On Feb 23, 1:03 pm, Alf P. Steinbach al...@start.no wrote:
Uhm, Paganini...
As I understand it he invented the destroy your instruments on stage. :-)
Cheers,
- Alf (off-topic)
You probably meant Franz Liszt, who regularly broke piano strings.
Paganini was also a rock-star virtuoso but he
On Feb 16, 10:41 pm, Andrej Mitrovic andrej.mitrov...@gmail.com
wrote:
On Feb 16, 7:38 pm, Casey Hawthorne caseyhhammer_t...@istar.ca
wrote:
Interesting talk on Python vs. Ruby and how he would like Python to
have just a bit more syntactic flexibility.
On Sun, Feb 21, 2010 at 10:22 AM, John Bokma j...@castleamber.com wrote:
Jonathan Gardner jgard...@jonathangardner.net writes:
On Fri, Feb 19, 2010 at 11:16 PM, Lie Ryan lie.1...@gmail.com wrote:
Now, why don't we start a PEP to make python a fully-functional language
then?
Because people
Jonathan Gardner jgard...@jonathangardner.net writes:
I won't deny that really smart people enjoy the challenge of
programming in a functional style, and some even find it easier to
work with. However, when it comes to readability and maintenance, I
appreciate the statement-based programming
Jonathan Gardner jgard...@jonathangardner.net writes:
On Sun, Feb 21, 2010 at 10:22 AM, John Bokma j...@castleamber.com wrote:
Jonathan Gardner jgard...@jonathangardner.net writes:
On Fri, Feb 19, 2010 at 11:16 PM, Lie Ryan lie.1...@gmail.com wrote:
Now, why don't we start a PEP to make
In message 1ecc71bf-54ab-45e6-a38a-d1861f092...@v25g2000yqk.googlegroups.com,
sjdevn...@yahoo.com wrote:
On Feb 20, 1:30 am, Lawrence D'Oliveiro l...@geek-central.gen.new_zealand
wrote:
In message op.u8at0suda8n...@gnudebst, Rhodri James wrote:
In classic Pascal, a procedure was distinct
John Bokma j...@castleamber.com writes:
In my class there where basically 2 groups of people: the ones who got
functional programming and the ones who had a hard time with it. The
latter group consisted mostly of people who had been programming in
languages like C and Pascal for years; they
In message
3aa0205f-1e98-4376-92e4-607f96f13...@k19g2000yqc.googlegroups.com, Michael
Sparks wrote:
[1] This is perhaps more appropriate because '(a b c) is equivalent
to (quote a b c), and quote a b c can be viewed as close to
python's expression lambda: a b c
You got to be
On Mon, Feb 22, 2010 at 12:31 PM, John Bokma j...@castleamber.com wrote:
In my class there where basically 2 groups of people: the ones who got
functional programming and the ones who had a hard time with it. The
latter group consisted mostly of people who had been programming in
languages
On Feb 22, 8:35 pm, Jonathan Gardner jgard...@jonathangardner.net
wrote:
On Mon, Feb 22, 2010 at 12:31 PM, John Bokma j...@castleamber.com wrote:
In my class there where basically 2 groups of people: the ones who got
functional programming and the ones who had a hard time with it. The
Steve Howell showel...@yahoo.com writes:
My gut instinct is that functional programming works well for lots of
medium sized problems and it is worth learning.
I think it's worth learning because it will make you a better programmer
even if you never use it for anything beyond academic
On Feb 22, 9:11 pm, Steve Howell showel...@yahoo.com wrote:
On Feb 22, 8:35 pm, Jonathan Gardner jgard...@jonathangardner.net
wrote:
On Mon, Feb 22, 2010 at 12:31 PM, John Bokma j...@castleamber.com wrote:
In my class there where basically 2 groups of people: the ones who got
On Feb 22, 9:06 pm, Paul Rubin no.em...@nospam.invalid wrote:
Steve Howell showel...@yahoo.com writes:
My gut instinct is that functional programming works well for lots of
medium sized problems and it is worth learning.
I think it's worth learning because it will make you a better
* Paul Rubin:
Steve Howell showel...@yahoo.com writes:
My gut instinct is that functional programming works well for lots of
medium sized problems and it is worth learning.
I think it's worth learning because it will make you a better programmer
even if you never use it for anything beyond
Jonathan Gardner jgard...@jonathangardner.net writes:
On Fri, Feb 19, 2010 at 11:16 PM, Lie Ryan lie.1...@gmail.com wrote:
Now, why don't we start a PEP to make python a fully-functional language
then?
Because people don't think the same way that programs are written in
functional
On Fri, Feb 19, 2010 at 11:16 PM, Lie Ryan lie.1...@gmail.com wrote:
Now, why don't we start a PEP to make python a fully-functional language
then?
Because people don't think the same way that programs are written in
functional languages.
--
Jonathan Gardner
jgard...@jonathangardner.net
--
On Fri, Feb 19, 2010 at 11:17 PM, sjdevn...@yahoo.com
sjdevn...@yahoo.com wrote:
On Feb 20, 1:30 am, Lawrence D'Oliveiro l...@geek-
central.gen.new_zealand wrote:
If Python doesn’t distinguish between procedures and functions, why should
it distinguish between statements and expressions?
On Feb 18, 4:15 pm, Steve Howell showel...@yahoo.com wrote:
...
def print_numbers()
[1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6].map { |n|
[n * n, n * n * n]
}.reject { |square, cube|
square == 25 || cube == 64
}.map { |square, cube|
cube
On Feb 20, 6:13 am, Michael Sparks spark...@gmail.com wrote:
On Feb 18, 4:15 pm, Steve Howell showel...@yahoo.com wrote:
...
def print_numbers()
[1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6].map { |n|
[n * n, n * n * n]
}.reject { |square, cube|
square == 25 || cube
On Feb 19, 1:44 pm, Steve Howell showel...@yahoo.com wrote:
def coroutine(co):
def _inner(*args, **kwargs):
gen = co(*args, **kwargs)
gen.next()
return gen
return _inner
def squares_and_cubes(lst, target):
for n in lst:
target.send((n * n, n
This pipeline idea has actually been implemented further, see http://
blog.onideas.ws/stream.py.
from stream import map, filter, cut
range(10) map(lambda x: [x**2, x**3]) filter(lambda t: t[0]!
=25 and t[1]!=64) cut[1] list
[0, 1, 8, 27, 216, 343, 512, 729]
Wow, cool!
Just to show that
On Feb 19, 7:50 am, Roald de Vries r...@roalddevries.nl wrote:
This pipeline idea has actually been implemented further, see http://
blog.onideas.ws/stream.py.
from stream import map, filter, cut
range(10) map(lambda x: [x**2, x**3]) filter(lambda t: t[0]!
=25 and t[1]!=64) cut[1]
On Fri, 19 Feb 2010 08:32:53 -0800, Steve Howell wrote:
The extra expressiveness of Ruby comes from the fact that you can add
statements within the block, which I find useful sometimes just for
debugging purposes:
debug = true
data = strange_dataset_from_third_party_code()
On Feb 19, 9:30 am, Steven D'Aprano st...@remove-this-
cybersource.com.au wrote:
On Fri, 19 Feb 2010 08:32:53 -0800, Steve Howell wrote:
The extra expressiveness of Ruby comes from the fact that you can add
statements within the block, which I find useful sometimes just for
debugging
On 02/19/10 14:57, Steve Howell wrote:
In a more real world example, the intermediate results would be
something like this:
departments
departments_in_new_york
departments_in_new_york_not_on_bonus_cycle
employees_in_departments_in_new_york_not_on_bonus_cycle
In message 87eikjcuzk@benfinney.id.au, Ben Finney wrote:
Lawrence D'Oliveiro l...@geek-central.gen.new_zealand writes:
In message hlhdsi$2p...@theodyn.ncf.ca, cjw wrote:
Aren't lambda forms better described as function?
Is this a function?
lambda : None
What about this?
In message 84166541-c10a-47b5-ae5b-
b23202624...@q2g2000pre.googlegroups.com, Steve Howell wrote:
Some people make the definition of function more restrictive--if it
has side effects, it is not a function.
Does changing the contents of CPU cache count as a side-effect?
--
In message op.u8at0suda8n...@gnudebst, Rhodri James wrote:
In classic Pascal, a procedure was distinct from a function in that it had
no return value. The concept doesn't really apply in Python; there are no
procedures in that sense, since if a function terminates without supplying
an
Lawrence D'Oliveiro l...@geek-central.gen.new_zealand writes:
So there is no distinction between functions and procedures, then?
In Python, no.
--
\ “When we pray to God we must be seeking nothing — nothing.” |
`\ —Saint Francis of Assisi |
Ben Finney wrote:
Lawrence D'Oliveiro l...@geek-central.gen.new_zealand writes:
If Python doesn’t distinguish between procedures and functions, why
should it distinguish between statements and expressions?
I don't see the connection between those two predicates. Why does the
former matter
On Feb 20, 1:28 am, Lawrence D'Oliveiro l...@geek-
central.gen.new_zealand wrote:
In message 87eikjcuzk@benfinney.id.au, Ben Finney wrote:
Lawrence D'Oliveiro l...@geek-central.gen.new_zealand writes:
In message hlhdsi$2p...@theodyn.ncf.ca, cjw wrote:
Aren't lambda forms better
On Feb 20, 1:30 am, Lawrence D'Oliveiro l...@geek-
central.gen.new_zealand wrote:
In message op.u8at0suda8n...@gnudebst, Rhodri James wrote:
In classic Pascal, a procedure was distinct from a function in that it had
no return value. The concept doesn't really apply in Python; there are no
On 02/20/10 17:30, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
In message op.u8at0suda8n...@gnudebst, Rhodri James wrote:
In classic Pascal, a procedure was distinct from a function in that it had
no return value. The concept doesn't really apply in Python; there are no
procedures in that sense, since if a
On 02/20/10 18:17, sjdevn...@yahoo.com wrote:
On Feb 20, 1:30 am, Lawrence D'Oliveiro l...@geek-
central.gen.new_zealand wrote:
In message op.u8at0suda8n...@gnudebst, Rhodri James wrote:
In classic Pascal, a procedure was distinct from a function in that it had
no return value. The concept
On Feb 19, 10:30 pm, Lawrence D'Oliveiro l...@geek-
central.gen.new_zealand wrote:
In message op.u8at0suda8n...@gnudebst, Rhodri James wrote:
In classic Pascal, a procedure was distinct from a function in that it had
no return value. The concept doesn't really apply in Python; there are no
On Feb 19, 11:12 pm, Steve Holden st...@holdenweb.com wrote:
Ben Finney wrote:
Lawrence D'Oliveiro l...@geek-central.gen.new_zealand writes:
If Python doesn’t distinguish between procedures and functions, why
should it distinguish between statements and expressions?
I don't see the
Jonathan Gardner jgard...@jonathangardner.net wrote:
On Feb 17, 12:02 am, Lawrence D'Oliveiro l...@geek-
central.gen.new_zealand wrote:
In message
8ca440b2-6094-4b35-80c5-81d000517...@v20g2000prb.googlegroups.com,
Jonathan Gardner wrote:
I used to think anonymous functions (AKA blocks,
On Feb 18, 1:23 am, Duncan Booth duncan.bo...@invalid.invalid wrote:
Jonathan Gardner jgard...@jonathangardner.net wrote:
On Feb 17, 12:02 am, Lawrence D'Oliveiro l...@geek-
central.gen.new_zealand wrote:
In message
8ca440b2-6094-4b35-80c5-81d000517...@v20g2000prb.googlegroups.com,
Steve Howell showel...@yahoo.com wrote:
If this is an argument against using anonymous functions, then it is a
quadruple strawman.
Shipping buggy code is a bad idea, even with named functions.
I doubt very much whether I have ever shipped any bug-free code but
even if it was fit for purpose
On Thu, 18 Feb 2010 06:15:20 -0800, Steve Howell wrote:
On Feb 18, 1:23 am, Duncan Booth duncan.bo...@invalid.invalid wrote:
Jonathan Gardner jgard...@jonathangardner.net wrote:
On Feb 17, 12:02 am, Lawrence D'Oliveiro l...@geek-
central.gen.new_zealand wrote:
In message
On Feb 18, 8:15 am, Steve Howell showel...@yahoo.com wrote:
def print_numbers()
[1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6].map { |n|
[n * n, n * n * n]
}.reject { |square, cube|
square == 25 || cube == 64
}.map { |square, cube|
cube
}.each {
On Thu, 18 Feb 2010 08:15:46 -0800, Steve Howell wrote:
Just to be clear, I'm not saying it's unforgivable to occasionally ship
software with bugs. It happens.
Occasionally? Oh, if only.
I would say that there probably isn't a non-trivial application in the
world that is entirely bug-free.
On Feb 18, 11:15 am, Steve Howell showel...@yahoo.com wrote:
def print_numbers()
[1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6].map { |n|
[n * n, n * n * n]
}.reject { |square, cube|
square == 25 || cube == 64
}.map { |square, cube|
cube
}.each {
Jonathan Gardner jgard...@jonathangardner.net writes:
On Feb 18, 8:15 am, Steve Howell showel...@yahoo.com wrote:
def print_numbers()
[1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6].map { |n|
[n * n, n * n * n]
}.reject { |square, cube|
square == 25 || cube == 64
John Bokma j...@castleamber.com writes:
Jonathan Gardner jgard...@jonathangardner.net writes:
On Feb 18, 8:15 am, Steve Howell showel...@yahoo.com wrote:
def print_numbers()
[1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6].map { |n|
[n * n, n * n * n]
}.reject { |square, cube|
On Feb 18, 3:04 pm, sjdevn...@yahoo.com sjdevn...@yahoo.com wrote:
You could do it without intermediate names or lambdas in Python as:
def print_numbers():
for i in [ cube for (square, cube) in
[(n*n, n*n*n) for n in [1,2,3,4,5,6]]
if square!=25
On Feb 18, 3:00 pm, Steven D'Aprano st...@remove-this-
cybersource.com.au wrote:
[...]
You wouldn't name your functions:
f01, f02, f03, f04, ... f99
Exactly.
(say), unless you were trying to deliberately obfuscate your code.
Anonymous functions are even more obfuscated than that. You can
Steven D'Aprano wrote:
On Thu, 18 Feb 2010 06:15:20 -0800, Steve Howell wrote:
[...]
There really ought to be a special level of Hell for people who misuse
strawman to mean a weak or invalid argument instead of what it
actually means, which is a weak or invalid argument NOT HELD by your
On Feb 18, 3:04 pm, sjdevn...@yahoo.com sjdevn...@yahoo.com wrote:
On Feb 18, 11:15 am, Steve Howell showel...@yahoo.com wrote:
def print_numbers()
[1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6].map { |n|
[n * n, n * n * n]
}.reject { |square, cube|
square == 25 || cube
Steve Howell showel...@yahoo.com writes:
But frankly, although there's no reason that you _have_ to name the
content at each step, I find it a lot more readable if you do:
def print_numbers():
tuples = [(n*n, n*n*n) for n in (1,2,3,4,5,6)]
filtered = [ cube for (square, cube) in
On Feb 18, 10:58 pm, Paul Rubin no.em...@nospam.invalid wrote:
Steve Howell showel...@yahoo.com writes:
But frankly, although there's no reason that you _have_ to name the
content at each step, I find it a lot more readable if you do:
def print_numbers():
tuples = [(n*n, n*n*n) for n
On Feb 18, 2:49 pm, Jonathan Gardner jgard...@jonathangardner.net
wrote:
On Feb 18, 8:15 am, Steve Howell showel...@yahoo.com wrote:
def print_numbers()
[1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6].map { |n|
[n * n, n * n * n]
}.reject { |square, cube|
square == 25
On Feb 18, 7:58 pm, Paul Rubin no.em...@nospam.invalid wrote:
Steve Howell showel...@yahoo.com writes:
But frankly, although there's no reason that you _have_ to name the
content at each step, I find it a lot more readable if you do:
def print_numbers():
tuples = [(n*n, n*n*n) for n
On Feb 18, 8:27 pm, sjdevn...@yahoo.com sjdevn...@yahoo.com wrote:
On Feb 18, 10:58 pm, Paul Rubin no.em...@nospam.invalid wrote:
Steve Howell showel...@yahoo.com writes:
But frankly, although there's no reason that you _have_ to name the
content at each step, I find it a lot more
On Thu, Feb 18, 2010 at 10:46 PM, Steve Howell showel...@yahoo.com wrote:
On Feb 18, 2:49 pm, Jonathan Gardner jgard...@jonathangardner.net
wrote:
On Feb 18, 8:15 am, Steve Howell showel...@yahoo.com wrote:
def print_numbers()
[1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6].map { |n|
[n *
On Feb 18, 7:58 pm, Paul Rubin no.em...@nospam.invalid wrote:
Steve Howell showel...@yahoo.com writes:
But frankly, although there's no reason that you _have_ to name the
content at each step, I find it a lot more readable if you do:
def print_numbers():
tuples = [(n*n, n*n*n) for n
Steve Howell showel...@yahoo.com writes:
http://haskell.org/ghc/docs/6.10.4/html/users_guide/syntax-extns.html...
might be of interest. Maybe Ruby and/or Python could grow something similar.
Can you elaborate?
List comprehensions are a Python feature you're probably familiar with,
and I think
On Thu, 18 Feb 2010 22:48:21 -0500, Steve Holden wrote:
Next week: Lesson 2 - Ad Hominem Attacks
I wouldn't pay any attention to Steve, all Stevens are notorious liars.
--
Steven
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Steve Howell wrote:
Python may not support the broadest notion of anonymous functions, but
it definitely has anonymous blocks. You can write this in Python:
for i in range(10):
print i
print i * i
print i * i * i
There's a clear difference between this and a Ruby
On Thu, 18 Feb 2010 19:57:35 -0800, Steve Howell wrote:
The names you give to the intermediate results here are terse--tuples
and filtered--so your code reads nicely.
In a more real world example, the intermediate results would be
something like this:
departments
On Feb 18, 9:41 pm, Steven D'Aprano st...@remove-this-
cybersource.com.au wrote:
On Thu, 18 Feb 2010 22:48:21 -0500, Steve Holden wrote:
Next week: Lesson 2 - Ad Hominem Attacks
I wouldn't pay any attention to Steve, all Stevens are notorious liars.
--
Steven
Especially when their last
On Fri, 19 Feb 2010 18:52:20 +1300, Gregory Ewing wrote:
The Ruby approach has the advantage of making it possible to implement
user-defined control structures without requiring a macro facility. You
can't do that in Python.
[...]
Also, most people who advocate adding some form of
On Feb 18, 9:46 pm, Steven D'Aprano st...@remove-this-
cybersource.com.au wrote:
On Thu, 18 Feb 2010 19:57:35 -0800, Steve Howell wrote:
The names you give to the intermediate results here are terse--tuples
and filtered--so your code reads nicely.
In a more real world example, the
On Feb 18, 9:37 pm, Kurt Smith kwmsm...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Feb 18, 2010 at 10:46 PM, Steve Howell showel...@yahoo.com wrote:
On Feb 18, 2:49 pm, Jonathan Gardner jgard...@jonathangardner.net
wrote:
On Feb 18, 8:15 am, Steve Howell showel...@yahoo.com wrote:
def print_numbers()
On Feb 18, 9:52 pm, Gregory Ewing greg.ew...@canterbury.ac.nz wrote:
Steve Howell wrote:
Python may not support the broadest notion of anonymous functions, but
it definitely has anonymous blocks. You can write this in Python:
for i in range(10):
print i
print i * i
In message 60b1abce-4381-46ab-91ed-
f2ab2154c...@g19g2000yqe.googlegroups.com, Andrej Mitrovic wrote:
Also, lambda's are expressions, not statements ...
Is such a distinction Pythonic, or not? For example, does Python distinguish
between functions and procedures?
--
In message
8ca440b2-6094-4b35-80c5-81d000517...@v20g2000prb.googlegroups.com,
Jonathan Gardner wrote:
I used to think anonymous functions (AKA blocks, etc...) would be a
nice feature for Python.
Then I looked at a stack trace from a different programming language
with lots of anonymous
Aahz a écrit :
In article 8ca440b2-6094-4b35-80c5-81d000517...@v20g2000prb.googlegroups.com,
Jonathan Gardner jgard...@jonathangardner.net wrote:
I used to think anonymous functions (AKA blocks, etc...) would be a
nice feature for Python.
Then I looked at a stack trace from a different
Jonathan Gardner jgard...@jonathangardner.net writes:
Then I looked at a stack trace from a different programming language
with lots of anonymous functions. (I believe it was perl.)
I became enlightened.
If it was Perl [1], I doubt it. Because line numbers are reported, and
if that doesn't
On 17-Feb-10 05:48 AM, Bruno Desthuilliers wrote:
Lawrence D'Oliveiro a écrit :
In message 60b1abce-4381-46ab-91ed-
f2ab2154c...@g19g2000yqe.googlegroups.com, Andrej Mitrovic wrote:
Also, lambda's are expressions, not statements ...
Is such a distinction Pythonic, or not?
Python is (by
On 2/17/2010 1:51 PM, cjw wrote:
On 17-Feb-10 05:48 AM, Bruno Desthuilliers wrote:
Lawrence D'Oliveiro a écrit :
In message 60b1abce-4381-46ab-91ed-
f2ab2154c...@g19g2000yqe.googlegroups.com, Andrej Mitrovic wrote:
Also, lambda's are expressions, not statements ...
Is such a distinction
In message hlhdsi$2p...@theodyn.ncf.ca, cjw wrote:
Aren't lambda forms better described as function?
Is this a function?
lambda : None
What about this?
lambda : sys.stdout.write(hi there!\n)
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
On 2/17/2010 5:46 PM, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
In messagehlhdsi$2p...@theodyn.ncf.ca, cjw wrote:
Aren't lambda forms better described as function?
Is this a function?
lambda : None
What about this?
lambda : sys.stdout.write(hi there!\n)
To repeat: Python lambda expressions
Lawrence D'Oliveiro l...@geek-central.gen.new_zealand writes:
In message hlhdsi$2p...@theodyn.ncf.ca, cjw wrote:
Aren't lambda forms better described as function?
Is this a function?
lambda : None
What about this?
lambda : sys.stdout.write(hi there!\n)
They are both lambda
On Thu, 18 Feb 2010 11:46:52 +1300, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
In message hlhdsi$2p...@theodyn.ncf.ca, cjw wrote:
Aren't lambda forms better described as function?
Is this a function?
lambda : None
What about this?
lambda : sys.stdout.write(hi there!\n)
Of course they
On Feb 17, 10:39 am, John Bokma j...@castleamber.com wrote:
Jonathan Gardner jgard...@jonathangardner.net writes:
Then I looked at a stack trace from a different programming language
with lots of anonymous functions. (I believe it was perl.)
I became enlightened.
If it was Perl [1], I
On Feb 17, 12:02 am, Lawrence D'Oliveiro l...@geek-
central.gen.new_zealand wrote:
In message
8ca440b2-6094-4b35-80c5-81d000517...@v20g2000prb.googlegroups.com,
Jonathan Gardner wrote:
I used to think anonymous functions (AKA blocks, etc...) would be a
nice feature for Python.
Then I
On Feb 17, 12:02 am, Lawrence D'Oliveiro l...@geek-
central.gen.new_zealand wrote:
In message 60b1abce-4381-46ab-91ed-
f2ab2154c...@g19g2000yqe.googlegroups.com, Andrej Mitrovic wrote:
Also, lambda's are expressions, not statements ...
Is such a distinction Pythonic, or not? For example,
On Wed, 17 Feb 2010 12:39:30 -0600, John Bokma wrote:
Jonathan Gardner jgard...@jonathangardner.net writes:
Then I looked at a stack trace from a different programming language
with lots of anonymous functions. (I believe it was perl.)
I became enlightened.
If it was Perl [1], I doubt
On Thu, 18 Feb 2010 01:04:00 -, Jonathan Gardner
jgard...@jonathangardner.net wrote:
On Feb 17, 12:02 am, Lawrence D'Oliveiro l...@geek-
central.gen.new_zealand wrote:
In message 60b1abce-4381-46ab-91ed-
f2ab2154c...@g19g2000yqe.googlegroups.com, Andrej Mitrovic wrote:
Also, lambda's
On Wed, 17 Feb 2010 17:04:00 -0800, Jonathan Gardner wrote:
(What the heck is a procedure, anyway? Is this different from a
subroutine, a method, or a block?)
The name is used in Pascal, which probably means it originated from
Fortran or Algol.
A subroutine is a generic piece of code which
Steven D'Aprano ste...@remove.this.cybersource.com.au writes:
On Wed, 17 Feb 2010 12:39:30 -0600, John Bokma wrote:
[..]
If it was Perl [1], I doubt it. Because line numbers are reported, and
if that doesn't help you, you can annotate anonymous functions with a
nick name using
local
On Feb 17, 5:39 pm, Steven D'Aprano
ste...@remove.this.cybersource.com.au wrote:
On Wed, 17 Feb 2010 17:04:00 -0800, Jonathan Gardner wrote:
(What the heck is a procedure, anyway? Is this different from a
subroutine, a method, or a block?)
The name is used in Pascal, which probably means it
On Feb 16, 4:19 pm, Jonathan Gardner jgard...@jonathangardner.net
wrote:
On Feb 16, 11:41 am, Andrej Mitrovic andrej.mitrov...@gmail.com
wrote:
On Feb 16, 7:38 pm, Casey Hawthorne caseyhhammer_t...@istar.ca
wrote:
Interesting talk on Python vs. Ruby and how he would like Python to
On Feb 17, 10:39 am, John Bokma j...@castleamber.com wrote:
Jonathan Gardner jgard...@jonathangardner.net writes:
Then I looked at a stack trace from a different programming language
with lots of anonymous functions. (I believe it was perl.)
I became enlightened.
If it was Perl [1], I
Interesting talk on Python vs. Ruby and how he would like Python to
have just a bit more syntactic flexibility.
http://blog.extracheese.org/2010/02/python-vs-ruby-a-battle-to-the-death.html
--
Regards,
Casey
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
On Feb 16, 7:38 pm, Casey Hawthorne caseyhhammer_t...@istar.ca
wrote:
Interesting talk on Python vs. Ruby and how he would like Python to
have just a bit more syntactic flexibility.
http://blog.extracheese.org/2010/02/python-vs-ruby-a-battle-to-the-de...
--
Regards,
Casey
Gary's friend
On Feb 16, 11:41 am, Andrej Mitrovic andrej.mitrov...@gmail.com
wrote:
On Feb 16, 7:38 pm, Casey Hawthorne caseyhhammer_t...@istar.ca
wrote:
Interesting talk on Python vs. Ruby and how he would like Python to
have just a bit more syntactic flexibility.
In article 8ca440b2-6094-4b35-80c5-81d000517...@v20g2000prb.googlegroups.com,
Jonathan Gardner jgard...@jonathangardner.net wrote:
I used to think anonymous functions (AKA blocks, etc...) would be a
nice feature for Python.
Then I looked at a stack trace from a different programming language
On Wed, Feb 17, 2010 at 4:41 AM, Andrej Mitrovic
andrej.mitrov...@gmail.com wrote:
Gary's friend Geoffrey Grosenbach says in his blog post (which Gary
linked to): Python has no comparable equivalent to Ruby’s do end
block. Python lambdas are limited to one line and can’t contain
statements
90 matches
Mail list logo
