Guido wrote:
I honestly and strongly believe that we should do nothing here. Python
> thrives because it is relatively simple. Adding new syntax to deal with
> looping special cases makes it less simple, and encourages a bad coding
> style (nested loops, multiple breaks...).
>
I agree with about
On 2020-07-29 at 07:09:05 -0700,
Guido van Rossum wrote:
> I honestly and strongly believe that we should do nothing here. Python
> thrives because it is relatively simple. Adding new syntax to deal
> with looping special cases makes it less simple, and encourages a bad
> coding style (nested loo
.iloc[] is the Pandas function for accessing by integer-location:
https://pandas.pydata.org/pandas-docs/stable/reference/api/pandas.DataFrame.iloc.html
"""
Purely integer-location based indexing for selection by position.
.iloc[] is primarily integer position based (from 0 to length-1 of the
axi
Jonathan Fine writes:
> Here's a baby example - searching in a nested loop. Suppose we're
> looking for the word 'apple' in a collection of books. Once we've
> found it, we stop.
While I was writing a reply, several people replied with very similar
comments, so I won't repeat them. But these
On Wed, Jul 29, 2020 at 07:01 Mathew Elman wrote:
>
>
> On Wed, 29 Jul 2020 at 14:42, Guido van Rossum wrote:
>
>> On Wed, Jul 29, 2020 at 02:51 Mathew Elman
>> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> .
>>>
If it *is* useful, it occurs to me that (1) this looks a lot like the
try ... except ... pattern, an
On Wed, 29 Jul 2020 at 14:42, Guido van Rossum wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 29, 2020 at 02:51 Mathew Elman wrote:
>
>>
>> .
>>
>>> If it *is* useful, it occurs to me that (1) this looks a lot like the
>>> try ... except ... pattern, and (2) breaks are generally perceived as
>>> exceptional exits from a
On 7/28/20 10:30 PM, Rob Cliffe via Python-ideas wrote:
A possible, unrelated, future language extension is to allow breaking
out of more than one loop at a time.
I would think that
break
would handle that situation.
--
~Ethan~
___
Python-ide
On 29.07.20 13:33, Jonathan Fine wrote:
Thank you all, particularly Guido, for your contributions. Having some
examples will help support the exploration of this idea.
Here's a baby example - searching in a nested loop. Suppose we're
looking for the word 'apple' in a collection of books. Once w
On Wed, Jul 29, 2020 at 02:51 Mathew Elman wrote:
>
> .
>
>> If it *is* useful, it occurs to me that (1) this looks a lot like the
>> try ... except ... pattern, and (2) breaks are generally perceived as
>> exceptional exits from a loop. Instead of "if break [LABEL]", "except
>> [LABEL]" might w
Thank you all, particularly Guido, for your contributions. Having some
examples will help support the exploration of this idea.
Here's a baby example - searching in a nested loop. Suppose we're looking
for the word 'apple' in a collection of books. Once we've found it, we stop.
for book in bo
On 2020-07-29 at 14:26:25 +0900,
"Stephen J. Turnbull" wrote:
> 2qdxy4rzwzuui...@potatochowder.com writes:
>
> > in order to foil suck attacks.
>
> Typo of the Year candidate! (It was a typo, right?)
Call it a Freudian slip of the fingers.
___
Pyth
.
> If it *is* useful, it occurs to me that (1) this looks a lot like the
> try ... except ... pattern, and (2) breaks are generally perceived as
> exceptional exits from a loop. Instead of "if break [LABEL]", "except
> [LABEL]" might work, although the semantic difference between labels
> and ex
On Wed, 29 Jul 2020 at 06:41, Inada Naoki wrote:
> FWIW, I optimized dict(d) in https://bugs.python.org/issue41431
> (https://github.com/python/cpython/pull/21674 )
> [...] 4.76x faster (-79%)
>
Great!
On Wed, 29 Jul 2020 at 06:41, Inada Naoki wrote:
> On Sun, Jul 26, 2020 at 4:44 AM Marco Su
13 matches
Mail list logo
