I actually really like the method-on-function-object syntax. +1, for
what it's worth from someone like me.
2018-08-10 0:46 GMT+02:00 Neil Girdhar :
> I prefer partial since many programmers studied computer science, and also
> it makes the concepts easier to google.
>
> Anyway, I don't actually wa
edu-sig may be a good list for such a discussion; though you may find more
information on Python lessons aligned with CS/Science curriculum standards
than professional certification.
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/edu-sig
> This list is for discussion of Python in education, however (at
On Thu, Aug 09, 2018 at 06:40:23PM +0100, Jonathan Fine wrote:
> Hi Oleg
>
> You wrote
>
> >In what way certification programs are related to documentation,
> > especially to the tutorial?
>
> One way is through syllabus. Necessarily, a certification via exam
> requires a syllabus (or a cour
On Thu, Aug 9, 2018 at 10:40 AM, Jonathan Fine wrote:
> There is, implicitly, a
> syllabus in https://docs.python.org/3/tutorial/.
>
The tutorial, is, well, a tutorial, it is by no means a complete course of
study. So no, I don't think it's an appropriate place to start to develop a
certificati
I prefer partial since many programmers studied computer science, and also
it makes the concepts easier to google.
Anyway, I don't actually want either a partial member nor new syntax for
this, but if I had to choose, I'd choose no new syntax.
On Thu, Aug 9, 2018 at 2:32 PM Abe Dillon wrote:
>
I'd like to push for the less jargon-y `func.given()` version if this gains
traction. Not only is it shorter, it's a much more common term with a clear
meaning. Words like 'partial', 'curry', 'lambda', and 'closure' are fine
for text books, published papers, and technical discussion, but I think
th
Hi Oleg
You wrote
>In what way certification programs are related to documentation,
> especially to the tutorial?
One way is through syllabus. Necessarily, a certification via exam
requires a syllabus (or a course of study). There is, implicitly, a
syllabus in https://docs.python.org/3/tutor
That's a nicer solution to me.
On Thu, Aug 9, 2018 at 1:00 PM Michel Desmoulin
wrote:
> I'd rather have functools.partial() to be added as a new method on
> function objects.
>
> >
> > fromfunctools importpartial
> >
> >
> > def add(x:int,y:int)->int:
> > returnx +y
> >
> >
> > add_2 = parti
Adding one operator is hard in Python.
Adding 4 operators, just for the sake of a bit of syntaxic suggar for
DSL based projects is never going to fly.
And I say that as a long time SQLA user.
Le 03/08/2018 à 19:46, Todd a écrit :
> Coming back to the previous discussion about a new set of overlo
On Thu, Aug 09, 2018 at 05:42:58PM +0100, Jonathan Fine
wrote:
> Python's excellent documentation, including
> https://docs.python.org/3/tutorial/, is in my opinion part of the
> language. I'm in favour of discussing Patrick's question here, so that
> we can perhaps develop something of value tha
I'd rather have functools.partial() to be added as a new method on
function objects.
>
> fromfunctools importpartial
>
>
> def add(x:int,y:int)->int:
> returnx +y
>
>
> add_2 = partial(add,2)
>
Would become:
add_2 = add.partial(2)
Nothing to change on the parser, no obscure syntax for futur
Hi Patrick and Oleg
Thank you, respectively, for a good question and a helpful response.
Patrick asks:
> Does anyone know of any PSF approved training or certifications for Python
> developers?
Oleg writes:
> The python-ideas list is for discussing more speculative design ideas of
> Python t
Hi!
On Thu, Aug 09, 2018 at 03:56:29PM +0100, Patrick Morris
wrote:
> Hi all
>
> I know this might be a contentious question but ...
>
> Does anyone know of any PSF approved training or certifications for Python
> developers?
>
> There is this 10 year old page
> https://wiki.python.org/psf/Ce
Hi all
I know this might be a contentious question but ...
Does anyone know of any PSF approved training or certifications for
Python developers?
There is this 10 year old page
https://wiki.python.org/psf/Certification%20Proposal but I dont see any
evidence that this was ever progressed pas
On Wed, Aug 8, 2018 at 5:09 AM Paul Moore wrote:
> This strikes me as *absolutely* something that should be promoted
> outside of the stdlib, as a 3rd party project, and once it's
> established as a commonly used and accepted standard, only then
> propose that the stdlib offer support for it (if
> On 8 Aug 2018, at 12:08, Victor Porton wrote:
>
>> On 08/08/18 12:25, Barry Scott wrote:
>>> On Tuesday, 7 August 2018 22:57:51 BST Victor Porton wrote:
>>> This is an idea of a new PEP.
>>>
>>> I propose to create a portable file format which will list command line
>>> options to run Pytho
16 matches
Mail list logo
