Re: [Edu-sig] Re: Naming in Python

Kirby Urner said unto the world upon 2005-02-01 23:57: Thanks for sharing your peeves. If you get any more pets, please share them too. Kirby Hi, I'd just like to mention the page and encourage peeved people to help the wiki grow. Best to all, Brian v

RE: [Edu-sig] Re: Naming in Python

Hi Scott: > Here you missed a simplicity bet (one of my two big pet peeves): > > class Function: > def __init__(self, f): > self.f = f > ... > Yes, good one. > For the curious, the other peeve is: > > def function(... > if expression: >

[Edu-sig] Re: Naming in Python

Kirby Urner wrote: [ lots of fun and good stuff ] class Function: def __init__(self, f): self.f = lambda x: f(x) ... Here you missed a simplicity bet (one of my two big pet peeves): class Function: def __init__(self, f): self.f = f ... For the curiou

RE: [Edu-sig] re: Naming in Python

> From: Anna Ravenscroft [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > On Jan 30, 2005, at 18:25, Arthur wrote: > > > > > > >> -Original Message- > >> From: Kirby Urner [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > >> > >>> Maybe a break-out session on Wittgenstein at PyCon ;) > >>> > >>> Art > >> > >> Well, at least you a

RE: [Edu-sig] re: Naming in Python

> -Original Message- > From: Kirby Urner [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > Maybe a break-out session on Wittgenstein at PyCon ;) > > > > Art > > Well, at least you and I should talk, maybe over a beer. Beer. I'll have to try to remember my ID ;) Look forward to it. Art __

RE: [Edu-sig] re: Naming in Python

> Maybe a break-out session on Wittgenstein at PyCon ;) > > Art Well, at least you and I should talk, maybe over a beer. You should be aware that Wittgenstein came up with two different philosophies in his career. They're linked, but the 2nd is a radical departure, which Russell couldn't fathom

RE: [Edu-sig] re: Naming in Python

> -Original Message- > From: Kirby Urner [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Saturday, January 29, 2005 11:18 AM > To: 'Arthur'; edu-sig@python.org > Subject: RE: [Edu-sig] re: Naming in Python > > > Hi Art -- > > I've been thinking about

Re: [Edu-sig] re: Naming in Python

- Original Message - From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Saturday, January 29, 2005 2:55 pm Subject: Re: [Edu-sig] re: Naming in Python > > as long as the things all have a method named "quack", and not > caring what each thing is and what quack does in context for >

Re: [Edu-sig] re: Naming in Python

[ [EMAIL PROTECTED] ] --- | as long as the things all have a method named "quack", and not | caring what each thing is and what quack does in context for | any particular thing. | Happens, BTW, that I was accused on python list of not understandin

Re: [Edu-sig] re: Naming in Python

- Original Message - From: Rodrigo Dias Arruda Senra <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Saturday, January 29, 2005 2:11 pm Subject: Re: [Edu-sig] re: Naming in Python > Perhaps this is a duck typing style of defining what > an object *is*. Interesting that the discussion here

Re: [Edu-sig] re: Naming in Python

Rodrigo Dias Arruda Senra wrote: [ The Bauman Family <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> ] --- | Although everybody already knows this, I'm sure, a function actually is | a class, Hi Tim, I beg to differ with your statement above. A function is not a class. Maybe I

Re: [Edu-sig] re: Naming in Python

[ The Bauman Family <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> ] --- | Although everybody already knows this, I'm sure, a function actually is | a class, Hi Tim, I beg to differ with your statement above. A function is not a class. To prove this point follows: >>> d

Re: [Edu-sig] re: Naming in Python

Kirby Urner wrote: As for decorators, at the moment I'm having no problems with the new syntax. You may have seen that post on the calculus. I was gratified to discover that @ may be used to hand off the function that follows to a class (to some __init__ method), so long as what's returned is li

RE: [Edu-sig] re: Naming in Python

Hi Art -- I've been thinking about your observation, but haven't come up with a really coherent way to extend your thinking, in such a way that a prove I know what you mean. Per Wittgenstein (a philosopher I like, and his philo the focus another eGroup I post in), if you go 1, 12, 42 and I go 9

RE: [Edu-sig] re: Naming in Python

> I'll sink to commenting on my own post. Not the first time. > > Sobering up - I still think the observation has real substance. > > Though it is only an insight to the extent that it is non-obvious. I > guess > that depends on who you are and where you are coming from. > > It took me a while

[Edu-sig] re: Naming in Python

I wrote - >Any opinions as to whether the following is an insight, or the kind of >pseudo-incite I tend to realize I have had when I sober up in the morning? >That the "readability" of Python is built-in to the structure of the >language in a largely non-obvious way, and has little to do with whi