On 02/03/2022 20:03, David Mertz, Ph.D. wrote:
I really am shocked by how many people seem to have broken ENTER keys
on their keyboards.
You mock. (As far as I remember you have always opposed new language
features/changes. Correct me if I am wrong.)
But the proposal would give people the c
On 02/03/2022 20:03, David Mertz, Ph.D. wrote:
I really am shocked by how many people seem to have broken ENTER keys
on their keyboards.
You mock. (As far as I remember you are always opposed to new language
features/changes.)
But the proposal would give people the choice of
Saving a lev
I have had precisely the same idea.
It feels better to make this feature general (if introduced at all) than
make it specific to 'for' + 'if'.
I think there would have to be a rule that any 'if' that appeared on a
line with other suite-introducing-statements could not have a
corresponding 'else
On Wed, Mar 02, 2022 at 09:25:01AM -0500, Ricky Teachey wrote:
> Is there some opportunity for some kind of compiler magic when the iterable
> of a for loop is fully contained in a place easily findable by the
> compiler, and not spread over multiple if and for statements?
I am not an expert on c
On Tue, Mar 1, 2022 at 4:51 PM Steven D'Aprano wrote:
> Then Python is the wrong language for you, because it uses exceptions to
> direct control flow *wink*
>
> The iteration protocol uses StopIteration to end iteration. The older
> sequence protocol uses IndexError for the same purpose.
>
I th
I really am shocked by how many people seem to have broken ENTER keys on
their keyboards.
Let's just keep Python readable rather than see how much we can cram on a
line.
On Wed, Mar 2, 2022, 2:56 PM Jeremiah Paige wrote:
> I have on a few occasions wanted a for..in..if statement and if it exist
I have on a few occasions wanted a for..in..if statement and if it existed
would
have used it. However, I agree that the level of change a new statement type
brings to the language is probably too high for this feature.
But what if python lifted the newline requirement for blocks that contain
comp
On Thu, 3 Mar 2022 at 01:28, Ricky Teachey wrote:
>
> I think I'm -0.5 but I have a question for the people on here smarter than me
> (pretty much all):
>
> Is there some opportunity for some kind of compiler magic when the iterable
> of a for loop is fully contained in a place easily findable b
On Wed, Mar 2, 2022 at 2:25 AM Steven D'Aprano wrote:
> > I think it's really the equivalent of
> >
> > for x in y:
> > if not x in c:
> > break
> > do_stuff
> >
> > which to me give the proposed syntax a bit more relative strength.
>
> Forgotten the difference between continue an
> On 2 Mar 2022, at 13:40, Davis, Matthew via Python-ideas
> wrote:
>
>
> Hi,
>
> Currently shutil.copyfileobj returns nothing.
> I would like to be able to find out how many bytes were copied.
>
> Whilst most file-like objects have a .tell() which you could use, some don’t,
> and .tell()
I think I'm -0.5 but I have a question for the people on here smarter than
me (pretty much all):
Is there some opportunity for some kind of compiler magic when the iterable
of a for loop is fully contained in a place easily findable by the
compiler, and not spread over multiple if and for statemen
On several functional languages that allow function invocations without
enclosing arguments in parentheses all functions take a single argument.
For multiple arguments the single argument is a tuple. For no arguments the
single argument is an empty tuple.
I've read the comments and I see more fear
Hi,
Currently shutil.copyfileobj returns nothing.
I would like to be able to find out how many bytes were copied.
Whilst most file-like objects have a .tell() which you could use, some don’t,
and .tell() is not guaranteed to measure the number of bytes, it could measure
with other units.
I don
I've heard "evaluation map" for a related mathematical concept: the natural map
from X to (X -> Y) -> Y in some cartesian closed category (whatever that means
:-), like the natural embedding of a vector space into its double dual space,
or like this sort of eval_at function that you can then plu
On Wed, 2 Mar 2022 at 10:27, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
> Off-topic, but since you raised the issue... is there a standard
> functional programming term for a variant of map() that applies a single
> argument to a series of different functions?
>
> # regular map
> map(func, list_of_args) # (
On Tue, Mar 01, 2022 at 09:27:05PM -0800, Christopher Barker wrote:
> I think it's really the equivalent of
>
> for x in y:
> if not x in c:
> break
> do_stuff
>
> which to me give the proposed syntax a bit more relative strength.
Forgotten the difference between continue and br
On Wed, Mar 02, 2022 at 05:01:38PM +0900, Stephen J. Turnbull wrote:
> My 63-year-old eyes struggle with 80-character lines, but in all
> fairness to those with better eyesight I'm not going to argue for
> Mom's 65[1].
This is a very good point that the "80 columns is too short" crowd
forget. 80
Michael Smith writes:
> This is just a small improvement, but worthwhile. It's intuitive IMO to be
> able to use similar filtering expressions to comprehensions at the top of a
> for loop.
Intuitive I guess, but in comprehensions it was "strictly from need"
since comprehension syntax is an exp
18 matches
Mail list logo
