Mike Meyer wrote:
If it's not a wart, why would it be a wart for user-defined types to
have the same behaviour?
It's a wart because user-defined classes *don't* have the same
behavior.
Then *my* solution for this would be to give user-defined classes a way to
behave like builtins, eg.
Mike wrote:
How can a (user-defined) class ensure that its instances are
immutable, like an int or a tuple, without inheriting from those
types?
What caveats should be observed in making immutable instances?
IMHO, this is usually (but not always) a mistake. (If you're
programming a missle
Hello. I'm a newbye of Python.
I'm looking for a way of coding a virtual keyboard similar to the one
that comes with Windows (Accessories - Accessibility - On Screen
Keyboard).
What I would like to do is make one which is a lot larger and add
transparency to it.
I've a first version in which I
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I don't find your code any more readable than the OP's
equivalent code:
the OP's question was
How you do this in a practic way without
the use of one-line code ?
The OPs code make one pass through the dict, your's makes
two. I do not know what effect (if
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Steve Holden wrote:
Whether or not some fragments of code remain unchanged at the end of
your project, if you start out with a piece of source code lifted from
wxPython then what you have created is definitely a derivative work
and, as such, you must take into account
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Fredrik Lundh wrote:
performance is of course another aspect; if you *need* two parallel
lists, creating a list full of tuples just to pull them apart and throw
them all away isn't exactly the most efficient way to do things.
(if performance didn't matter at
[EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Steve Holden wrote:
Whether or not some fragments of code remain unchanged at the end of
your project, if you start out with a piece of source code lifted from
wxPython then what you have created is definitely a derivative work
and, as such, you
Fredrik Lundh wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Fredrik Lundh wrote:
performance is of course another aspect; if you *need* two parallel
lists, creating a list full of tuples just to pull them apart and throw
them all away isn't exactly the most efficient way to do things.
(if
Alex Martelli wrote:
Fuzzyman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
...
- the internal keys list should be hidden
I disagree. It is exposed so that you can manually change the order
(e.g. to create a sorted dict, rather than one ordered by key
insertion).
What do you *gain* by hiding it ?
Paul Watson wrote:
It appears that _ALL_SOURCE gets defined in the /usr/include/standards.h
file. If we could #define _ANSI_C_SOURCE or _POSIX_SOURCE, it appears
that it would eleminate _ALL_SOURCE.
Ah, ok - this should be easy enough. Python would normally define
_POSIX_SOURCE (through
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Steve Holden wrote:
Yomgui: I am not a language lawyer, but I think you can feel safe
returning from inside a loop. Just as a matter of interest, how else
would you propose to implement the functionality Mike showed:
def f():
... for i in range(20):
... if i
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
the thing that's in favour is then-if-else, not if-then-else.
Sorry if I confused you, I though it was clear that I meant the
concept, not a specific syntactical implementation.
yup, but if you care readability about, the words order appear in
would to seem matter
Ok.
That answers a question in the post I've just made. This thread is hard
to follow.
Thanks
Fuzzyman
http://www.voidspace.org.uk/python/index.shtml
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Mike Meyer wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Steve Holden wrote:
Whether or not some fragments of code remain unchanged at the end of
your project, if you start out with a piece of source code lifted from
wxPython then what you have created is definitely a derivative
Hi Members,
Kindly forward your resume for the following:
Skills: Python Programmers
Minimum of 2/3 years of experience
Location : Japan
Contract: upto 6 months extendable.
Forward your resumes to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Thanks Regards,
Murali
--
Op 2005-11-24, Fredrik Lundh schreef [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
the thing that's in favour is then-if-else, not if-then-else.
Sorry if I confused you, I though it was clear that I meant the
concept, not a specific syntactical implementation.
yup, but if you care
Steve Holden wrote:
Well, I'm happy in this instance that practicality beats purity, since
the above is not only ugly in the extreme it's also far harder to read.
What are the claimed advantages for a single exit point? I'd have
thought it was pretty obvious the eight-line version you gave
Christoph Zwerschke wrote:
Fuzzyman wrote:
So what do you want returned when you ask for d1[1] ? The member keyed
by 1, or the item in position 1 ?
In case of conflict, the ordered dictionary should behave like a
dictionary, not like a list. So d1[1] should be the member keyed by 1,
not
Op 2005-11-22, [EMAIL PROTECTED] schreef [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
* Should some of the unicode mathematical symbols be reserved for
literals?
It would be greatly preferable to write \u2205 instead of the other
proposed
empty-set literal notation, {-}. Perhaps nullary operators
Fredrik Lundh wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
the thing that's in favour is then-if-else, not if-then-else.
Sorry if I confused you, I though it was clear that I meant the
concept, not a specific syntactical implementation.
yup, but if you care readability about, the words order
Steven D'Aprano wrote:
Steve Holden wrote:
The thrust of my original remarks was to try to persuade the OP that the
original comment about changing the code was ingenuous. If you take some
code under license as a starting point then even if no line of code
remains unchanged at the end of
Christoph Zwerschke wrote:
Duncan Booth schrieb:
In Javascript Object properties (often used as an associative array)
are defined as unordered although as IE seems to always store them in
the order of original insertion it wouldn't surprise me if there are
a lot of websites depending on that
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I know that is a single list of tuples, I mean that can be used as
well.
for k, _ in d.items(): print k
for _, v in d.items(): print v
for k in d.keys(): print k
for v in d.values(): print v
Would there be a noticeable performance difference ?
Sloppy use of
[EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
...
qualification, you're quite likely to get such disclaimers. If you
don't want them, learn to ask about stopping your users from
ACCIDENTALLY doing X, and no reasonable respondant will fail to notice
the qualification.
Interestingly, that
Alex Martelli wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
...
qualification, you're quite likely to get such disclaimers. If you
don't want them, learn to ask about stopping your users from
ACCIDENTALLY doing X, and no reasonable respondant will fail to notice
the
Recommended:
Sophie's World, by Jostein Gaarder, 1995.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sophie%27s_World
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0425152251/
Xah
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
∑ http://xahlee.org/
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Steve Holden wrote:
The thrust of my original remarks was to try to persuade the OP that the
original comment about changing the code was ingenuous. If you take some
code under license as a starting point then even if no line of code
remains unchanged at the end of the process your code is
Mike Meyer wrote:
Giovanni Bajo [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Mike Meyer wrote:
Note that this property of __slots__ is an implementation detail. You
can't rely on it working in the future.
I don't rely on it. I just want to catch bugs in my code.
I certainly hope you're not relying on it
Fredrik Lundh wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I know that is a single list of tuples, I mean that can be used as
well.
for k, _ in d.items(): print k
for _, v in d.items(): print v
for k in d.keys(): print k
for v in d.values(): print v
Would there be a noticeable performance
Fredrik Lundh wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I know that is a single list of tuples, I mean that can be used as
well.
for k, _ in d.items(): print k
for _, v in d.items(): print v
for k in d.keys(): print k
for v in d.values(): print v
Would there be a noticeable performance
On Thu, 24 Nov 2005 05:22:18 GMT, Dennis Lee Bieber
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wed, 23 Nov 2005 16:51:15 GMT, Manlio Perillo
[EMAIL PROTECTED] declaimed the following in
comp.lang.python:
So, it's seem to be a specific problem of Windows XP(?).
Pardon? I think the prior respondent said
Fredrik Lundh wrote:
Consider a dictionary with one million items. The following operations
k = d.keys()
v = d.values()
creates two list objects, while
i = d.items()
creates just over one million objects. In your equivalent example,
you're calling d.items() twice to
Giovanni Bajo [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Mike Meyer wrote:
Note that this property of __slots__ is an implementation detail. You
can't rely on it working in the future.
I don't rely on it. I just want to catch bugs in my code.
I certainly hope you're not relying on it to catch bugs. You should
Steven D'Aprano wrote:
cut
I'm FREE to use the software, FREE to redistribute it, FREE to give it
away, FREE to make derivative works, FREE to transfer the licence, *and*
I got it FREE of cost as well, but that doesn't make it free.
Indeed, when I explain GPL to non-techies and what their
Alan aka David Isaac wrote:
Peter Otten [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
You are in for a surprise here:
You got that right!
def empty():
... for item in []:
... yield item
...
bool(empty())
True
Ouch.
bool(iter([]))
True # python
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Fredrik Lundh wrote:
def convert(old):
new = dict(
CODE=old['CODEDATA'],
DATE=old['DATE']
)
if old['CONTACTTYPE'] == 2:
new['CONTACT'] = old['FIRSTCONTACT']
else:
new['CONTACT'] = old['SECONDCONTACT']
return
Steve Holden wrote:
Interestingly, I just saw a thread over at TurboGears(or is it this
group, I forgot) about this multiple return issue and there are people
who religiously believe that a function can have only one exit point.
def f():
r = None
for i in range(20):
if i 10:
On Wed, 23 Nov 2005 13:23:21 +0100, Fredrik Lundh [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Bengt Richter wrote:
Are you thinking of something like lines from a file, where there might be
chunky buffering? ISTM that wouldn't matter if the same next method was
called.
Here we have multiple references to the
Duncan Booth wrote:
To bonono, not Steve:
So if a function should religiously have only one exit point why does the
example you give have two exit points? i.e. the 'return r', and the implied
'return None' if you execute the 'something' branch.
I may have remember it wrong, but don't ask me.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Steve Holden wrote:
I agree that sometimes those who shoot such proposals down in flames
might be more considerate of the feelings of the proposers, but life is
short and we are all imperfect.
Well, no one is obliged to be considerate about other's feeling, that
Manlio Perillo wrote:
I have added a question mark...
However: did you have installed SP1 or SP2?
running XP without service packs is a really bad idea. you're not
telling me that you haven't updated, are you?
(the machines I tested on are all fully up to date)
/F
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Consider a dictionary with one million items. The following operations
k = d.keys()
v = d.values()
creates two list objects, while
i = d.items()
creates just over one million objects. In your equivalent example,
Sorry. I lose you here. Could you
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
As for the (k,v) vs (v,k), I still don't think it is a good example. I
can always use index to access the tuple elements and most other
functions expect the first element to be the key. For example :
a=d.items()
do something about a
b = dict(a)
But using the
The Eternal Squire wrote:
Suppose I have a central class with complex behavior that I want to
simply write as a bare skeleton upon which to hang the auxillary
classes that help provide the complex behavior.
So, it's akin to the GoF's Template Method or Strategy patterns, then.
What I will
On Thu, 24 Nov 2005 10:24:02 +0100, Fredrik Lundh
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Manlio Perillo wrote:
I have added a question mark...
However: did you have installed SP1 or SP2?
running XP without service packs is a really bad idea. you're not
telling me that you haven't updated, are you?
I
Op 2005-11-23, [EMAIL PROTECTED] schreef [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
My own experience with adapting to Guido's design-view relates to
tuples and lists. To Guido, tuples are for records and lists are for
iteration. My own inclination is to view tuples as immutable lists.
Accordingly, it seems obvious
Carsten Haese wrote:
On Wed, 23 Nov 2005 23:39:22 +0100, Christoph Zwerschke wrote
Carsten Haese schrieb:
Thus quoth the Zen of Python:
Explicit is better than implicit.
In the face of ambiguity, refuse the temptation to guess.
With those in mind, since an odict behaves mostly
Steve Holden:
What are the claimed advantages for a single exit point? I'd have
thought it was pretty obvious the eight-line version you gave is far
more likely to contain errors than Mike's three-line version, wouldn't
you agree?
Single exit point is an ancient Dijkstraism. It was
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
creates just over one million objects. In your equivalent example,
you're calling d.items() twice to produce two million objects, none
of which you really care about.
This is what I get from the doc :
a.items() a copy of a's list of (key, value) pairs (3)
Neil Hodgson wrote:
Yes, the rule has obvious shortcomings, but OTOH if it had enabled
reasonable formal verification...
I somehow find it hard to believe that you could write a multi-exit
function that cannot be trivially and automatically converted to a
single-exit function, for further
On 24 Nov 2005 10:21:51 GMT, Antoon Pardon [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
But only Guido, thinks like Guido and then even Guido may now think
differently than he thought before. And what if Guido had a bad day
when he came up with something, should we just adopt to what he
had in mind without
I'll do the job from the UK for you. ;-)
Fuzzyman
http://www.voidspace.org.uk/python/index.shtml
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
do things right is my fundamental beef with Python.
Dispite claims, I don't believe Python's designers have
a monopoly on the definition of right.
This hammer is stupid. It's very uncomfortable, and
it's not hard and heavy enough to get the nails into
the wall.
It
Alex Martelli wrote:
I think you mean volatile or mutable rather than transient? transient
is not a keyword in C++, while both volatile and mutable are, with
different semantics. Anyway, C++'s 'const' is a mess both theoretical
AND practical. I'm told Ruby's object-freezing works better
Fredrik Lundh wrote:
Neil Hodgson wrote:
Yes, the rule has obvious shortcomings, but OTOH if it had enabled
reasonable formal verification...
I somehow find it hard to believe that you could write a multi-exit
function that cannot be trivially and automatically converted to a
Op 2005-11-24, Mike Meyer schreef [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Mike Meyer wrote:
I do think that the Python development community believes they do,
or more accurately, that if someone wants to use a different style,
they can go use something else.
In
On Wed, 23 Nov 2005 18:18:34 +0100, Fredrik Lundh [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Manlio Perillo wrote:
print data
Traceback (most recent call last):
File xxx, line xxx, in ?
print data
IOError: [Errno 12] Not enough space
errno 12 is ENOMEM (that is, the system did not have enough
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
These results make more sense. However, I am still puzzled :
1. why would d.keys()/d.values() only return one list element ? Why
isn't it a list of 1M element of either the keys or values but items()
is ?
keys returns a single list object which contains references
On Wed, 23 Nov 2005 17:55:35 +0100, Fredrik Lundh [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
so how equivalent must something be to be equivalent?
quack, quack? ;-)
Regards,
Bengt Richter
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Bengt Richter wrote:
If windows has been running a long time (a few days or a week may be long ;-)
it
may get fragmented in some smallish memory arena reserved for special things
(I forgot
what versions, but I wouldn't be surprised if something still had s
specialized limit).
I know it
On Thu, 24 Nov 2005 11:06:58 +, Steve Holden wrote:
Besides which I'm somewhat sceptical about formal verification methods.
While outwardly they apear to offer a technique for making software more
reliable there are two shortcomings I'm leery of. First, no verification
program can
Fredrik Lundh wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
These results make more sense. However, I am still puzzled :
1. why would d.keys()/d.values() only return one list element ? Why
isn't it a list of 1M element of either the keys or values but items()
is ?
keys returns a single list
On Thu, 24 Nov 2005 00:26:36 -0800, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
As for the liability, that is for sure, withness what is happening for
the linux kernel.
What is happening for the Linux kernel?
--
Steven.
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Antoon Pardon wrote:
When we notice that people are fighting the language, sometimes
the best approach is to change the language so that there is
less reason to fight the language.
I think just don't disregard the other side without considering their
rationale is enough, and I mean the other
We're using DOM to create XML files that describes fairly
complex calculations. The XML is structured as a big tree,
where elements in the beginning have values that depend on
other values further down in the tree. Imagine something
like below, but much bigger and much more complex:
node sum=15
Fredrik Lundh wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
creates just over one million objects. In your equivalent example,
you're calling d.items() twice to produce two million objects, none
of which you really care about.
This is what I get from the doc :
a.items() a copy of a's list of
Christoph Zwerschke [EMAIL PROTECTED] (CZ) escribió:
CZ Eso es exactamente lo que yo queria haber!
¿Haber? ¿Tener? :=(
--
Piet van Oostrum [EMAIL PROTECTED]
URL: http://www.cs.uu.nl/~piet [PGP 8DAE142BE17999C4]
Private email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
Someone using Python Midi Package from
http://www.mxm.dk/products/public/ lately?
I want to do the following :
write some note events in a midi file
then after doing that, put some controllers at the beginning of the
midifile
(because I want to be able to make those dependant on what notes were
Op 2005-11-24, Simon Brunning schreef [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
On 24 Nov 2005 10:21:51 GMT, Antoon Pardon [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
But only Guido, thinks like Guido and then even Guido may now think
differently than he thought before. And what if Guido had a bad day
when he came up with something,
Steve Holden wrote:
sepcifications
did you mean: sceptifications ?
(otoh, with 11,100 google hits, sepcifications should probably be
considered as a fully acceptable alternate spelling ;-)
/F
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
By the way, Nicola and I will be working on an improving odict in line
with several of the suggestions in this thread.
See :
http://www.voidspace.org.uk/python/weblog/arch_d7_2005_11_19.shtml#e140
All the best,
Fuzzyman
http://www.voidspace.org.uk/python/index.shtml
--
On 24 Nov 2005 11:30:04 GMT, Antoon Pardon [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
But he's consistently a
better judge of language design than I am, and in all likelihood
better than you, too. If you like Python, it's 'cos you like the
decisions he's made over many years.
So, that makes that about a
Steven D'Aprano wrote:
On Thu, 24 Nov 2005 00:26:36 -0800, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
As for the liability, that is for sure, withness what is happening for
the linux kernel.
What is happening for the Linux kernel?
The confidence of some of its (potential? gullible?) users in their
ability to
Steven D'Aprano wrote:
While outwardly they apear to offer a technique for making software
more reliable there are two shortcomings I'm leery of. First, no
verification program can verify itself;
That's not a problem if there exists a verification program A which
can't verify itself but
Peter Hansen wrote:
Steven D'Aprano wrote:
On Thu, 24 Nov 2005 00:26:36 -0800, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
As for the liability, that is for sure, withness what is happening for
the linux kernel.
What is happening for the Linux kernel?
The confidence of some of its (potential? gullible?)
Duncan Booth wrote:
In practice it is impossible to write code in Python (or most
languages) with only one return point from a function: any line could throw
an exception which is effectively another return point, so the cleanup has
to be done properly anyway.
def
Fredrik Lundh wrote:
Steve Holden wrote:
sepcifications
did you mean: sceptifications ?
(otoh, with 11,100 google hits, sepcifications should probably be
considered as a fully acceptable alternate spelling ;-)
Not if they're all in pages at site:holdenweb.com ! grin
--
Op 2005-11-24, Mike schreef [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Ben Finney [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Howdy all,
How can a (user-defined) class ensure that its instances are
immutable, like an int or a tuple, without inheriting from those
types?
What caveats should be
Ben Finney wrote:
Alex Martelli [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Ben Finney [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
How can a (user-defined) class ensure that its instances are
immutable, like an int or a tuple, without inheriting from those
types?
You can make a good start by defining __setattr__, __delattr__ (and
Magnus Lycka wrote:
snip
In some cases, building up a DOM tree in memory takes up
several GB of RAM, which is a real showstopper. The actual
file is maybe a magnitute smaller than the DOM tree. The
app is using libxml2. It's actually written in C++. Some
library that used much less memory
Fredrik Lundh wrote:
Steve Holden wrote:
sepcifications
did you mean: sceptifications ?
QOTW!
I love it. I need to insert this in my vocabulary instantly!
--Scott David Daniels
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Op 2005-11-24, Simon Brunning schreef [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
On 24 Nov 2005 11:30:04 GMT, Antoon Pardon [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
But he's consistently a
better judge of language design than I am, and in all likelihood
better than you, too. If you like Python, it's 'cos you like the
decisions
(...I
sent this one a second time, waited for 60 minutes, it didn't appear,
sorry if it's a double...)
Someone using Python Midi Package from http://www.mxm.dk/products/public/
lately?
I want to do the following :
write some note events in a midi file
then after doing that, put some
[EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I meant the SCO saga, don't know if you are referring the same thing.
Probably. MS bought some shares from SCO to help financing the lawsuit.
Anyway, I don't see much people worrying about it and in fact, I see more
people laughing about SCO's
Duncan Booth schrieb:
On IE this will go through elements in the order 0, 1, 2, 4, 3.
Oops! I bet most people would not expect that, and it is probably not
mentioned in most Javascript tutorials. I think this is a weakpoint of
the ECMA definition, not MSIE.
-- Christoph
--
Tom Anderson wrote:
On Tue, 22 Nov 2005, Christoph Zwerschke wrote:
One implementation detail that I think needs further consideration is in
which way to expose the keys and to mix in list methods for ordered
dictionaries.
In Foord/Larosa's odict, the keys are exposed as a public
tim wrote:
Someone using Python Midi Package from
http://www.mxm.dk/products/public/ lately?
I want to do the following :
write some note events in a midi file
then after doing that, put some controllers at the beginning of the
midifile
(because I want to be able to make those dependant on
Your mail to 'documentation' with the subject
pcgiqaqwbxsoyvyg
Is being held until the list moderator can review it for approval.
The reason it is being held:
Post by non-member to a members-only list
Either the message will get posted to the list, or you will receive
notification of
Your mail to 'documentation' with the subject
pcgiqaqwbxsoyvyg
Is being held until the list moderator can review it for approval.
The reason it is being held:
Post by non-member to a members-only list
Either the message will get posted to the list, or you will receive
notification of
Hi there,
I am using the ftplib library to connect to a ftp server.
After I got connected, I can see a list of file in the current directory
using ftp.dir() or ftp.retrlines('LIST'). But using ftp.nlst() returns
an empty list which seems somehow strange to me. Here is, what I did:
from
Alex Martelli [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Ben Finney [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Why is I want to make objects immutable seen as I don't trust
my users? Are Python's existing immutable types also seen the
same way? If not, why the distinction?
A type implemented in C offers different
Antoon Pardon wrote:
What does this mean?
It means that the hammer works better if you learn how to hold
and swing it, instead of trying to modify it so that it's more
comfortable to use it in a non-optimal way.
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
On Wed, 23 Nov 2005 23:00:29 +0100, Christoph Zwerschke [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Fuzzyman wrote:
So what do you want returned when you ask for d1[1] ? The member keyed
by 1, or the item in position 1 ?
In case of conflict, the ordered dictionary should behave like a
dictionary, not like a
Ed Jensen wrote:
[On closed source derivatives of Python]
I'm aware of this concern. I don't think it's justified. Unless
you'd like to point out all those closed, proprietary Python
implementations that are destroying civilization as we know it.
Well, there was some concern voiced at
Nico Grubert wrote:
I am using the ftplib library to connect to a ftp server.
After I got connected, I can see a list of file in the current directory
using ftp.dir() or ftp.retrlines('LIST'). But using ftp.nlst() returns
an empty list which seems somehow strange to me. Here is, what I did:
Magnus Lycka wrote:
We're using DOM to create XML files that describes fairly
complex calculations. The XML is structured as a big tree,
where elements in the beginning have values that depend on
other values further down in the tree. Imagine something
like below, but much bigger and much
On 24 Nov 2005 03:22:26 -0800, [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Bengt Richter wrote:
If windows has been running a long time (a few days or a week may be long
;-) it
may get fragmented in some smallish memory arena reserved for special things
(I forgot
what versions, but I
Antoon Pardon wrote:
Op 2005-11-24, Mike schreef [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
and many a time. I've been annoyed (in Java and MS christelijke vorm er van.
frameworks)
Antoon, I don't think Mike wrote it like that :)
I don't even know how I spotted that, since I didn't really read that
part of the text. I
[EMAIL PROTECTED] skrev i en meddelelse
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
permissions just to be safe. What would cause the logging to work at a
command prompt but fail in cron?
Because the environment is different; man cron might tell *how* it is
different (I cannot because it varies with platform,
Hi all,
I'm working on an application that will be used by several users at the same
time. The user should be able to both read and write to some data file
stored on our file server. My question is: how can I prevent that one user
writes to the file while another user is reading it?
I've seen
1 - 100 of 237 matches
Mail list logo
