No worries,
I've just sent you my pull-request :)
On Thu, Nov 22, 2012 at 1:11 PM, Pavel Solin wrote:
> Hi Alec,
>
>> Can you put your website—http://femhub.com/textbook-python/—on your
>> github—https://github.com/femhub/nclab-textbook-python?
>
> Done, thank you so much.
>
> I edited the textb
On Thu, 22 Nov 2012 17:41:22 -0500, Colin J. Williams wrote:
> You and I used __format__. I understand that the use of double
> underscore functions is deprecated.
Double leading and trailing underscore methods are not deprecated, they
are very much part of the public interface. But they are re
On 22 November 2012 22:41, Colin J. Williams wrote:
> On 22/11/2012 1:27 PM, Ian Kelly wrote:
>
>> On Thu, Nov 22, 2012 at 5:24 AM, Colin J. Williams wrote:
>>
>>> From my reading of the docs, it seems to me that the three following
>>> should
>>> be equivalent:
>>>
>>>(a) formattingStr.for
On 22/11/2012 1:27 PM, Ian Kelly wrote:
On Thu, Nov 22, 2012 at 5:24 AM, Colin J. Williams wrote:
From my reading of the docs, it seems to me that the three following should
be equivalent:
(a) formattingStr.format(values)
with
(b) format(values, formattingStr)
or
(c) tupleOfValues.__
On 11/22/2012 7:24 AM, Colin J. Williams wrote:
From my reading of the docs, it seems to me that the three following
should be equivalent:
We read differently...
(a) formattingStr.format(values)
Where 'values' is multiple arguments
with
(b) format(values, formattingStr)
"format(
On Thu, Nov 22, 2012 at 5:24 AM, Colin J. Williams wrote:
> From my reading of the docs, it seems to me that the three following should
> be equivalent:
>
> (a) formattingStr.format(values)
> with
> (b) format(values, formattingStr)
> or
> (c) tupleOfValues.__format__(formattingStr
>
> Examp
From Yet another Python textbook
On 21/11/2012 5:17 PM, Chris Angelico wrote:
On Thu, Nov 22, 2012 at 4:03 AM, Colin J. Williams wrote:
On 20/11/2012 4:00 PM, Chris Angelico wrote:
To the OP: jmf has an unnatural hatred of Python 3.3 and PEP 393
strings. Take no notice; the rest of the world
On 11/21/2012 6:21 PM, Joshua Landau wrote:
Since we've decided to derail the conversation...
"{}".format() is a blessing an "" % () should go. "%" has no relevance
to strings, is hard to "get" and has an appalling* syntax. Having two
syntaxes just makes things less obvious, and the right choic
Hi Alec,
> Can you put your website—http://femhub.com/textbook-python/—on your
> github—https://github.com/femhub/nclab-textbook-python?
Done, thank you so much.
I edited the textbook based on responses that I received. Based
on several inquiries we also decided to add Python 3.2 to NCLab.
New r
On Wed, Nov 21, 2012 at 4:21 PM, Joshua Landau
wrote:
> "{}".format() is a blessing an "" % () should go. "%" has no relevance to
> strings, is hard to "get" and has an appalling* syntax. Having two syntaxes
> just makes things less obvious, and the right choice rarer.
>
> str.format is also reall
On 21/11/2012 23:21, Joshua Landau wrote:
On 21 November 2012 22:17, Chris Angelico wrote:
On Thu, Nov 22, 2012 at 4:03 AM, Colin J. Williams wrote:
On 20/11/2012 4:00 PM, Chris Angelico wrote:
To the OP: jmf has an unnatural hatred of Python 3.3 and PEP 393
strings. Take no notice; the res
On Wed, 21 Nov 2012 12:03:30 -0500, Colin J. Williams wrote:
> On 20/11/2012 4:00 PM, Chris Angelico wrote:
>> To the OP: jmf has an unnatural hatred of Python 3.3 and PEP 393
>> strings. Take no notice; the rest of the world sees this as a huge
>> advantage. Python is now in a VERY small group o
On 21 November 2012 22:17, Chris Angelico wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 22, 2012 at 4:03 AM, Colin J. Williams wrote:
> > On 20/11/2012 4:00 PM, Chris Angelico wrote:
> >> To the OP: jmf has an unnatural hatred of Python 3.3 and PEP 393
> >> strings. Take no notice; the rest of the world sees this as a h
On Wed, Nov 21, 2012 at 3:58 PM, Dave Angel wrote:
> Some don't realize that one very powerful use for the .format style of
> working is that it makes localization much more straightforward. With
> the curly brace approach, one can translate the format string into
> another language, and if the p
On 11/21/2012 05:17 PM, Chris Angelico wrote:
>
>
>
> That said, though, I'm just glad that %-formatting is staying. It's an
> extremely expressive string formatting method, and exists in many
> languages (thanks to C's heritage). Pike's version is insanely
> powerful, Python's is more like C's, b
On Thu, Nov 22, 2012 at 4:03 AM, Colin J. Williams wrote:
> On 20/11/2012 4:00 PM, Chris Angelico wrote:
>> To the OP: jmf has an unnatural hatred of Python 3.3 and PEP 393
>> strings. Take no notice; the rest of the world sees this as a huge
>> advantage. Python is now in a VERY small group of la
On 20/11/2012 4:00 PM, Chris Angelico wrote:
On Wed, Nov 21, 2012 at 1:57 AM, wrote:
Le mardi 20 novembre 2012 09:09:50 UTC+1, Chris Angelico a écrit :
On Tue, Nov 20, 2012 at 7:02 PM, Pavel Solin wrote:
Perhaps you are right. Is there any statistics of how many Python
programmers are u
Le mardi 20 novembre 2012 22:00:49 UTC+1, Chris Angelico a écrit :
> On Wed, Nov 21, 2012 at 1:57 AM, wrote:
>
-
> To the OP: jmf has an unnatural hatred of Python 3.3 and PEP 393
>
> strings.
No. Not at all. I'm mainly and deeply disappointed.
jmf
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/lis
On Wed, Nov 21, 2012 at 8:55 AM, Mark Lawrence wrote:
> On 20/11/2012 21:00, Chris Angelico wrote:
>>
>>
>> To the OP: jmf has an unnatural hatred of Python 3.3 and PEP 393
>> strings. Take no notice; the rest of the world sees this as a huge
>> advantage. Python is now in a VERY small group of la
On 20/11/2012 21:00, Chris Angelico wrote:
To the OP: jmf has an unnatural hatred of Python 3.3 and PEP 393
strings. Take no notice; the rest of the world sees this as a huge
advantage. Python is now in a VERY small group of languages (I'm aware
of just one other) that have absolutely proper Uni
On 11/20/2012 3:02 AM, Pavel Solin wrote:
previous page that Python 3 was released in 2008. Is there any work
underway get Python 3 into NCLab?
There is an ongoing discussion but we are not sure.
Are there any reasons except for the print () command
and division of integers?
(In add
On Wed, Nov 21, 2012 at 1:57 AM, wrote:
> Le mardi 20 novembre 2012 09:09:50 UTC+1, Chris Angelico a écrit :
>> On Tue, Nov 20, 2012 at 7:02 PM, Pavel Solin wrote:
>>
>> > Perhaps you are right. Is there any statistics of how many Python
>>
>> > programmers are using 2.7 vs. 3? Most of people I
On Tue, Nov 20, 2012 at 1:02 AM, Pavel Solin wrote:
> There is an ongoing discussion but we are not sure.
> Are there any reasons except for the print () command
> and division of integers?
The big one is that Python 3 holds the future of Python development.
There are no more feature releases pla
Le mardi 20 novembre 2012 09:09:50 UTC+1, Chris Angelico a écrit :
> On Tue, Nov 20, 2012 at 7:02 PM, Pavel Solin wrote:
>
> > Perhaps you are right. Is there any statistics of how many Python
>
> > programmers are using 2.7 vs. 3? Most of people I know use 2.7.
>
>
>
> If you're teaching Pyt
On Mon, 19 Nov 2012 17:58:55 +0100, Kwpolska wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 19, 2012 at 6:30 AM, Pavel Solin
> wrote:
>> I would like to introduce a new Python textbook aimed at high school
>> students:
>>
>> http://femhub.com/textbook-python/.
>>
>> The textbook is open source and its public Git repositor
On Tue, Nov 20, 2012 at 7:02 PM, Pavel Solin wrote:
> Perhaps you are right. Is there any statistics of how many Python
> programmers are using 2.7 vs. 3? Most of people I know use 2.7.
If you're teaching Python, the stats are probably about zero for zero.
Start them off on Py3 and help move the
Hi Ian,
thank you for your comments.
On Mon, Nov 19, 2012 at 11:46 PM, Ian Kelly wrote:
> On Sun, Nov 18, 2012 at 10:30 PM, Pavel Solin
> wrote:
> > I would like to introduce a new Python textbook
> > aimed at high school students:
> >
> > http://femhub.com/textbook-python/.
> >
> > The text
On Sun, Nov 18, 2012 at 10:30 PM, Pavel Solin wrote:
> I would like to introduce a new Python textbook
> aimed at high school students:
>
> http://femhub.com/textbook-python/.
>
> The textbook is open source and its public Git
> repository is located at Github:
>
> g...@github.com:femhub/nclab-tex
On Nov 20, 2:58 am, Kwpolska wrote:
> You are writing it for something called “NCLab”, not for the general
> public, and that sucks.
And making it available to the general public to consume. What's wrong
with writing for one audience and providing for a broader?
If you're that concerned with the
On Mon, Nov 19, 2012 at 6:30 AM, Pavel Solin wrote:
> I would like to introduce a new Python textbook
> aimed at high school students:
>
> http://femhub.com/textbook-python/.
>
> The textbook is open source and its public Git
> repository is located at Github:
>
> g...@github.com:femhub/nclab-text
I would like to introduce a new Python textbook
aimed at high school students:
http://femhub.com/textbook-python/.
The textbook is open source and its public Git
repository is located at Github:
g...@github.com:femhub/nclab-textbook-python.git
Feedback and contributions are very much
welcome, e
31 matches
Mail list logo
