2016 04:44, Rustom Mody wrote:
> > On Saturday, April 16, 2016 at 10:22:10 PM UTC+5:30, Marko Rauhamaa wrote:
>
> >> It comes with the maxim that one function must be visible at once on the
>
On Monday, April 18, 2016 at 8:49:33 AM UTC+5:30, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
> On Mon, 18 Apr 2016 11:39 am, Rustom Mody wrote:
>
> > yes we can agree on this -- arbitrary line lengths are almost certainly
> > unreadable.
> > The problem then becomes so what is optimal?
&
On Sunday, April 17, 2016 at 9:19:48 AM UTC+5:30, Chris Angelico wrote:
> On Sun, Apr 17, 2016 at 1:44 PM, Rustom Mody wrote:
> > Thats a strange self-contradiction. I wrote this:
> > http://blog.languager.org/2012/10/layout-imperative-in-functional.html
> > to make the ca
On Saturday, April 16, 2016 at 10:22:10 PM UTC+5:30, Marko Rauhamaa wrote:
> Larry Martell :
>
> > I have worked for many companies where you are required to get a clean
> > run of pep8 on your code before your pull request will even be
> > considered for approval. I don't agree with this at all,
On Wednesday, April 13, 2016 at 10:30:07 PM UTC+5:30, Peter Otten wrote:
> alister wrote:
>
> > On Wed, 13 Apr 2016 06:18:22 -0700, durgadevi1 wrote:
> >
> >> I have a doubt regarding a problem.
> >>
> > No, you have a question doubt means you don't believe something
> > (sorry I know this is
401 - 500 of 1733 matches
Mail list logo
