I am running 2.5.2 on Red Hat 5. I am getting many printouts of
reference counts, such as
[10263 refs]
I do not recall ever seeing this until recently. Why am I getting
this? Thanks.
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
On May 25, 2:32 pm, Joe P. Cool [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 24 Mai, 15:58, Ben Finney [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Sh4wn [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
first, python is one of my fav languages, and i'll definitely keep
developing with it. But, there's 1 one thing what I -really- miss:
data
On Jun 2, 6:41 am, Carl Banks [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
You are not realizing that only useful(**) thing about data hiding is
that some code has access to the data, other code does not. If you
hide data equally from everyone it's just a useless spelling change.
I think you're missing the
On Jun 2, 3:04 pm, Carl Banks [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Jun 2, 4:50 pm, Russ P. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Jun 2, 6:41 am, Carl Banks [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
You are not realizing that only useful(**) thing about data hiding is
that some code has access to the data, other code does
On Jun 2, 4:17 pm, Carl Banks [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Jun 2, 6:39 pm, Russ P. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Jun 2, 3:04 pm, Carl Banks [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Jun 2, 4:50 pm, Russ P. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Jun 2, 6:41 am, Carl Banks [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
You
On Jun 2, 6:21 pm, alex23 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Jun 3, 9:41 am, Russ P. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Here's what I think Python should have. I think it should have a
keyword, something like priv, to identify data or functions as
private.
As I stated earlier in this thread, if you want
On Jun 2, 5:11 pm, Paul Rubin http://[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Russ P. [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I also realize, by the way, that Python allows a client of a class to
define a new class member from completely outside the class
definition. Obviously, that cannot be declared private
On Jun 2, 10:23 pm, alex23 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Jun 3, 2:11 pm, Russ P. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Yes, that looks interesting, but I think it has a couple of drawbacks.
First, it requires another completely separate class for the
implementation (although perhaps that could
On Jun 2, 10:23 pm, alex23 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Then again, I have no issue with the current convention and personally
find the idea of adding a private keyword makes as much sense as
being able to syntactically define model, view and controller
methods.
Well, the designers of C++, Java,
On Jun 3, 11:02 am, Richard Levasseur [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Jun 3, 3:07 am, BJörn Lindqvist [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Mon, Jun 2, 2008 at 10:50 PM, Russ P. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Jun 2, 6:41 am, Carl Banks [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
You are not realizing that only useful
On Jun 3, 4:21 am, George Sakkis [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Jun 3, 1:42 am, Russ P. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Jun 2, 10:23 pm, alex23 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Then again, I have no issue with the current convention and personally
find the idea of adding a private keyword makes
On Jun 3, 11:44 am, tmallen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Is there a way to pick apart this text without resorting to regular
expressions?
p {
color: black;
}
p - element
color - property
black - value
Sure.
data = txt.strip(}).split({)
element = data[0].strip()
items =
On Jun 3, 8:50 pm, Ben Finney [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
alex23 [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
So the basic answers I'm seeing that do just fine are:
1. Don't test private functions.
2. Add functionality _to_ the private functions for testing.
3. Change the interface for the purpose of testing.
On Jun 4, 4:29 am, NickC [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Jun 4, 4:09 am, Russ P. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
What is it about leading underscores that bothers me? To me, they are
like a small pebble in your shoe while you are on a hike. Yes, you can
live with it, and it does no harm, but you
I've always appreciated Python's lack of requirement for a semi-colon
at the end of each line. I also appreciate its rules for automatic
line continuation. If a statement ends with a +, for example, Python
recognizes that the statement obviously must continue.
I've noticed, however, that the same
On Jun 4, 9:01 pm, Dan Bishop [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Jun 4, 10:09 pm, Russ P. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I've always appreciated Python's lack of requirement for a semi-colon
at the end of each line. I also appreciate its rules for automatic
line continuation. If a statement ends
On Jun 5, 4:47 am, Bruno Desthuilliers bruno.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Antoon Pardon a écrit :
On 2008-06-04, NickC [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Jun 4, 4:09 am, Russ P. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
What is it about leading underscores that bothers me? To me, they are
like a small pebble
On Jun 5, 4:53 am, Bruno Desthuilliers bruno.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Russ P. a écrit :
Given your very recent discovery of what 'dynamic' *really* means in
Python (like, for exemple, dynamically adding / replacing attributes -
including methods - on a per-class or per-instance basis
On Jun 5, 11:25 am, George Sakkis [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Jun 5, 2:07 pm, Russ P. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The private keyword goes further and prevents
access even by derived classes. The double leading underscore in
Python does no such thing.
Who develops these derived classes
For the record, I have made it abundantly clear that I don't think
Python should not have as rigorous an encapsulation regime as C++ or
Java. The worst that could happen with my proposition is that you
would need to use a mangled name to access private data or methods.
But you will be using
On Jun 5, 12:20 pm, Roy Smith [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
All somebody has to do to get at the private data is:
#define private public
# include MySecretClass.h
#undef private
Well, that shows the weakness of the C/C++ header files. The include
directive merely does a simple text substitution,
On Jun 5, 2:27 pm, Dennis Lee Bieber [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Thu, 5 Jun 2008 11:36:28 -0700 (PDT), Russ P.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] declaimed the following in comp.lang.python:
would need to use a mangled name to access private data or methods.
But you will be using the name many times, you
On Jun 5, 2:57 pm, Hrvoje Niksic [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Russ P. [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
By the way, my recollection is that in C++ access defaults to private
if nothing is declared explicity. So normally the private
declaration is unnecessary. If it is left out, your little trick won't
On Jun 6, 8:25 am, Bruno Desthuilliers bruno.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I also realize, by the way, that Python allows a client of a class to
define a new class member from completely outside the class
definition. Obviously, that cannot be declared private.
Why so ?
Why should the
On Jun 6, 8:28 am, Bruno Desthuilliers bruno.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Russ P. a écrit :
On Jun 5, 2:27 pm, Dennis Lee Bieber [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Thu, 5 Jun 2008 11:36:28 -0700 (PDT), Russ P.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] declaimed the following in comp.lang.python:
would need to use
On Jun 8, 5:52 am, Mark Wooding [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
By enforcing your `data hiding', you're effectively telling me that I'm
too stupid to make rational decisions of this sort. And that's actually
extremely insulting.
1) I suggest you not take it personally.
2) Local data within
On Jun 8, 5:40 am, Mark Wooding [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Russ P. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The idea of being able to discern properties of an object by its name
alone is something that is not normally done in programming in
general.
Really? You obviously haven't noticed Prolog, Smalltalk
On Jun 9, 2:23 am, Bruno Desthuilliers bruno.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Mark Wooding a écrit :
Fuzzyman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
So, you are stating that no API programmer using Python *ever* has a
valid or genuine reason for wanting (even if he can't have it) genuine
'hiding' of
On Jun 9, 2:22 am, Bruno Desthuilliers bruno.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Does
anyone object to not having access from outside a function to local
variables within the function? I doubt it. The other thing is that the
vast majority of Python software, I would guess, is provided with
source
On Jun 9, 2:10 pm, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
But if it takes 6 month to get the mentioned developer to release
something I can use, I'm screwed up. Fine.
I've lost track of how many times I've said this now, but my
suggestion for a priv keyword allowed for indirect access to
On Jun 10, 1:04 am, Bruno Desthuilliers bruno.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
If you hope to get a general agreement here in favor of a useless
keyword that don't bring anything to the language, then yes, I'm afraid
you're wasting your time.
Actually, what I hope to do is to take something away
On Jun 10, 11:58 am, Jonathan Gardner
Who cares what the type of an object is? Only the machine. Being able
to tell, in advance, what the type of a variable is is a premature
optimization. Tools like psyco prove that computers (really,
programmers) nowadays are smart enough to figure things
On Jun 11, 2:36 am, Paul Boddie [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Maybe, but I'd hope that some of those programmers would be at least
able to entertain what Russ has been saying rather than setting
themselves up in an argumentative position where to concede any
limitation in Python might be
I am baffled about why my exception messages are not displaying
properly.
I have a class that represents physical scalars with units. If I type
3 * s + 4 * m
I should get something like this:
scalar.InconsistentUnits: 3 s, 4 m
to show that seconds cannot be added to meters. Instead, the
On Dec 21, 2:58 pm, Lie [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Change the exception into this:
class InconsistentUnits(Exception):
def __init__(self, args=): self.args = (args,)
# Python have an odd (read: broken) singleton implementation
# single member tuple must have a comma behind it
Hey,
On Dec 22, 5:34 am, Fredrik Lundh [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Russ P. wrote:
Actually, the parens aren't needed, so this works too:
def __init__(self, args=): self.args = args,
The trailing comma wasn't necessary a while back (pre 2.5?), so
something in Python must have changed. I'd
On Jan 3, 9:39 am, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hopefully this isn't too OT.
One thing I like about comp.lang.python is the breadth of topics
discussed here. People can ask about Python installation and
configuration issues on specific platforms, compare third party
libraries, ask for book
On Jan 4, 10:07 pm, John Nagle [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
aspineux wrote:
Hi
I read the PEP 3117 about the new Postfix type declarations in
Python3000.
THIS PEP as been REJECTED !
Of course. That was a joke.
And I think this is a good idea to include typing in python.
Since
Python is strongly-typed and dynamically-typed, this
--
Hyphenating after ly is grammatically incorrect.
\It is the responsibility of intellectuals to tell the truth |
`\and expose lies. -- Noam Chomsky
Never quote Noam Chomsky on truth. He
On Jan 7, 7:15 pm, jo3c [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
hi everybody
im a newbie in python
i need to read line 4 from a header file
using linecache will crash my computer due to memory loading, because
i am working on 2000 files each is 8mb
fileinput don't load the file into memory first
how do i
Given that the OP is talking 2000 files to be processed, I think I'd
recommend explicit open() and close() calls to avoid having lots of I/O
structures floating around...
Good point. I didn't think of that. It could also be done as follows:
for fileN in files:
lnum = 0 # line
On Jan 7, 9:41 pm, Dennis Lee Bieber [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Mon, 7 Jan 2008 20:10:58 -0800 (PST), Russ P.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] declaimed the following in comp.lang.python:
for file0 in files:
lnum = 0 # line number
for line in file(file0):
lnum += 1
if lnum
On Jan 9, 11:51 pm, Fredrik Lundh [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Steve Brown wrote:
I've got a series of modules which look like this:
#
#
# Temperature Sense Test
#
#
class Test3(ar_test.AR_TEST):
Temperature Sense Test
I don't like the duplicated
On Jan 11, 10:50 am, teddyber [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hello,
first i'm a newbie to python (but i searched the Internet i swear).
i'm looking for some way to split up a string into a list of pairs
'key=value'. This code should be able to handle this particular
example string :
On Jan 11, 12:53 pm, Russ P. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Jan 11, 10:50 am, teddyber [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hello,
first i'm a newbie to python (but i searched the Internet i swear).
i'm looking for some way to split up a string into a list of pairs
'key=value'. This code should
On Jan 23, 7:42 pm, George Sakkis [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Jan 23, 8:14 pm, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The annual Linux Journal survey is online now for any Linux users who
want to vote for Python. http://www.linuxjournal.com/node/1006101
...
18. What is your favorite programming
A while back I came across a tentative proposal from way back in 2000
for optional static typing in Python:
http://www.python.org/~guido/static-typing
Two motivations were given:
-- faster code
-- better compile-time error detection
I'd like to suggest a third, which could help extend
On Jan 27, 2:36 pm, Jarek Zgoda [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Russ P. pisze:
I noticed that Guido has expressed further interest in static typing
three or four years ago on his blog. Does anyone know the current
status of this project? Thanks.
I thought it was april fools joke?
On January 21
On Jan 27, 2:49 pm, André [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Jan 27, 6:19 pm, Russ P. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
A while back I came across a tentative proposal from way back in 2000
for optional static typing in Python:
http://www.python.org/~guido/static-typing
Two motivations were given
On Jan 27, 3:08 pm, Jarek Zgoda [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Russ P. pisze:
I noticed that Guido has expressed further interest in static typing
three or four years ago on his blog. Does anyone know the current
status of this project? Thanks.
I thought it was april fools joke?
On January
On Jan 27, 5:03 pm, Paddy
If static typing is optional then a program written in a dynamic
language that passes such an automated static analysis of source code
would have to be a simple program written in a simplistic way, and
also in a static style.
Yes, but for safety-critical software
On Jan 27, 5:13 pm, Wildemar Wildenburger
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Ben Finney wrote:
André [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Personally, I like the idea you suggest, with the modification that I
would use . instead of @, as in
class Server(object):
def __init__(self, .host, .port,
On Jan 27, 5:41 pm, Roy Smith [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
In article
[EMAIL PROTECTED],
ajaksu [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Jan 27, 10:32 pm, Paddy [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I would value the opinion of fellow Pythoneers who have also
contributed to Wikipedia, on the issue of Is Python
On Jan 27, 7:33 pm, Ben Finney [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Russ P. [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Jan 27, 5:13 pm, Wildemar Wildenburger
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
class Server(object):
def __init__(self, self.host, self.port,
self.protocol, self.bufsize, self.timeout
On Jan 27, 11:47 pm, Steven D'Aprano [EMAIL PROTECTED]
cybersource.com.au wrote:
On Mon, 28 Jan 2008 08:04:05 +0100, Torsten Bronger wrote:
Are you referring to the alternate syntax or to the decorator? Either
way, you could be saving 4 or 5 or more lines, if you have enough
arguments.
On Jan 28, 12:21 am, Ben Finney [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Russ P. [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
OK, then how about a special function that could be called from
inside the constructor (or anywhere else for that matter) to
initialize a list of data members. For example,
self.__set__(host, port
On Jan 28, 1:53 am, Bruno Desthuilliers bruno.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Russ P. a écrit :
On Jan 27, 5:03 pm, Paddy
If static typing is optional then a program written in a dynamic
language that passes such an automated static analysis of source code
would have to be a simple program
On Jan 28, 1:51 am, Bruno Desthuilliers bruno.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Russ P. a écrit : A while back I came across a tentative proposal from way
back in 2000
for optional static typing in Python:
(snip)
In any case, optional static typing in Python would help tremendously
here
On Jul 16, 7:16 am, Ben Sizer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Although the standard library in Python is great, there are
undoubtedly some great packages available from 3rd parties, and I've
encountered a few almost by accident. However, I don't know how a user
would become aware of many of
If, as I wrote, you permit the omission of self in method signatures
defined within class definitions, then you could still insist on
instance attribute qualification using self - exactly as one would
when writing Java according to certain style guidelines.
I'm not sure exactly what people
So why not allow something like this?:
class MyClass:
def func( , xxx, yyy):
.xxx = xxx
local = .yyy
The self argument is replaced with nothing, but a comma is used as a
placeholder.
(+1) but why retain the leading comma in
the argument list?
As I said,
On Jul 26, 2:25 pm, Terry Reedy
There is a lot of code you have not seen. Really. In informal code I
use 's' and 'o' for 'self' and 'other'. I don't usually post such
because it is not considered polite. So you have seen a biased sample
of the universe.
You take the name down to a single
On Jul 26, 7:23 pm, Marcus.CM
1. python should hardcode the keyword self. So whenever this keyword
is used, it would automatically implied that it is
referring to a class scope variable. This would be similar to how the
this keyword is used in C++.
2. Omit self from the parameter.
That
On Jul 26, 11:18 pm, Terry Reedy [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Colin J. Williams wrote:
Russ P. wrote:
class MyClass:
def func( , xxx, yyy):
.xxx = xxx
local = .yyy
The use of nothing'.' has been suggested before and rejected.
Where and why?
--
http
On Jul 26, 11:22 pm, Terry Reedy [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Russ P. wrote:
On Jul 26, 2:25 pm, Terry Reedy
There is a lot of code you have not seen. Really. In informal code I
use 's' and 'o' for 'self' and 'other'. I don't usually post such
because it is not considered polite. So you
On Jul 27, 3:11 am, alex23 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Jul 27, 4:26 pm, Russ P. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Jul 26, 11:18 pm, Terry Reedy [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The use of nothing'.' has been suggested before and rejected.
Where and why?
Google is your
friend:http://mail.python.org
On Jul 27, 1:19 am, Steven D'Aprano [EMAIL PROTECTED]
cybersource.com.au wrote:
On Sat, 26 Jul 2008 17:14:46 -0700, Russ P. wrote:
You take the name down to a single letter. As I suggested in an earlier
post on this thread, why not take it down to zero letters?
The question isn't why
On Jul 27, 12:39 pm, Bruno Desthuilliers
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Derek Martin a écrit :
On Sun, Jul 27, 2008 at 08:19:17AM +, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
You take the name down to a single letter. As I suggested in an earlier
post on this thread, why not take it down to zero letters?
On Jul 27, 3:11 pm, Russ P. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Jul 27, 12:39 pm, Bruno Desthuilliers
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Derek Martin a écrit :
On Sun, Jul 27, 2008 at 08:19:17AM +, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
You take the name down to a single letter. As I suggested in an earlier
On Jul 27, 3:54 pm, Steven D'Aprano [EMAIL PROTECTED]
cybersource.com.au wrote:
On Sun, 27 Jul 2008 12:33:16 -0700, Russ P. wrote:
On Jul 27, 1:19 am, Steven D'Aprano [EMAIL PROTECTED]
cybersource.com.au wrote:
On Sat, 26 Jul 2008 17:14:46 -0700, Russ P. wrote:
You take the name down
On Jul 27, 6:21 pm, Terry Reedy [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Russ P. wrote:
On Jul 27, 12:39 pm, Bruno Desthuilliers
All I am suggesting is that the programmer have the option of
replacing self.member with simply .member, since the word self
is arbitrary and unnecessary.
I presume you
On Jul 27, 8:38 pm, alex23 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Jul 28, 4:59 am, Russ P. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Jul 27, 3:11 am, alex23 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Jul 27, 4:26 pm, Russ P. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Jul 26, 11:18 pm, Terry Reedy [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The use
On Jul 27, 8:58 pm, castironpi [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Jul 27, 2:39 pm, Bruno Desthuilliers
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Derek Martin a écrit :
It's bad programming, but the world is full of bad programmers, and we
don't always have the choice not to use their code. Isn't one of
On Jul 27, 9:44 pm, alex23 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Jul 27, 4:26 pm, Russ P. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Terry Reedy [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The use of nothing'.' has been suggested before and rejected.
Where and why?
Dude, I agree with Guido completely on this one. You
On Jul 27, 10:32 pm, Terry Reedy [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Derek Martin wrote:
Furthermore, as you described, defining the function within the scope
of a class binds a name to the function and then makes it a method of
the class. Once that happens, *the function has become a method*.
If
On Jul 28, 4:23 am, Bruno Desthuilliers
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Russ P. a écrit :
On Jul 27, 3:11 pm, Russ P. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Jul 27, 12:39 pm, Bruno Desthuilliers
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Derek Martin a écrit :
On Sun, Jul 27, 2008 at 08:19:17AM +, Steven D'Aprano
On Jul 28, 2:52 am, alex23 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Jul 28, 3:07 pm, Russ P. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
What was suggested in rejected on the thread you pointed me to was
not what I suggested. Not even close. Get it, genius?
*sigh* Clearly I don't have better things to do right now than
On Jul 28, 7:07 am, Steven D'Aprano [EMAIL PROTECTED]
cybersource.com.au wrote:
On Sun, 27 Jul 2008 21:42:37 -0700, Russ P. wrote:
+1 QOTW
Do you realize what an insult that is to everyone else who has posted
here in the past week?
Actually I don't. I hadn't realised that when a person
On Jul 28, 5:44 pm, Ben Finney [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Bruno Desthuilliers [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Boy, I don't know who you think you're talking to, but you're
obviously out of luck here. I'm 41, married, our son is now a
teenager, I have an happy social life, quite a lot of work, and
On Jul 28, 12:08 pm, Bruno Desthuilliers
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
It's a very simple idea that you insist on
making complicated. As I said, I could write a pre-processor myself to
implement it in less than a day.
Preprocessor are not a solution. Sorry.
I never said that a pre-processor
On Jul 28, 8:44 pm, alex23 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Jul 29, 4:46 am, Russ P. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
As I said, I could write a pre-processor myself to
implement it in less than a day.
So WHY DON'T YOU WRITE IT ALREADY?
I'm working on something else right now if you don't mind
On Jul 29, 1:40 pm, kj [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Yet another noob question...
Is there a way to mimic C's static variables in Python? Or something
like it? The idea is to equip a given function with a set of
constants that belong only to it, so as not to clutter the global
namespace with
On Jul 29, 6:33 pm, Russ P. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Jul 29, 1:40 pm, kj [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Yet another noob question...
Is there a way to mimic C's static variables in Python? Or something
like it? The idea is to equip a given function with a set of
constants that belong
On Jul 29, 2:27 am, Iain King [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Jul 29, 5:33 am, Russ P. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Jul 28, 8:44 pm, alex23 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Jul 29, 4:46 am, Russ P. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
As I said, I could write a pre-processor myself to
implement
On Jul 29, 9:52 pm, Carl Banks [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Jul 29, 11:17 pm, Terry Reedy [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Carl Banks wrote:
As I wrote in the second reply email I sent, check out my integer set
recipe on ASPN (and to save you the search:
On Jul 29, 10:33 pm, Carl Banks [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Jul 30, 1:15 am, Russ P. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Having said that, it would sure be nice to be able to write
if myList is not empty:
instead of
if len(myList) != 0:
I can agree with this.
But I guess that could only work
On Jul 29, 11:09 pm, Erik Max Francis [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'm getting this sneaking suspicion that you guys are all putting us on.
As I said in an earlier post, I realize that this would only work if
there were only one copy of empty (as there is only one copy of
None). I don't know off
On Jul 29, 11:16 pm, Erik Max Francis [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Russ P. wrote:
On Jul 29, 10:33 pm, Carl Banks [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Jul 30, 1:15 am, Russ P. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Having said that, it would sure be nice to be able to write
if myList is not empty:
instead
On Jul 29, 11:36 pm, Erik Max Francis [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Russ P. wrote:
On Jul 29, 11:09 pm, Erik Max Francis [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'm getting this sneaking suspicion that you guys are all putting us on.
As I said in an earlier post, I realize that this would only work
On Jul 29, 11:36 pm, Erik Max Francis [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Russ P. wrote:
Come to think of it, shouldn't the list type have an isempty method?
Or does it?
Yes. It's written:
if not aList:
...
As you know, that is not quite exactly the same thing. An isempty
On Jul 30, 12:03 am, Heiko Wundram [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Am Mittwoch, 30. Juli 2008 08:30:48 schrieb Russ P.:
On Jul 29, 11:09 pm, Erik Max Francis [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'm getting this sneaking suspicion that you guys are all putting us on.
As I said in an earlier post, I realize
On Jul 30, 12:49 am, Heiko Wundram [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Am Mittwoch, 30. Juli 2008 09:18:48 schrieb Russ P.:
Oh, Lordy. I understand perfectly well how boolean tests, __len__, and
__nonzero__ work in Python. It's very basic stuff. You can quit
patronizing me (and Carl too, I'm sure
On Jul 30, 1:07 am, Erik Max Francis [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Russ P. wrote:
Oh, Lordy. I understand perfectly well how boolean tests, __len__, and
__nonzero__ work in Python. It's very basic stuff. You can quit
patronizing me (and Carl too, I'm sure).
You suggested a syntax for testing
On Jul 30, 7:05 pm, Erik Max Francis [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Russ P. wrote:
On Jul 30, 1:07 am, Erik Max Francis [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Russ P. wrote:
Oh, Lordy. I understand perfectly well how boolean tests, __len__, and
__nonzero__ work in Python. It's very basic stuff. You can quit
On Jul 30, 8:03 pm, Erik Max Francis [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Russ P. wrote:
The reason I wrote that it would be nice to be able to write
if x is not empty:
is that it reads naturally. It was not an actual proposal, and the
fact that you took it as such was *your* mistake
On Jul 30, 8:24 pm, Russ P. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Jul 30, 8:03 pm, Erik Max Francis [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Russ P. wrote:
The reason I wrote that it would be nice to be able to write
if x is not empty:
is that it reads naturally. It was not an actual proposal
On Jul 30, 9:27 pm, Erik Max Francis [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Russ P. wrote:
I don't know if you can read minds, but you seem to have a lot of
trouble reading words.
Can you read it would be nice to be able to write ...? Can you
understand what it means? Can you understand that it does
On Jul 30, 10:43 pm, Erik Max Francis [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Russ P. wrote:
On Jul 30, 9:27 pm, Erik Max Francis [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
You're sure going on about a distinction without a difference for a guy
who childishly likes to call other people names. A reasonable person
would
On Aug 1, 8:31 am, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'm writing Python as if it were strongly typed, never recycling a
name to hold a type other than the original type.
Is this good software engineering practice, or am I missing something
Pythonic?
Reusing names for no reason can make debugging
Many of you probably consider me a real jerk. Well, I guess I have
been one here. Believe it or not, I'm actually a pretty nice guy in
real life. Something about the detachment and (partial) anonymity of
being online makes me write things I would never say in person. For
that I apologize.
I had
1 - 100 of 272 matches
Mail list logo
