Re: newb question about @property

On 05/10/2017 14:13, Steve D'Aprano wrote: On Thu, 5 Oct 2017 10:51 pm, bartc wrote: Am I allowed to say that it all seems a bit of a mess? You may or may not be pleased to learn that there's a push to create a "record like" or "struct like" datatype for Python 3.7 or 3.8, tentatively

Re: newb question about @property

On Thu, 5 Oct 2017 10:51 pm, bartc wrote: > Am I allowed to say that it all seems a bit of a mess? You may or may not be pleased to learn that there's a push to create a "record like" or "struct like" datatype for Python 3.7 or 3.8, tentatively called a "Data Class" for now. The proposed

Re: newb question about @property

On 05/10/2017 12:29, Gregory Ewing wrote: bartc wrote: Result? You can't just look at my 'any' class and see what fields it uses. You can't even just look at the static source code. You have to run the program to find out. And it might be different each time. You can usually get a pretty

Re: newb question about @property

bartc wrote: Result? You can't just look at my 'any' class and see what fields it uses. You can't even just look at the static source code. You have to run the program to find out. And it might be different each time. You can usually get a pretty good idea of what attributes a class has by

Re: newb question about @property

On Wed, 4 Oct 2017 11:46 pm, Rhodri James wrote: > On 04/10/17 12:07, bartc wrote: >> I've seen that example brought up before. It still doesn't cut any ice. >> >> You might as well be condescending of someone who finds Joyce or Proust >> unreadable, and prefers McBain, Simenon or Chandler.

Re: Constants [was Re: newb question about @property]

On Thu, 5 Oct 2017 04:00 am, Paul Moore wrote: > I wonder - would the people who want "real constants" find the > following confusing: > from demo import foo foo = 14 foo > 14 > > It's fundamental to the way the import function works, and how names > in Python behave, but I can

Re: newb question about @property

On Thu, 5 Oct 2017 09:08 am, bartc wrote: [...] > And when I tried, it didn't really work in Python 2 (extra attributes > could still be created, and .__slots__ wasn't readonly); only Py3. Not quite, but I don't blame you for the mistake. Its an easy one to make. __slots__ only works in "new

Re: newb question about @property

On 04/10/2017 17:02, Rhodri James wrote: On 04/10/17 16:33, Paul Moore wrote: It's not an advantage or a disadvantage, just an approach. Many people like it, you may not. Specifically, yes you can't "just declare a lightweight struct or record with exactly two fields". Actually you can:

Re: newb question about @property

On Wed, Oct 4, 2017 14:03 PM, bartc wrote > "A property, in some object-oriented programming languages, is a special >sort of class member, intermediate in functionality between a field (or >data member) and a method." > >But Python has some problems just in using fields. If

Re: Constants [was Re: newb question about @property]

On 4 October 2017 at 17:15, Ian Kelly wrote: > On Wed, Oct 4, 2017 at 9:08 AM, Steve D'Aprano > wrote: >> But in large projects, especially those where you cannot trust every module >> in >> the project to obey the naming convention, I can see

Re: newb question about @property

On 4 October 2017 at 17:02, Rhodri James wrote: > Actually you can: > class Point: > ... __slots__ = ("x", "y") > ... def __init__(self, x, y): > ... self.x = x > ... self.y = y > ... def __str__(self): > ... return "({0},{1})".format(self.x, self.y) >

Re: Constants [was Re: newb question about @property]

On Wed, Oct 4, 2017 at 9:08 AM, Steve D'Aprano wrote: > But in large projects, especially those where you cannot trust every module in > the project to obey the naming convention, I can see that this lack might > contribute to the perception, if not the fact, of Python

Re: newb question about @property

On 04/10/17 16:33, Paul Moore wrote: On 4 October 2017 at 16:03, bartc wrote: No error. Some would perceive all this as an advantage, but it means you can't just declare a lightweight struct or record 'Point' with exactly two fields x and y. You have to use other solutions

Re: newb question about @property

On 4 October 2017 at 16:03, bartc wrote: > No error. Some would perceive all this as an advantage, but it means you > can't just declare a lightweight struct or record 'Point' with exactly two > fields x and y. You have to use other solutions ('namedtuples' or whatever, > which

Constants [was Re: newb question about @property]

On Thu, 5 Oct 2017 12:41 am, Ian Kelly wrote: > Python has the simplest named constants of all: > > C = 12345 > > As long as you don't subsequently change it, it's a constant. And it's > very simple because it works just like any other variable. I do feel that the lack of constants[1] is a

Re: newb question about @property

On 04/10/2017 14:41, Ian Kelly wrote: On Wed, Oct 4, 2017 at 5:07 AM, bartc wrote: For that matter, I don't think Python has such a feature either. So that you write for example: const C = 123345 and then whenever C appears within the code, it's implemented as:

Re: newb question about @property

On Wed, Oct 4, 2017 at 5:07 AM, bartc wrote: > It is just being elitist. I have a preference for keeping things simple and > avoiding unnecessary complexity. But with programming languages many do have > a penchant for the latter. > > As an example, a recent discussion on

Re: newb question about @property

On 04/10/17 12:07, bartc wrote: I've seen that example brought up before. It still doesn't cut any ice. You might as well be condescending of someone who finds Joyce or Proust unreadable, and prefers McBain, Simenon or Chandler. (Sorry, can't think of any modern pulp novelists). I don't

Re: newb question about @property

On 04/10/2017 06:32, Steve D'Aprano wrote: On Wed, 4 Oct 2017 02:00 am, bartc wrote: Does all this advanced stuff (which I don't understand and which doesn't look very appealing either; hopefully I will never come across such code) still count as programming? I could not have hoped to see a

Re: newb question about @property

On Wed, 4 Oct 2017 02:00 am, bartc wrote: > Does all this advanced stuff (which I don't understand and which doesn't > look very appealing either; hopefully I will never come across such > code) still count as programming? I could not have hoped to see a more perfect example of the Blub effect

Re: newb question about @property

On Tue, Oct 3, 2017 at 9:16 AM, Jorge Gimeno wrote: > No, I see this as teaching the skills involved to drive a car. Practicing a > turn, scanning gauges, and checking blind spots are all a part of driving. > When one is learning, it's easier to learn these in isolation so

Re: newb question about @property

Steve D'Aprano wrote: On Tue, 3 Oct 2017 06:51 am, Bill wrote: Can you inspire me with a good decorator problem (standard homework exercise-level will be fine)? Here is a nice even dozen problems for you. Please ask for clarification if any are unclear. Thank you for sharing the problems

Re: newb question about @property

No, I see this as teaching the skills involved to drive a car. Practicing a turn, scanning gauges, and checking blind spots are all a part of driving. When one is learning, it's easier to learn these in isolation so when the problem must be solved in real time, you know what to do. This is no

Re: newb question about @property

On 03/10/2017 15:39, Ian Kelly wrote: On Tue, Oct 3, 2017 at 4:41 AM, Steve D'Aprano wrote: On Tue, 3 Oct 2017 06:51 am, Bill wrote: Can you inspire me with a good decorator problem (standard homework exercise-level will be fine)? Here is a nice even dozen

Re: newb question about @property

On Tue, Oct 3, 2017 at 4:41 AM, Steve D'Aprano wrote: > On Tue, 3 Oct 2017 06:51 am, Bill wrote: > >> Can you inspire me with a good decorator problem (standard homework >> exercise-level will be fine)? > > > Here is a nice even dozen problems for you. Please ask for

Re: newb question about @property

On Tue, 3 Oct 2017 10:01 pm, Lele Gaifax wrote: > Steve D'Aprano writes: > >> (9) [ADVANCED] Modify the decorator from (8) to take an argument specifying >> the path to a file, and use the logging module to log the details to that >> file instead of printing them. >

Re: newb question about @property

Steve D'Aprano writes: > (9) [ADVANCED] Modify the decorator from (8) to take an argument specifying > the > path to a file, and use the logging module to log the details to that file > instead of printing them. This may suffer of excessive creativity, as usually

Re: newb question about @property

On Tue, 3 Oct 2017 06:51 am, Bill wrote: > Can you inspire me with a good decorator problem (standard homework > exercise-level will be fine)? Here is a nice even dozen problems for you. Please ask for clarification if any are unclear. (1) Write a decorator which simply prints a descriptive

Re: newb question about @property

Bill wrote: Chris Angelico wrote: Decorators are fairly straight-forward if you understand higher-order functions. ChrisA I was just minding my own business, and thought to write my first decorator for a simple *recursive* function f. The decorator WORKS if f does not make a call to

Re: newb question about @property

On Tue, Oct 3, 2017 at 2:39 PM, Bill wrote: > Chris Angelico wrote: >> >> Decorators are fairly straight-forward if you understand higher-order >> functions. >> >> ChrisA > > > > I was just minding my own business, and thought to write my first decorator > for a simple

Re: newb question about @property

Chris Angelico wrote: Decorators are fairly straight-forward if you understand higher-order functions. ChrisA I was just minding my own business, and thought to write my first decorator for a simple *recursive* function f. The decorator WORKS if f does not make a call to itself.

Re: newb question about @property

Steve D'Aprano wrote: There's no need to set the radius and the diameter, as one is completely derived from the other Good point; I'm glad I submitted my code for grading. Sort of a "trick question" to ask me to add diameter and then take off points because I used it! ; ) Bill

Re: newb question about @property

On Tue, 3 Oct 2017 06:32 am, Bill wrote: > Steve D'Aprano wrote: >> Circle didn't use any setters, but I could have let you set the >> diameter, which in >> turn would set the radius: >> >> circle.radius = 2 >> assert circle.diameter == 4 >> circle.diameter == 2 # requires a setter >> assert

Re: newb question about @property

On Mon, Oct 2, 2017 at 1:32 PM, Bill wrote: > @property def circumference(self): > return 2 * math.pi *self.radius Of course the *proper* formula here is just math.tau * self.radius. -- https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list

Re: newb question about @property

On Tue, Oct 3, 2017 at 6:51 AM, Bill wrote: > Can you inspire me with a good decorator problem (standard homework > exercise-level will be fine)? Otherwise I will go create one which will > prints a row of asterisks before and after the call to the original function >

Re: newb question about @property

Chris Angelico wrote: On Tue, Oct 3, 2017 at 6:23 AM, Larry Hudson via Python-list wrote: On 10/01/2017 03:52 PM, Bill wrote: Steve D'Aprano wrote: The definitive explanation of descriptors is here: https://docs.python.org/3/howto/descriptor.html Thank you! It is

Re: newb question about @property

Steve D'Aprano wrote: Circle didn't use any setters, but I could have let you set the diameter, which in turn would set the radius: circle.radius = 2 assert circle.diameter == 4 circle.diameter == 2 # requires a setter assert circle.radius == 1 Getting that to work is left as an exercise :-)

Re: newb question about @property

On Tue, Oct 3, 2017 at 6:23 AM, Larry Hudson via Python-list wrote: > On 10/01/2017 03:52 PM, Bill wrote: >> >> Steve D'Aprano wrote: >>> >>> The definitive explanation of descriptors is here: >>> https://docs.python.org/3/howto/descriptor.html >> >> >> Thank you! It is

Re: newb question about @property

On 10/01/2017 03:52 PM, Bill wrote: Steve D'Aprano wrote: The definitive explanation of descriptors is here: https://docs.python.org/3/howto/descriptor.html Thank you!  It is next on my list.   Then I'll try that Circle problem you mentioned as an exercise last night!  I don't expect run

Re: newb question about @property

On Mon, 2 Oct 2017 07:51 pm, Marko Rauhamaa wrote: > Chris Angelico : > >> On Mon, Oct 2, 2017 at 5:34 PM, Marko Rauhamaa wrote: >>> I have *seen* a semi-useful decorator in code once >>> (@contextlib.contextmanager) but still would prefer explicit dunder >>>

Re: newb question about @property

On 2017-10-02 10:51, Marko Rauhamaa wrote: > Chris Angelico : > >> On Mon, Oct 2, 2017 at 5:34 PM, Marko Rauhamaa wrote: >>> I have *seen* a semi-useful decorator in code once >>> (@contextlib.contextmanager) but still would prefer explicit dunder >>> methods.

Re: newb question about @property

Chris Angelico : > On Mon, Oct 2, 2017 at 5:34 PM, Marko Rauhamaa wrote: >> I have *seen* a semi-useful decorator in code once >> (@contextlib.contextmanager) but still would prefer explicit dunder >> methods. > > [...] I'm not sure where dunder methods come

Re: newb question about @property

On Mon, 2 Oct 2017 05:34 pm, Marko Rauhamaa wrote: > I must say, though, I have yet to run into a need for descriptors. You've never called a method? -- Steve “Cheer up,” they said, “things could be worse.” So I cheered up, and sure enough, things got worse. --

Re: newb question about @property

On Mon, Oct 2, 2017 at 5:34 PM, Marko Rauhamaa wrote: > Chris Angelico : > >> Yes, that's correct. The *descriptor* protocol is what allows >> "foo.bar" to cause a function to be executed > > That mechanism allows you to expose data fields in the API. If the >

Re: newb question about @property

Chris Angelico : > Yes, that's correct. The *descriptor* protocol is what allows > "foo.bar" to cause a function to be executed That mechanism allows you to expose data fields in the API. If the implementation later changes, you can emulate the data fields. I must say, though,

Re: newb question about @property

On Sunday, October 1, 2017 at 6:47:34 PM UTC+1, MRAB wrote: > On 2017-10-01 02:52, Stefan Ram wrote: > > MRAB writes: > >>raise ValueError("Temperature below -273 is not possible") > > > >-273.15 > > > I think you've trimmed a little too much. In my reply I was only copying > what someone

Re: newb question about @property

On Mon, Oct 2, 2017 at 9:47 AM, Bill wrote: > Stephan Houben wrote: >> >> Op 2017-10-01, Bill schreef : >>> >>> I watched an example on YouTube where someone wrote a simple descriptor >>> ("@Time_it) to output the amount of time that it took

Re: newb question about @property

Steve D'Aprano wrote: The definitive explanation of descriptors is here: https://docs.python.org/3/howto/descriptor.html Thank you! It is next on my list. Then I'll try that Circle problem you mentioned as an exercise last night! I don't expect run into any difficulties. : ) --

Re: newb question about @property

Stephan Houben wrote: Op 2017-10-01, Bill schreef : I watched an example on YouTube where someone wrote a simple descriptor ("@Time_it) to output the amount of time that it took ordinary functions to complete.To be honest, I AM interested in descriptors. Are you

Re: newb question about @property

ot;, where I meant "decorator" (at least newb is still in the subject line). I don't even know what a descriptor is yet--I know a bit more about meta-classes! %-) So, on your list, I'm basically up to the leading edge of (5), writing decorators. But my previous programming experienc

Re: newb question about @property

Op 2017-10-01, Bill schreef : > Steve D'Aprano wrote: >> >> [1] Technically, the interpreter knows nothing about properties. What >> it cares about is *descriptors*. Properties are just one kind of >> descriptor, as are methods. But I'm intentionally not talking about >>

Re: newb question about @property

Op 2017-10-01, Bill schreef : > I watched an example on YouTube where someone wrote a simple descriptor > ("@Time_it) to output the amount of time that it took ordinary functions > to complete.To be honest, I AM interested in descriptors. Are you sure you are not

Re: newb question about @property

On 2017-10-01 02:52, Stefan Ram wrote: MRAB writes: raise ValueError("Temperature below -273 is not possible") -273.15 I think you've trimmed a little too much. In my reply I was only copying what someone else had written. --

Re: newb question about @property

On 01/10/17 03:52, Stefan Ram wrote: > MRAB writes: >> raise ValueError("Temperature below -273 is not possible") > -273.15 > Either way, that depends. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Negative_temperature#Examples --

Re: newb question about @property

On Sun, 1 Oct 2017 05:46 pm, Bill wrote: > If you were going to show non-Python users, say science undergraduates > and faculty, that Python is an interesting tool (in 45 minutes), would > one delve into descriptors? Hell no :-) I think there's a hierarchy of

Re: newb question about @property

Steve D'Aprano wrote: [1] Technically, the interpreter knows nothing about properties. What it cares about is *descriptors*. Properties are just one kind of descriptor, as are methods. But I'm intentionally not talking about the gory details of descriptors. Feel free to ask if you care, but

Re: newb question about @property

Steve D'Aprano wrote: Circle didn't use any setters, but I could have let you set the diameter, which in turn would set the radius: circle.radius = 2 assert circle.diameter == 4 circle.diameter == 2 # requires a setter assert circle.radius == 1 Getting that to work is left as an exercise :-)

Re: newb question about @property

On Sun, 1 Oct 2017 11:07 am, Bill wrote: > You and Ned are both right. Up until a few minutes ago, I wasn't > thinking about a class having more than 1 attribute that I wanted to > change. And now I realize that __get__ doesn't really make sense in > that context (in the back of my mind was the

Re: newb question about @property

On 30Sep2017 20:07, Bill wrote: think all of this would have made a bit more sense (to me), if instead of just "@property", the syntax was "@property.getter". Perhaps, but nobody wants to type this. Also many properties are ready only, so that is the default. Now

Re: newb question about @property

On 2017-10-01 01:07, Bill wrote: Steve D'Aprano wrote: On Sun, 1 Oct 2017 08:47 am, Bill wrote: I spent a few hours experimenting with @property. To my mind it seems like it would be preferable to just define (override) instance methods __get__(), __set__(), and possibly __del__(), as

Re: newb question about @property

Ned Batchelder wrote: On 9/30/17 7:18 PM, Bill wrote: Ned Batchelder wrote: On 9/30/17 5:47 PM, Bill wrote: I spent a few hours experimenting with @property. To my mind it seems like it would be preferable to just define (override) instance methods __get__(), __set__(), and possibly

Re: newb question about @property

Steve D'Aprano wrote: On Sun, 1 Oct 2017 08:47 am, Bill wrote: I spent a few hours experimenting with @property. To my mind it seems like it would be preferable to just define (override) instance methods __get__(), __set__(), and possibly __del__(), as desired, as I could easily provide them

Re: newb question about @property

On 9/30/17 7:18 PM, Bill wrote: Ned Batchelder wrote: On 9/30/17 5:47 PM, Bill wrote: I spent a few hours experimenting with @property. To my mind it seems like it would be preferable to just define (override) instance methods __get__(), __set__(), and possibly __del__(), as desired, as I

Re: newb question about @property

On Sun, 1 Oct 2017 08:47 am, Bill wrote: > I spent a few hours experimenting with @property. To my mind it seems > like it would be preferable to just define (override) instance methods > __get__(), __set__(), and possibly __del__(), as desired, as I could > easily provide them with "ideal"

Re: newb question about @property

On 9/30/17 5:47 PM, Bill wrote: I spent a few hours experimenting with @property. To my mind it seems like it would be preferable to just define (override) instance methods __get__(), __set__(), and possibly __del__(), as desired, as I could easily provide them with "ideal" customization. Am I

newb question about @property

I spent a few hours experimenting with @property. To my mind it seems like it would be preferable to just define (override) instance methods __get__(), __set__(), and possibly __del__(), as desired, as I could easily provide them with "ideal" customization. Am I overlooking something? Bill --

Trouble writing lines into file with line feeds- Python Newb

Overview: I'm attempting to read strings from a serial port. Each string ends with a carriage return and line feed. I want to write those strings to a file, like a log file. So, if I send P1 and the P2 on a new line, I would expect to open this file and find (line 1) P1 (line 2) P2. Problem:

Re: Trouble writing lines into file with line feeds- Python Newb

daniel.t.he...@gmail.com writes: - - Problem: The file only contains P2. It always overwrites the first line. I can send 20 strings and the file will always contain the last string received. - - while True: rawcode=ser.readline() codelog=open('/home/pi/avdms/codes.log','w') -

Some python newb help please?

So I'm trying to write a program for a problem in class, and something strange is happening that I can't figure out why is happening. I was wondering if you guys could help me fix it? http://pastebin.com/6QZTvx6Z Basically, 1 and 2 work just fine as inputs, but whenever I input 3 or 4, idle

Re: Some python newb help please?

On 12/11/2013 22:14, lrwarre...@gmail.com wrote: So I'm trying to write a program for a problem in class, and something strange is happening that I can't figure out why is happening. I was wondering if you guys could help me fix it? http://pastebin.com/6QZTvx6Z Basically, 1 and 2 work just

Re: Some python newb help please?

On Tuesday, November 12, 2013 4:21:58 PM UTC-6, Mark Lawrence wrote: On 12/11/2013 22:14, lr@gmail.com wrote: So I'm trying to write a program for a problem in class, and something strange is happening that I can't figure out why is happening. I was wondering if you guys could help

Re: Some python newb help please?

Welcome to the world of Python programming! I'm glad you're learning this great language. As to your bug, think about this: in each if or elif statement, you're reading the user input again, so if user input is NOT equal to 1 in the first place, it reads input again. Try to step through your

Re: Some python newb help please?

First thing would you please read and action this https://wiki.python.org/moin/GoogleGroupsPython so we don't have to read double spaced google crap, thanks. On 12/11/2013 22:27, lrwarre...@gmail.com wrote: On Tuesday, November 12, 2013 4:21:58 PM UTC-6, Mark Lawrence wrote: On 12/11/2013

Re: Some python newb help please?

On 2013-11-12 14:27, lrwarre...@gmail.com wrote: if int(raw_input()) == 1: print Moving north y = y + 1 elif int(raw_input()) == 2: print Moving east x = x + 1 elif int(raw_input()) == 3: print Moving south

Re: Some python newb help please?

On 12/11/2013 22:27, lrwarre...@gmail.com wrote: On Tuesday, November 12, 2013 4:21:58 PM UTC-6, Mark Lawrence wrote: On 12/11/2013 22:14, lr@gmail.com wrote: So I'm trying to write a program for a problem in class, and something strange is happening that I can't figure out why is

Re: Some python newb help please?

On Wed, Nov 13, 2013 at 9:27 AM, lrwarre...@gmail.com wrote: I'm not quite sure what you mean by that. it was on that pastebin link. I'll post it again here though. it's no longer than half a page. Inline means what you did in this post. Out-of-line means providing us with a link to where the

Re: Some python newb help please?

On Tuesday, November 12, 2013 4:56:35 PM UTC-6, MRAB wrote: On 12/11/2013 22:27, l...@gmail.com wrote: On Tuesday, November 12, 2013 4:21:58 PM UTC-6, Mark Lawrence wrote: On 12/11/2013 22:14, lr@gmail.com wrote: So I'm trying to write a program for a problem in class, and

Re: Some python newb help please?

On Tue, 12 Nov 2013 14:14:42 -0800, lrwarren94 wrote: http://pastebin.com/6QZTvx6Z Work through your code very very carefully. You're doing something in each if branch that you probably only want to do once in each execution of the while loop. If you can't figure it out, I'll post a

Re: Some python newb help please?

On Wed, Nov 13, 2013 at 10:04 AM, lrwarre...@gmail.com wrote: Thanks a lot! I'll try this out! Sorry to everyone else whose eyes I made bleed. I've never used a newsgroup before...still not really sure what they are. Found this through a google search :\ There's an easy fix. Go to this

Re: newb __init__ inheritance

On Thursday, March 8, 2012 5:25:06 PM UTC+2, hyperboogie wrote: Hello everyone. This is my first post in this group. I started learning python a week ago from the dive into python e- book and thus far all was clear. However today while reading chapter 5 about objects and object orientation

Re: newb __init__ inheritance

On Mar 11, 12:47 am, Colin J. Williams c...@ncf.ca wrote: On 10/03/2012 12:58 PM, Colin J. Williams wrote: On 08/03/2012 10:25 AM, hyperboogie wrote: Hello everyone. [snip] main() I'm not sure that the class initialization is required. Good luck, Colin W. When I wrote earlier, I

Re: newb __init__ inheritance

On Sun, Mar 11, 2012 at 3:18 AM, hyperboogie hyperboo...@gmail.com wrote: snip thank you everyone... Still things are not working as expected... what am I doing wrong? snip # cat test.py #!/usr/bin/python class A(): You should be subclassing `object`, but that's a minor point which isn't

Re: newb __init__ inheritance

On Sunday, March 11, 2012 12:38:27 PM UTC+2, Chris Rebert wrote: On Sun, Mar 11, 2012 at 3:18 AM, hyperboogie wrote: snip thank you everyone... Still things are not working as expected... what am I doing wrong? snip # cat test.py #!/usr/bin/python class A(): You should be

Re: newb __init__ inheritance

On Sun, Mar 11, 2012 at 3:56 AM, hyperboogie hyperboo...@gmail.com wrote: On Sunday, March 11, 2012 12:38:27 PM UTC+2, Chris Rebert wrote: On Sun, Mar 11, 2012 at 3:18 AM, hyperboogie wrote: snip thank you everyone... Still things are not working as expected... what am I doing wrong? snip

Re: newb __init__ inheritance

On Sun, Mar 11, 2012 at 4:56 AM, hyperboogie hyperboo...@gmail.com wrote: 1. What do you mean by subclassing `object`? In Python 2 there are two different types of classes: classic classes, which are retained for backward compatibility, and new-style classes, which were introduced in Python 2.2.

Re: newb __init__ inheritance

On Sun, Mar 11, 2012 at 5:40 AM, Ian Kelly ian.g.ke...@gmail.com wrote: 2. Is the mro function available only on python3? No, but it is available only on new-style classes.  If you try it on a classic class, you'll get an AttributeError. And by the way, you probably shouldn't call the mro

Re: newb __init__ inheritance

Ian Kelly wrote: On Sun, Mar 11, 2012 at 5:40 AM, Ian Kelly ian.g.ke...@gmail.com wrote: 2. Is the mro function available only on python3? No, but it is available only on new-style classes. If you try it on a classic class, you'll get an AttributeError. And by the way, you probably

Re: newb __init__ inheritance

On 08/03/2012 10:25 AM, hyperboogie wrote: Hello everyone. This is my first post in this group. I started learning python a week ago from the dive into python e- book and thus far all was clear. However today while reading chapter 5 about objects and object orientation I ran into something that

Re: newb __init__ inheritance

On 10/03/2012 12:58 PM, Colin J. Williams wrote: On 08/03/2012 10:25 AM, hyperboogie wrote: Hello everyone. [snip] main() I'm not sure that the class initialization is required. Good luck, Colin W. When I wrote earlier, I wondered about the need for initialization. With Version 2, both

newb __init__ inheritance

Hello everyone. This is my first post in this group. I started learning python a week ago from the dive into python e- book and thus far all was clear. However today while reading chapter 5 about objects and object orientation I ran into something that confused me. it says here:

Re: newb __init__ inheritance

On Thursday, March 8, 2012 4:25:06 PM UTC+1, hyperboogie wrote: My question is if __init__ in the descendant class overrides __init__ in the parent class how can I call the parent's __init__ from the descendant class - I just overrode it didn't I? Am I missing something more fundamental

Re: newb __init__ inheritance

Maarten wrote: Alternatively you can figure out the parent class with a call to super: This is WRONG: super(self.__class__, self).__init__() You have to name the current class explicitly. Consider: class A(object): ... def __init__(self): ... print in a ... class

Re: newb __init__ inheritance

hyperboogie wrote: Hello everyone. This is my first post in this group. I started learning python a week ago from the dive into python e- book and thus far all was clear. However today while reading chapter 5 about objects and object orientation I ran into something that confused me. it says

Re: newb

I received 1 st a href=http://bestfinance-blog.com/topics/mortgage-loans;mortgage loans/a when I was 25 and that supported my family very much. But, I need the bank loan once more time. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list

Re: newb

of Python you wish to use. Since you're a newb, I'd probably suggest starting off with Python 3. The version in your book is probably version 2.*. The difference is minor, but, when you're starting off (I assume with computer languages in general?) the difference in syntax can kick you where

Re: newb

appreciated...cheers It may also depend on which version of Python you wish to use. Since you're a newb, I'd probably suggest starting off with Python 3. The version in your book is probably version 2.*. The difference is minor, but, when you're starting off (I assume with computer languages

newb

hi all. am totally new to python and was wondering if there are any newsgroups that are there specifically for beginners. i have bought a book for $2 called learn to program using python by alan gauld. starting to read it but it was written in 2001. presuming that the commands and info would

Re: newb

On Jul 27, 9:07 pm, whitey m...@here.com wrote: hi all. am totally new to python and was wondering if there are any newsgroups that are there specifically for beginners. i have bought a book for $2 called learn to program using python by alan gauld. starting to read it but it was written in

Re: newb

whitey wrote: hi all. am totally new to python and was wondering if there are any newsgroups that are there specifically for beginners. i have bought a book for $2 called learn to program using python by alan gauld. starting to read it but it was written in 2001. presuming that the commands

Re: newb

On Tue, 27 Jul 2010 11:07:09 GMT, whitey m...@here.com wrote: hi all. am totally new to python and was wondering if there are any newsgroups that are there specifically for beginners. Yes, Python Tutor list is specifically aimed for beginners. You can access it by subscribing to either

  1   2   3   4   >