On 09/08/12 03:59, Dennis Lee Bieber wrote:
On Wed, 08 Aug 2012 20:31:57 +0100, lipska the kat
declaimed the following in
gmane.comp.python.general:
[snip]
If a "node" is a father or mother, and it takes one of each to
produce a "leaf", your "tree" has just collapsed.
This would
On Thu, Aug 9, 2012 at 3:28 AM, Steven D'Aprano
wrote:
> (As they say: I'll believe that corporations are people when Texas
> executes one.)
If proper excuse you can trump any,
You may wind up a Limited Company
You cannot conveniently blow it up!
-- WS Gilbert, "Utopia, Ltd"
But not every "is-a
Who could have predicted that a request for suggesting books on OOP can
come so far!
On Wed, Aug 8, 2012 at 9:31 PM, lipska the kat wrote:
> On 08/08/12 17:42, Dennis Lee Bieber wrote:
>
>> On Wed, 08 Aug 2012 10:51:45 +0100, lipska the kat
>> declaimed the following in
>> gmane.comp.python.ge
On 08/08/12 17:42, Dennis Lee Bieber wrote:
On Wed, 08 Aug 2012 10:51:45 +0100, lipska the kat
declaimed the following in
gmane.comp.python.general:
The point I'm obviously struggling to make is that words convey concepts
The word Person conveys a whole lifetime of experience of People and a
On Wed, 08 Aug 2012 09:27:40 -0700, rusi wrote:
> I once sat for a presentation of a wannabe university teacher. The
> subject she chose was object-orientation.
>
> She spent some time on the usual dope about employee, manager etc.
> Finally she reached the base-class: Person.
>
> Or so we thoug
On Aug 8, 2:51 pm, lipska the kat wrote:
> The point I'm obviously struggling to make is that words convey concepts
> The word Person conveys a whole lifetime of experience of People and as
> imperfect human beings many of us are unable to tease out 'bits of being
> a person' that are relevant to
On 07/08/12 22:57, Chris Angelico wrote:
On Wed, Aug 8, 2012 at 3:00 AM, lipska the kat wrote:
I'm still undecided over the whole 'User' thing actually,
[snip]
This makes little sense to my mind. If you can have a "class User:",
why can you not have a "class Person:" ?
User and Person are
On Aug 8, 12:14 pm, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
> You claim that named Patterns simplify and clarify communication. If you
> have to look the terms up, they aren't simplifying and clarifying
> communication, they are obfuscating it.
By that argument, an encyclopaedia is useless because if you have to
On Wed, Aug 8, 2012 at 12:14 PM, Steven D'Aprano
wrote:
> NoneType raises an error if you try to create a second instance. bool
> just returns one of the two singletons (doubletons?) again.
>
> py> type(None)()
> Traceback (most recent call last):
> File "", line 1, in
> TypeError: cannot creat
On Tue, 07 Aug 2012 17:07:59 -0700, alex23 wrote:
>> I'm pretty sure that people could talk about good coding design before
>> the Gof4. As you say, they didn't invent the patterns. So people
>> obviously wrote code, and talked about algorithms, without the Gof4
>> terminology.
>
> So what did pe
On Aug 8, 5:02 am, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
> I haven't read the Gang of Four book itself, but I've spent plenty of
> time being perplexed by over-engineered, jargon-filled code, articles,
> posts and discussions by people who use Design Patterns as an end to
> themselves rather than a means to an e
On 8/7/2012 3:02 PM, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
On Sun, 05 Aug 2012 19:44:31 -0700, alex23 wrote:
I think you've entirely missed the point of Design Patterns.
Perhaps I have. Or perhaps I'm just (over-)reacting to the abuse of
Patterns:
http://c2.com/cgi/wiki?DesignPatternsConsideredHarmful
or
On Wed, Aug 8, 2012 at 3:00 AM, lipska the kat wrote:
> I'm still undecided over the whole 'User' thing actually, I don't think I
> can see a time when I will have a User Class in one of my systems but as I
> don't want to get 'dogmatic' about this I remain open to any ideas that
> might include s
On Sun, 05 Aug 2012 19:44:31 -0700, alex23 wrote:
> I think you've entirely missed the point of Design Patterns.
Perhaps I have. Or perhaps I'm just (over-)reacting to the abuse of
Patterns:
http://c2.com/cgi/wiki?DesignPatternsConsideredHarmful
or maybe I'm just not convinced that Design Patt
On 07/08/12 16:04, rusi wrote:
On Aug 7, 7:34 pm, lipska the kat wrote:
Never thought so for a moment, good to know you can be reasonable as
well as misguided ;-)
Well Lipska I must say that I find something resonant about the 'no-
person' thing, though I am not sure what.
You also said som
On Aug 7, 7:34 pm, lipska the kat wrote:
>
> Never thought so for a moment, good to know you can be reasonable as
> well as misguided ;-)
Well Lipska I must say that I find something resonant about the 'no-
person' thing, though I am not sure what.
You also said something about 'user' being more
On 07/08/12 10:44, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
On Mon, 06 Aug 2012 17:23:19 +0100, lipska the kat wrote:
On 06/08/12 13:19, rusi wrote:
I suggest this
http://steve-yegge.blogspot.in/2006/03/execution-in-kingdom-of-
nouns.html
http://bpfurtado.livejournal.com/2006/10/21/
Unfortunately the aut
On Mon, 06 Aug 2012 17:23:19 +0100, lipska the kat wrote:
> On 06/08/12 13:19, rusi wrote:
>> I suggest this
>> http://steve-yegge.blogspot.in/2006/03/execution-in-kingdom-of-
nouns.html
>
> http://bpfurtado.livejournal.com/2006/10/21/
Unfortunately the author (Bruno Furtado) has missed the poi
On 07/08/2012 02:12, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
On Mon, 06 Aug 2012 17:17:33 +0100, Mark Lawrence wrote:
Please see my comment at the bottom hint hint :)
Please trim unnecessary quoted text.
We don't need to see the entire thread of comment/reply/reply-to-reply
duplicated in *every* email.
P
Steven D'Aprano writes:
> Please trim unnecessary quoted text.
>
> We don't need to see the entire thread of comment/reply/reply-to-reply
> duplicated in *every* email.
s/every/any/
--
\ “If you make people think they're thinking, they'll love you; |
`\ but if you really make th
On Mon, 06 Aug 2012 17:17:33 +0100, Mark Lawrence wrote:
> Please see my comment at the bottom hint hint :)
Please trim unnecessary quoted text.
We don't need to see the entire thread of comment/reply/reply-to-reply
duplicated in *every* email.
--
Steven
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/l
On Tue, Aug 7, 2012 at 2:34 AM, rusi wrote:
> BTW in "automatic garbage collection" which of the three words is most
> important? Least?
Most important is "garbage". I sure don't want any language I use to
automatically collect non-garbage!!
But in seriousness, the definition of "garbage" is one
On Aug 6, 7:27 pm, lipska the kat wrote:
> You take out the garbage.
> I've got automatic garbage collection
:-)
BTW in "automatic garbage collection" which of the three words is most
important? Least?
Heres another take on nouns (and therefore OO):
http://hilgart.org/enformy/dma-verb.htm
--
On 06/08/12 13:19, rusi wrote:
On Aug 6, 12:46 am, lipska the kat wrote:
On 04/08/12 16:49, Jean Dubois wrote:
I'm looking for a good introduction to object oriented programming
with Python.
snip
I suggest this
http://steve-yegge.blogspot.in/2006/03/execution-in-kingdom-of-nouns.html
Please see my comment at the bottom hint hint :)
On 06/08/2012 16:38, Ramchandra Apte wrote:
Its a docstring - it documents the function/class
Did you know that docstrings can be used for testing - look at the doctest
standard library module!
try:
class A:
def method(self):
'''Sam
Its a docstring - it documents the function/class
Did you know that docstrings can be used for testing - look at the doctest
standard library module!
try:
class A:
def method(self):
'''Sample method
This method does the difficult task X.
Call this method with no arguments.'''#docstring
On 5 aug, 20:28, Mark Lawrence wrote:
> On 05/08/2012 19:04, Jean Dubois wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > On 5 aug, 02:11, shearich...@gmail.com wrote:
> >> One reason you may be having difficulty is that unlike some languages
> >> (C++/Java) object-orientation is not a be all and end all in Python,
On 06/08/12 13:19, rusi wrote:
On Aug 6, 12:46 am, lipska the kat wrote:
On 04/08/12 16:49, Jean Dubois wrote:
I'm looking for a good introduction to object oriented programming
with Python.
Object Oriented programming is a mindset, a way of looking at that
particular part of our world t
In article ,
lipska the kat wrote:
> UML works, non technical 'stakeholders' (yuk) can understand it at a
> high level and in my HUMBLE opinion the sequence diagram is the single
> most important piece of documentation in the entire software project
Yup. Sequence diagrams are the most common
On Aug 6, 12:46 am, lipska the kat wrote:
> On 04/08/12 16:49, Jean Dubois wrote:
>
> > I'm looking for a good introduction to object oriented programming
> > with Python.
>
> Object Oriented programming is a mindset, a way of looking at that
> particular part of our world that you are trying to
On 06/08/12 02:27, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
On Sun, 05 Aug 2012 19:12:35 -0400, Roy Smith wrote:
Good lord. I'd rather read C++ than UML. And I can't read C++.
UML is under-rated. I certainly don't have any love of the 47 different
flavors of diagram, but the basic idea of having a common gra
On 06/08/12 01:27, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
On Sun, 05 Aug 2012 19:12:35 -0400, Roy Smith wrote:
Good lord. I'd rather read C++ than UML. And I can't read C++.
UML is under-rated. I certainly don't have any love of the 47 different
flavors of diagram, but the basic idea of having a common gra
On 05/08/12 23:51, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
On Sun, 05 Aug 2012 18:45:47 -0400, Dennis Lee Bieber wrote:
Don't look for Object-Oriented Programming -- since the first widely
popular OOP language was C++ (Smalltalk was earlier, but rather
specialized, whereas C++ started as a preprocessor for C).
Dennis Lee Bieber :
> Don't look for Object-Oriented Programming -- since the first widely
>popular OOP language was C++ (Smalltalk was earlier, but rather
>specialized, whereas C++ started as a preprocessor for C).
Well, C++ did to C what Simula 67 did to Algol 60, much earlier. Simula
was
On Aug 6, 10:22 am, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
> In my not-so-humble opinion, the popularity of Design Patterns has a lot
> to do with the fact that they are so abstract and jargon-ridden that they
> have become a badge of membership into an elite. Shorn of their excessive
> abstractness, they're not
On 2012-08-06 at 00:27:43 +,
Steven D'Aprano wrote:
> I frequently draw diagrams to understand the relationships between my
> classes and the problem I am trying to solve. I almost invariably use one
> type of box and one type of arrowhead. Sometimes if I'm bored I draw
> doodles on the di
On Sun, 05 Aug 2012 19:12:35 -0400, Roy Smith wrote:
>> Good lord. I'd rather read C++ than UML. And I can't read C++.
>
> UML is under-rated. I certainly don't have any love of the 47 different
> flavors of diagram, but the basic idea of having a common graphical
> language for describing how
On 06/08/2012 00:12, Roy Smith wrote:
In article <501ef904$0$29867$c3e8da3$54964...@news.astraweb.com>,
Steven D'Aprano wrote:
On Sun, 05 Aug 2012 18:45:47 -0400, Dennis Lee Bieber wrote:
Don't look for Object-Oriented Programming -- since the first widely
popular OOP language was C++ (Sma
In article <501ef904$0$29867$c3e8da3$54964...@news.astraweb.com>,
Steven D'Aprano wrote:
> On Sun, 05 Aug 2012 18:45:47 -0400, Dennis Lee Bieber wrote:
>
> > Don't look for Object-Oriented Programming -- since the first widely
> > popular OOP language was C++ (Smalltalk was earlier, but rather
On Sun, 05 Aug 2012 18:45:47 -0400, Dennis Lee Bieber wrote:
> Don't look for Object-Oriented Programming -- since the first widely
> popular OOP language was C++ (Smalltalk was earlier, but rather
> specialized, whereas C++ started as a preprocessor for C).
>
> Rather look for Object-Oriented An
On 05/08/2012 19:43, Ifthikhan Nazeem wrote:
[top posting fixed]
On Sun, Aug 5, 2012 at 8:28 PM, Mark Lawrence wrote:
On 05/08/2012 19:04, Jean Dubois wrote:
On 5 aug, 02:11, shearich...@gmail.com wrote:
One reason you may be having difficulty is that unlike some languages
(C++/Java) objec
I would recommend Bruce Eckel's Thining in Python. Check it out here
http://www.mindview.net/Books/TIPython/
On Sun, Aug 5, 2012 at 8:28 PM, Mark Lawrence wrote:
> On 05/08/2012 19:04, Jean Dubois wrote:
>
>> On 5 aug, 02:11, shearich...@gmail.com wrote:
>>
>>> One reason you may be having diff
In article
<8f1b60a5-0411-4aae-9ee6-0025b493c...@m13g2000vbd.googlegroups.com>,
Jean Dubois wrote:
> Can someone here on this list give a trivial example of what object
> oriented programming is, using only Python?
OOP seems to mean different things to different people. What OOP means
to you
On 05/08/2012 19:04, Jean Dubois wrote:
On 5 aug, 02:11, shearich...@gmail.com wrote:
One reason you may be having difficulty is that unlike some languages
(C++/Java) object-orientation is not a be all and end all in Python, in fact
you could work with Python for a long time without really 'do
On 5 aug, 02:11, shearich...@gmail.com wrote:
> One reason you may be having difficulty is that unlike some languages
> (C++/Java) object-orientation is not a be all and end all in Python, in fact
> you could work with Python for a long time without really 'doing it' at all
> (well other than ca
On 5 aug, 02:11, shearich...@gmail.com wrote:
> One reason you may be having difficulty is that unlike some languages
> (C++/Java) object-orientation is not a be all and end all in Python, in fact
> you could work with Python for a long time without really 'doing it' at all
> (well other than ca
46 matches
Mail list logo
