Commands for a breakpoint in .pdbrc
Hi all, I'd like to save the commands for a breakpoint in a .pdbrc, something like: b 81 commands 1 pp foo.attr1 pp foo.attr2 end b 108 commands 2 pp bar.attr1 pp bar.attr2 end This would automate setting the environment for the debugging session. However, this does not work with 'python -m pdb script.py', because at the line 'commands 1', the pdb prompt starts and asks me for the commands for the first breakpoint, ignoring what I wrote in .pdbrc; further, it raises a NameError after I type 'end' at the pdb prompt, because of 'foo.attr1', 'foo.attr2' and even 'end'. The same happens for the rest of the breakpoints, so I end up with them set but not their commands. What would be the correct way to do this? Is it even possible? Thanks a lot, Pablo Torres N. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: easy question, how to double a variable
On Sep 24, 5:51 am, Iain King iaink...@gmail.com wrote: On Sep 23, 7:36 pm, David C Ullrich dullr...@sprynet.com wrote: On Tue, 22 Sep 2009 02:34:53 +, Steven D'Aprano wrote: On Mon, 21 Sep 2009 13:50:23 -0500, David C Ullrich wrote: But you actually want to return twice the value. I don't see how to do that. What? Seriously? You're saying it _can_ be done in Python? They must have added something to the standard library again. I mean how can you return twice a value without a twice function to start with? I've tried. You'd think def twice(n): return twice(n) would work, but I get this really long error message. You're not just yanking the OP's chain??? That would be cruel. I mean the guy has enough problems already... Sorry, there is no 'twice' builtin. I think what you are looking for is: def twice(n): return return n Iain Actually, what he wants is: (def twice (x) (+ (once x) (once x))) -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Why does extend() fail in this case, and what am I doing wrong?
This has been asked extensively before, here and elsewhere. On Tue, Jul 14, 2009 at 09:52, Xavier Hocont...@xavierho.com wrote: Why doesn't the second output print [1, 2, 3, , 7, 8, 9] ? The code is run at: http://codepad.org/wgLU4JZh class A(): def __init__(self): self.n = [1, 2, 3, 4, 5] a = A() print a.n print a.n.extend([6, 7, 8, 9]) #Output: #[1, 2, 3, 4, 5] #None I really don't know, but I'm probably missing something. Any pointers would be great. Best regards, Ching-Yun Xavier Ho, Technical Artist Contact Information Mobile: (+61) 04 3335 4748 Skype ID: SpaXe85 Email: cont...@xavierho.com Website: http://xavierho.com/ -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list -- Pablo Torres N. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: can i write a assemly language programs in python
Or maybe he meant if you can have both Python and assembler code in the same source file, but I haven't heard of it. If what you are trying to do is write a faster version of some part of your code, try SWIG: http://www.swig.org/ Playing the guessing game is a time sink, and since nobody has done it so far, I will: OP, please read http://www.mikeash.com/getting_answers.html and http://catb.org/esr/faqs/smart-questions.html On Thu, Jul 9, 2009 at 12:40, Terry Reedytjre...@udel.edu wrote: Dave Angel wrote: m.reddy prasad reddy wrote: can any one tell me how to write assembly language programs in python...if no is there any other way to write the programs in python Reddi prasad reddy ph.no:09958083797 Assembly language is a different programming language than Python. You can use both in the same process, much in the same way you can use C or C++ with Python. In fact, some of the system DLL's are written (partly) in assembler, though mostly in C or C++. It is possible that he meant how to write assembly *with* python. Or how to translate python to assembly. As it turns out, CPython translates Python to byte code and has a dis (assembly) module that produces very nice assembly code ;-) So that is one answer to his question. You'll need to tell us what your real goal is. Definitely. tjr -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list -- Pablo Torres N. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Newbie needs help
On Tue, Jul 7, 2009 at 10:02, nacim_br...@agilent.com wrote: Hello Gurus, Thank you for trying to help to my initial and not well written questions. I will compile more detailed information and ask again. Btw, I am giving a glimpse to: How To Ask Questions The Smart Way. nacim Give this one a try too: http://www.mikeash.com/getting_answers.html It doesn't talk down to you...as much :P -- Pablo Torres N. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: A Bug By Any Other Name ...
On Mon, Jul 6, 2009 at 07:12, Hendrik van Rooyenm...@microcorp.co.za wrote: Terry Reedy t@..el.edu wrote: Gabriel Genellina wrote: In this case, a note in the documentation warning about the potential confusion would be fine. How would that help someone who does not read the doc? It obviously won't. All it will do, is that it will enable people on this group, who may read the manual, to tell people who complain, to RTFM. Yes, it's their problem if they don't read the docs. I agree that it would be a good idea to make it an error, or a warning - this might not do what you think it does, or an are you sure? exception. :-) - Hendrik That would be even harder than adding a line to the docs. Besides, the problem that Mr. alex23 pointed: where do you stop? would really get out of hand. -- Pablo Torres N. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Semi-Newbie needs a little help
On Mon, Jul 6, 2009 at 17:02, Nilenile_mcad...@yahoo.com wrote: Code for x in range(len(file_list)): d = open(file_list[x] , r) data = d.readlines() k = above_or_below(data) # This function seems to work correctly print here is the value that was returned , k dict[k] = dict.get(k,0) + 1 dict_list = dict.values() print here is a list of the dictionary values , dict_list print the length of the dictionary is , len(dict) Correcting your indentation errors and moving your comments above the line they reference will attract more help from others in this list ;-) Also, I'd recommend limiting your line length to 80 chars, since lines are wrapped anyway. -- Pablo Torres N. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: How Python Implements long integer?
On Sun, Jul 5, 2009 at 04:57, Mark Dickinsondicki...@gmail.com wrote: On Jul 5, 8:38 am, Pedram pm567...@gmail.com wrote: Hello, I'm reading about implementation of long ints in Python. I downloaded the source code of CPython and will read the longobject.c, but from where I should start reading this file? I mean which function is the first? I don't really understand the question: what do you mean by 'first'? It might help if you tell us what your aims are. I think he means the entry point, problem is that libraries have many. -- Pablo Torres N. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Calling C or C++ Functions inside Python script
On Sat, Jul 4, 2009 at 05:06, Parikshat Dubeyparikshatdu...@gmail.com wrote: Hi, Is this possible to call C functions(inbuilt or user defined) inside python script.If yes, please illustrate how it can be done. Thanks, Parikshat Dubey From http://www.swig.org : SWIG is a software development tool that connects programs written in C and C++ with a variety of high-level programming languages. SWIG is used with different types of languages including common scripting languages such as Perl, PHP, Python, Tcl and Ruby. --- Pablo Torres N. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Clarity vs. code reuse/generality
On Sat, Jul 4, 2009 at 10:05, kjno.em...@please.post wrote: http://docs.python.org/reference/simple_stmts.html#grammar-token-assert_stmt The current code generator emits no code for an assert statement when optimization is requested at compile time. Sorry, this doesn't say anything like don't use assertions to test argument values. I'm aware of the fact that assertions are silenced under certain circumstances. But where does the principle 1. in your first reply come from? I've never seen it before, and would like to understand the reasoning behind it. kj -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list But...if no code is generated for assertions on some occasions, then the parameters would go unchecked, potentially breaking your code in said occasions. -- Pablo Torres N. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Sequence splitting
On Fri, Jul 3, 2009 at 06:01, Paul Moorep.f.mo...@gmail.com wrote: 2009/7/3 Brad schi...@gmail.com: Perhaps true, but it would be a nice convenience (for me) as a built- in written in either Python or C. Although the default case of a bool function would surely be faster. The chance of getting this accepted as a builtin is essentially zero. To be a builtin, as opposed to being in the standard library, something has to have a very strong justification. That's right. Mr. schickb, I think what you need is a few concrete examples as to where this function would be beneficial, so it can be judged objectively. -- Pablo Torres N. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Clarity vs. code reuse/generality
On Fri, Jul 3, 2009 at 09:05, kjno.em...@please.post wrote: The context is the concept of a binary search. In one of their homeworks, my students will have two occasions to use a binary search. This seemed like a perfect opportunity to illustrate the idea of abstracting commonalities of code into a re-usable function. So I thought that I'd code a helper function, called _binary_search, that took five parameters: a lower limit, an upper limit, a one-parameter function, a target value, and a tolerance (epsilon). It returns the value of the parameter for which the value of the passed function is within the tolerance of the target value. Five params for a novice function is overkill. I'd drop the epsilon thing and, assuming you are searching in a list, tuple or something similar, make the lower limit default to the first index and the upper default to the last one. In fact, I'd let them to realize that a function is convenient, and base some of the grading in whether they wrote it or not. Just a thought. -- Pablo Torres N. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Sequence splitting
On Thu, Jul 2, 2009 at 21:56, schickbschi...@gmail.com wrote: I have fairly often found the need to split a sequence into two groups based on a function result. Much like the existing filter function, but returning a tuple of true, false sequences. In Python, something like: def split(seq, func=None): if func is None: func = bool t, f = [], [] for item in seq: if func(item): t.append(item) else: f.append(item) return (t, f) The discussion linked to below has various approaches for doing this now, but most traverse the sequence twice and many don't apply a function to spit the sequence. http://stackoverflow.com/questions/949098/python-split-a-list-based-on-a-condition Is there any interest in a C implementation of this? Seems too trivial to write a PEP, so I'm just trying to measure interest before diving in. This wouldn't really belong in intertool. Would it be best implemented as a top level built-in? -Brad -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list This sounds like it belongs to the python-ideas list. I suggest posting there for better feedback, since the core developers check that list more often than this one. -- Pablo Torres N. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Sequence splitting
On Jul 2, 9:56 pm, schickb schi...@gmail.com wrote: I have fairly often found the need to split a sequence into two groups based on a function result. Much like the existing filter function, but returning a tuple of true, false sequences. In Python, something like: def split(seq, func=None): if func is None: func = bool t, f = [], [] for item in seq: if func(item): t.append(item) else: f.append(item) return (t, f) The discussion linked to below has various approaches for doing this now, but most traverse the sequence twice and many don't apply a function to spit the sequence.http://stackoverflow.com/questions/949098/python-split-a-list-based-o... Is there any interest in a C implementation of this? Seems too trivial to write a PEP, so I'm just trying to measure interest before diving in. This wouldn't really belong in intertool. Would it be best implemented as a top level built-in? -Brad This sounds like it belongs to the python-ideas list. I suggest posting there for better feedback, since the core developers check that list more often than this one. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Sequence splitting
On Thu, Jul 2, 2009 at 23:34, Bradschi...@gmail.com wrote: On Jul 2, 9:08 pm, Paul Rubin http://phr...@nospam.invalid wrote: Brad schi...@gmail.com writes: On Jul 2, 8:14 pm, Paul Rubin http://phr...@nospam.invalid wrote: schickb schi...@gmail.com writes: def split(seq, func=None): if func is None: func = bool t, f = [], [] for item in seq: if func(item): t.append(item) else: f.append(item) return (t, f) untested: def split(seq, func=bool): xs = zip(seq, itertools.imap(func, seq)) t = list(x for (x,y) in xs if y) f = list(x for (x,y) in xs if not y) return (t, f) In my testing that is 3.5x slower than the original solution (and less clear imo). I fixed my version to take a bool default. Either way, I'm not really looking for additional ways to do this in Python unless I've totally missed something. What I am considering is writing it in C, much like filter. I'm a little skeptical that the C version will help much, if it's evaluating a python function at every list element. Perhaps true, but it would be a nice convenience (for me) as a built- in written in either Python or C. Although the default case of a bool function would surely be faster. Here's a variant of your version: def split(seq, func=bool): t, f = [], [] ta, fa = t.append, f.append for item in seq: (ta if func(item) else fa)(item) return (t, f) This avoids some dict lookups and copying. I wonder if that helps significantly. Faster, but in tests of a few short sequences only 1% so. -Brad -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list If it is speed that we are after, it's my understanding that map and filter are faster than iterating with the for statement (and also faster than list comprehensions). So here is a rewrite: def split(seq, func=bool): t = filter(func, seq) f = filter(lambda x: not func(x), seq) return list(t), list(f) The lambda thing is kinda ugly, but I can't think of anything else. Also, is it ok to return lists? Py3k saw a lot of APIs changed to return iterables instead of lists, so maybe my function should have 'return t, f' as it's last statement. -- Pablo Torres N. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
