Andrew Berg, 19.05.2011 02:39:
On 2011.05.18 03:30 AM, Stefan Behnel wrote:
Well, it pretty clearly states that on the PyPI page, but I also added it
to the project home page now. lxml 2.3 works with any CPython version from
2.3 to 3.2.
Thank you. I never would've looked at PyPI for info on a p
On Wed, 18 May 2011 14:34:46 -0700, geremy condra
wrote:
: Systems can be designed that are absolutely secure under reasonable
: assumptions. The fact that it has assumptions does not make your
: statement true.
: (...)
: I can't tell if you're trying to play word games with the distinction
["Followup-To:" header set to comp.lang.python.]
On Wed, 18 May 2011 22:40:28 +0200, Raymond Wiker
wrote:
: I said tree operations, not tree walks. A tree operation might
: involve several tree walks.
OK. The original claim under dispute regarded tree walks.
:
On 5/4/2011 11:36 AM, Ethan Furman wrote:
Raymond Hettinger wrote:
I'm writing-up more guidance on how to use super() and would like to
point at some real-world Python examples of cooperative multiple
inheritance.
Multiple inheritance in Python is so badly designed that it
probably should n
On Tue, May 17, 2011 at 1:20 PM, VGNU Linux wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I am confused on which web framework to select for developing a small data
> driven web application. Application will have features generally found in
> now-a-days web application like security, database connectivity,
> authenticati
Littlefield, Tyler wrote:
I know about rate limiting and dos attacks, as well as some others, but
I think there's a lot more that I don't know--can someone kind of aim me
in the right direction for some of this? I want to be able to take
techniques, break my server and then fix it so that can't b
On 5/18/2011 9:42 AM, lkcl wrote:
he's got a good point, terry. breaking backwards-compatibility was a
completely mad and incomprehensible decision.
I see that I should take everything you (or Harris) say with a big grain
of salt;-). You just gave me a lecture about the impossibility of do
rusi wrote:
> On May 18, 5:09 pm, Peter Moylan
> wrote:
>> ObAUE: In common parlance, the English word "recursion" means pretty
>> much the same as what computing people call "iteration". This might be
>> the first time I have ever found a point of agreement with Xah Lee.
>
> Maybe the common us
On 2011.05.18 03:30 AM, Stefan Behnel wrote:
> Well, it pretty clearly states that on the PyPI page, but I also added it
> to the project home page now. lxml 2.3 works with any CPython version from
> 2.3 to 3.2.
Thank you. I never would've looked at PyPI for info on a project that
has its own sit
On Wed, 2011-05-18 at 15:48 -0400, D'Arcy J.M. Cain wrote:
> On Wed, 18 May 2011 12:06:07 -0700 (PDT)
> "tmac641...@yahoo.com" wrote:
> > HOW TO MAKE EASY MONEY FAST AND LEGALLY
>
> Wow! Was this stuck in someone's mail queue since 1992?
Me too!
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listi
2011/5/18 Ian Kelly :
> Ah, that's it. I was using Python 2.5. Using 2.7 I get the same
> result that you do.
>
> Still, it's a surprising change that doesn't seem to be documented as
> such. I'm not sure whether it's a regression or an intentional
> change.
I was wrong, it's more complicated t
2011/5/18 Rafael Durán Castañeda :
> Are you using python 2.x or 3.x? At python 2.7 using:
>
> import logging
> logging.getLogger('log').warning('test')
>
> I got:
>
> No handlers could be found for logger "log"
Ah, that's it. I was using Python 2.5. Using 2.7 I get the same
result that you do.
http://code.activestate.com/recipes/577703-item-properties/
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
On May 18, 11:10 pm, Ian Kelly wrote:
> It seems to work without any configuration just as well as the root logger:
>
> >>> importlogging
> >>>logging.getLogger('foo').warning('test')
>
> WARNING:foo:test
>
> Or am I misunderstanding you?
In general for Python 2.x, the code
import logging
loggi
On 19/05/11 00:10, Ian Kelly wrote:
2011/5/18 Rafael Durán Castañeda:
I think you are confuse because of you are looking at advanced logging,
where getLogger is being used. Simple logging works without any
configuration, getLogger doesn't.
It seems to work without any configuration just as well
2011/5/18 Rafael Durán Castañeda :
> I think you are confuse because of you are looking at advanced logging,
> where getLogger is being used. Simple logging works without any
> configuration, getLogger doesn't.
It seems to work without any configuration just as well as the root logger:
>>> import
On 5/18/2011 5:24 AM, lkcl wrote:
There seem to be two somewhat separate requirement issues: the
interpreter binary and the language version.
a) at the moment a http://python.org 2.N interpreter is required to
actually run the translator. if you use http://python.org 2.5 or 2.6
you do not
On 18/05/11 23:29, Ian Kelly wrote:
2011/5/18 Rafael Durán Castañeda:
That's not exactly how it works. You can use logging without any
configuration and the default output will be console. In addition default
logging level is warning, so:
logging.info("Some text")
won't show anything and
log
On Wed, May 18, 2011 at 11:26 AM, Littlefield, Tyler
wrote:
>>might be secure as long as attackers cannot, say:
> You forgot UFOs.
> Anyway, again, thanks to everyone for the advice, this is good reading.
> Incidentally, I don't know to much about security. I know about rate
> limiting and dos att
On Wed, May 18, 2011 at 12:56 PM, Hans Georg Schaathun
wrote:
> On Wed, 18 May 2011 12:07:49 -0700, geremy condra
> wrote:
> : I was playing around with an HSM the other day that had originally
> : targeted FIPS 140-3 level 5, complete with formal verification models
> : and active side-chan
2011/5/18 Rafael Durán Castañeda :
> That's not exactly how it works. You can use logging without any
> configuration and the default output will be console. In addition default
> logging level is warning, so:
>
> logging.info("Some text")
>
> won't show anything and
>
> logging.warning("Other tex
On 17/05/2011 23:20, Ian Kelly wrote:
On Tue, May 17, 2011 at 4:26 PM, Xah Lee wrote:
Though, if you think about it, it's not exactly a correct description.
“Recursive”, or “recursion”, refers to a particular type of algorithm,
or a implementation using that algorithm.
Only when used as progr
Xah Lee :
>In the emacs case: “Recursive delete of xx? (y or n) ”, what could it
>possibly mean by the word “recursive” there? Like, it might delete the
>directory but not delete all files in it?
My understanding is that non-recursive means, I think there are no (non-
empty?) subdirectories, or I
On 05/18/2011 02:50 AM, Harrison Hill wrote:
> Recursion: (N). See recursion.
The index of IBM's Document Composition Facility SCRIPT/VS Text
Programmer's Guide, Release 3.0 (form SH35-0069-2), put it thus:
> Circular definition
> See definition, circular
> definition
> circular 211
>
Hans Georg Schaathun writes:
> ["Followup-To:" header set to comp.lang.python.]
> On Wed, 18 May 2011 21:09:15 +0200, Raymond Wiker
>wrote:
> : > In the sense that the tree itself is a stack, yes. But if we
> : > consider the tree (or one of its branches) to be a stack, then
> : > the origin
Hans Georg Schaathun écrivit:
: also, in the rsync case: “This would recursively transfer all files
: from the directory … ”, what does the word “recursively” mean there?
Exactly the same as it does in «listing the directory recursively»
or «deleting the directory recursively».
Traversing r
On 5/17/2011 3:26 PM, Xah Lee wrote:
might be of interest.
〈English Idiom in Unix: Directory Recursively〉
http://xahlee.org/comp/idiom_directory_recursively.html
--
English Idiom in Unix: Directory Recursively
Xah Lee, 2011-05-17
Today, let's discuss so
["Followup-To:" header set to comp.lang.python.]
On Wed, 18 May 2011 21:09:15 +0200, Raymond Wiker
wrote:
: > In the sense that the tree itself is a stack, yes. But if we
: > consider the tree (or one of its branches) to be a stack, then
: > the original claim becomes a tautology.
:
: No
On Wed, 18 May 2011 12:07:49 -0700, geremy condra
wrote:
: I was playing around with an HSM the other day that had originally
: targeted FIPS 140-3 level 5, complete with formal verification models
: and active side-channel countermeasures. I'm quite confident that it
: was secure in nearly
On Wed, 18 May 2011 12:06:07 -0700 (PDT)
"tmac641...@yahoo.com" wrote:
> HOW TO MAKE EASY MONEY FAST AND LEGALLY
Wow! Was this stuck in someone's mail queue since 1992?
--
D'Arcy J.M. Cain | Democracy is three wolves
http://www.druid.net/darcy/| and a sheep v
On 18/05/11 03:09, Fei wrote:
On May 17, 6:55 pm, Ian Kelly wrote:
On Tue, May 17, 2011 at 2:55 PM, Fei wrote:
where is default logging file on Mac? I saw lots of app just import
logging, and begins to logging.info(...) etc. I'm not sure where to
look at the logging configuration to figure o
Hans Georg Schaathun writes:
> ["Followup-To:" header set to comp.lang.python.]
> On Wed, 18 May 2011 20:20:01 +0200, Raymond Wiker
>wrote:
> : I don't think anybody mentioned *binary* trees. The context was
> : directory traversal, in which case you would have nodes with an
> : arbitra
On Wed, May 18, 2011 at 10:33 AM, Hans Georg Schaathun
wrote:
> On Wed, 18 May 2011 09:54:30 -0700, geremy condra
> wrote:
> : On Wed, May 18, 2011 at 12:36 AM, Hans Georg Schaathun
> wrote:
> : > But then, nothing is secure in any absolute sense.
> :
> : If you're talking security and not
t...@sevak.isi.edu (Thomas A. Russ) writes:
> Well, unless you have a tree with backpointers, you have to keep the
> entire parent chain of nodes visited. Otherwise, you won't be able to
> find the parent node when you need to backtrack. A standard tree
> representation has only directional link
On Thu, May 19, 2011 at 4:26 AM, Littlefield, Tyler wrote:
>>might be secure as long as attackers cannot, say:
> You forgot UFOs.
> Anyway, again, thanks to everyone for the advice, this is good reading.
> Incidentally, I don't know to much about security. I know about rate
> limiting and dos atta
On Thu, May 19, 2011 at 4:20 AM, Raymond Wiker wrote:
>> You are right that I assumed parent pointers of some description;
>> but it does demonstrate that tree walks can be done iteratively,
>> without keeping a stack of any sort.
>
> Except that the chain of parent pointers *would* constit
["Followup-To:" header set to comp.lang.python.]
On Wed, 18 May 2011 20:20:01 +0200, Raymond Wiker
wrote:
: I don't think anybody mentioned *binary* trees. The context was
: directory traversal, in which case you would have nodes with an
: arbitrary (almost) number of children.
If we ar
On Thu, May 19, 2011 at 4:31 AM, Dotan Cohen wrote:
> The python code should not be concerned with DDoS, that is what
> iptables is for. Remember, never do in code what Linux will do for
> you.
In general, yes. Denial of service is a fairly broad term, though, and
if there's a computationally-exp
On Wed, May 18, 2011 at 20:24, Chris Angelico wrote:
> Denial of service attacks are the hardest to truly defend against, and
> if your level of business is low enough, you can probably ignore them
> in your code, and deal with them by human ("Hmm, we seem to be getting
> ridiculous amounts of tra
On Wed, May 18, 2011 at 20:24, Chris Angelico wrote:
> But you CAN make a system 100% secure against network-based
> attacks.
>
Only by unplugging the network cable. This is called an air gap, and
is common in military installations. Anything with a cable plugged in
is hackable.
--
Dotan Cohen
>might be secure as long as attackers cannot, say:
You forgot UFOs.
Anyway, again, thanks to everyone for the advice, this is good reading.
Incidentally, I don't know to much about security. I know about rate
limiting and dos attacks, as well as some others, but I think there's a
lot more that
Hans Georg Schaathun writes:
> ["Followup-To:" header set to comp.lang.python.]
> On 18 May 2011 09:16:26 -0700, Thomas A. Russ
>wrote:
> : Well, unless you have a tree with backpointers, you have to keep the
> : entire parent chain of nodes visited. Otherwise, you won't be able to
> : fi
On Thu, May 19, 2011 at 2:16 AM, Thomas A. Russ wrote:
> Well, unless you have a tree with backpointers, you have to keep the
> entire parent chain of nodes visited. Otherwise, you won't be able to
> find the parent node when you need to backtrack. A standard tree
> representation has only direc
["Followup-To:" header set to comp.lang.python.]
On 18 May 2011 09:16:26 -0700, Thomas A. Russ
wrote:
: Well, unless you have a tree with backpointers, you have to keep the
: entire parent chain of nodes visited. Otherwise, you won't be able to
: find the parent node when you need to backtra
On Thu, May 19, 2011 at 3:40 AM, geremy condra wrote:
> Just a note: you can do many cool things to prevent the last from
> working, assuming you're talking about RSA fault injection attacks.
Sure. Each of those caveats can be modified in various ways; keeping
checksums of everything in memory, e
Harrison Hill wrote:
> No need - I have the Dictionary definition of recursion here:
>
> Recursion: (N). See recursion.
If you tell a joke, you have to tell it right.
Recursion: (N). See recursion. See also tail recursion.
Victor.
--
Victor Eijkhout -- eijkhout at tacc utexas edu
--
http://
Hans Georg Schaathun writes:
> ["Followup-To:" header set to comp.lang.python.]
> On 17 May 2011 23:42:20 -0700, Thomas A. Russ
>wrote:
> : Tree walks are the canonical example of what can't be done in an
> : iterative fashion without the addition of an explicitly managed stack
>
> Of cour
On Thu, May 19, 2011 at 3:31 AM, John Bokma wrote:
>> Agreed. Things can be secure if you accept caveats. A good server
>> might be secure as long as attackers cannot, say:
>> * Get physical access to the server, remove the hard disk, and tamper with it
>> * Hold a gun to the developer and say "Lo
On Wed, May 18, 2011 at 10:24 AM, Chris Angelico wrote:
> On Thu, May 19, 2011 at 2:54 AM, geremy condra wrote:
>> On Wed, May 18, 2011 at 12:36 AM, Hans Georg Schaathun
>> wrote:
>>> But then, nothing is secure in any absolute sense.
>>
>> If you're talking security and not philosophy, there i
Chris Angelico writes:
> On Thu, May 19, 2011 at 2:54 AM, geremy condra wrote:
>> On Wed, May 18, 2011 at 12:36 AM, Hans Georg Schaathun
>> wrote:
>>> But then, nothing is secure in any absolute sense.
>>
>> If you're talking security and not philosophy, there is such a thing
>> as a secure sy
On Wed, 18 May 2011 09:54:30 -0700, geremy condra
wrote:
: On Wed, May 18, 2011 at 12:36 AM, Hans Georg Schaathun
wrote:
: > But then, nothing is secure in any absolute sense.
:
: If you're talking security and not philosophy, there is such a thing
: as a secure system. As a developer you
On Thu, May 19, 2011 at 2:54 AM, geremy condra wrote:
> On Wed, May 18, 2011 at 12:36 AM, Hans Georg Schaathun
> wrote:
>> But then, nothing is secure in any absolute sense.
>
> If you're talking security and not philosophy, there is such a thing
> as a secure system. As a developer you should a
On Wed, May 18, 2011 at 12:36 AM, Hans Georg Schaathun
wrote:
> On Mon, 16 May 2011 23:42:40 +0100, Rhodri James
> wrote:
> : ...which is, of course, not exactly secure either. A sufficiently
> : determined hacker won't have much trouble disassembling a shared library
> : even if you do str
Ian Kelly wrote:
On Tue, May 17, 2011 at 2:20 PM, Ethan Furman wrote:
The big question, though, is would you do it this way:
some_var = bytes(23).replace(b'\x00', b'a')
or this way?
some_var = bytes(b'a' * 23)
Actually, I would just do it this way:
some_var = b'a' * 23
That's already a b
QOTW: "When did we come to the idea that people should be able to
program in
a language without actually learning it? The fact that Python comes
so close
to that possibility is nothing short of revolutionary. I suppose one
day a
reasoning android will be able to sit down at the terminal of a sta
On Wed, May 18, 2011 at 9:15 AM, rusi wrote:
>> What you're failing to explain is why you would consider that function
>> to be recursive from a programming standpoint.
>
> As for putting + under the format of primitive recursion, it would go
> something like this (I guess)
>
> Matching up that de
On May 18, 7:27 pm, RJB wrote:
> Thank you! Very cool and clear. I
> hoped that there was something that Python made natural I couldn't see
> after 50 years in other languages.
>
> I'd like to work on combining both approaches. It may take a while...
>From the Knuth identity F[n+m] = ..
you p
On May 18, 7:32 pm, Ian Kelly wrote:
> On Wed, May 18, 2011 at 1:10 AM, rusi wrote:
> >> Um, it is. Consider the simple function (lambda x, y: x + y).
> >> Mathematically, this function is recursive. Algorithmically, it is
> >> not. Do you disagree?
>
> > See the definition of primitive recurs
On Wed, May 18, 2011 at 10:36, Hans Georg Schaathun wrote:
> But then, nothing is secure in any absolute sense. The best you can
> do with all your security efforts is to manage risk. Since obfuscation
> increases the cost of mounting an attack, it also reduces risk,
> and thereby provides some
On Wed, May 18, 2011 at 1:10 AM, rusi wrote:
>> Um, it is. Consider the simple function (lambda x, y: x + y).
>> Mathematically, this function is recursive. Algorithmically, it is
>> not. Do you disagree?
>
> See the definition of primitive recursion eg.
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Primiti
On May 17, 9:36 am, rusi wrote:
> On May 17, 8:50 pm, RJB wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > I noticed some discussion of recursion. the trick is to find a
> > formula where the arguments are divided, not decremented.
> > I've had a "divide-and-conquer" recursion for the Fibonacci numbers
> > for a couple
On May 18, 9:28 am, Christoph Scheingraber
wrote:
> On 2011-05-15, Miki Tebeka wrote:
>
> > Why not just catch KeyboardInterrupt?
>
> Would it be possible to continue my program as nothing had happened in
> that case (like I did before, setting a flag to tell main() to finish the
> running data d
On Wed, 2011-05-18 at 13:39 +0100, Stuart MacKay wrote:
> If you were required to answer the question then asking the poster to
> phrase it better is going to help solve the issue faster but for a
> mailing list like this simply ignore it.
Which is what I've done.
--
http://mail.python.org/ma
On May 17, 5:38 pm, harrismh777 wrote:
> is recompiled everything still works... not so in Python. The fact that
> Python is free to morph gleely from PEP to PEP without responsibility or
> accountability with the user base is what may kill Python, unless the
> Python community gets a grip on thi
On May 18, 10:24 am, lkcl wrote:
> > > otherwise please - really: just saying "give me support for python
> > > 3.x or else" is ...
>
> > And I did not say that.
>
> yeah i know - i'm sorry: it just, with a little bit of "twisting",
> could be construed as implying that.
in case it wasn't cl
On 2011-05-15, Miki Tebeka wrote:
> Why not just catch KeyboardInterrupt?
Would it be possible to continue my program as nothing had happened in
that case (like I did before, setting a flag to tell main() to finish the
running data download and quit instead of starting the next data download
{it'
On 18/05/2011 12:47, Albert Hopkins wrote:
On Tue, 2011-05-17 at 21:46 -0300, Gabriel Genellina wrote:
En Tue, 17 May 2011 16:48:29 -0300, Albert Hopkins
escribió:
On Tue, 2011-05-17 at 10:18 -0600, Littlefield, Tyler wrote
Not to be pedantic or anything, and I may not be able to help
regard
On May 18, 5:09 pm, Peter Moylan
wrote:
>
> ObAUE: In common parlance, the English word "recursion" means pretty
> much the same as what computing people call "iteration". This might be
> the first time I have ever found a point of agreement with Xah Lee.
Maybe the common usage mirrors the facts
Harrison Hill wrote:
> On May 18, 7:06 am, rusi wrote:
>> I could continue down 2,3,4 but really it may be worthwhile if the
>> arguers first read the wikipedia disambiguation pages on recursion...
>
> No need - I have the Dictionary definition of recursion here:
>
> Recursion: (N). See recursi
Thomas A. Russ wrote:
> "Pascal J. Bourguignon" writes:
>
>> Roland Hutchinson writes:
>
>>> Tail recursion can always be turned into an iteration when it is
>>> executed.
>> All recursions can be turned into iterations, before execution.
>
> True, but only by simulating the call stack in t
On Tue, 2011-05-17 at 21:46 -0300, Gabriel Genellina wrote:
> En Tue, 17 May 2011 16:48:29 -0300, Albert Hopkins
> escribió:
> > On Tue, 2011-05-17 at 10:18 -0600, Littlefield, Tyler wrote:
>
> >> Not to be pedantic or anything, and I may not be able to help
> >> regardless, but it looks like you
On May 18, 12:41 pm, rusi wrote:
> On May 18, 12:05 pm, Sebastien Douche wrote:
>
> > On Thu, May 12, 2011 at 17:27, Jorge Romero
> > wrote:
> > > I tried Googling about Python 2.7 on Debian Squeeze, but did not find
> > > anything but discussions -.-. Anyone out there that can point me some
>
On May 18, 6:29 am, harrismh777 wrote:
> Terry Reedy wrote:
>
> > No, because I think you are exaggerating. That said, I think core
> > Python is pretty close to 'complete' and I would not mind further syntax
> > freezes like the one for 3.2.
>
> I am exaggerating only to the extent that someone
Xah Lee :
>For example, when you want to delete the whole dir in emacs, it
>prompts this message: “Recursive delete of xx? (y or n) ”.
AFAICS what emacs calls "recursive delete" is what the ordinary person
would simply call "delete". Presumably the non-recursive delete is
called simply "delete" bu
On May 18, 2:33 am, Terry Reedy wrote:
> On 5/17/2011 12:07 PM, lkcl wrote:
>
> > On May 4, 7:37 pm, Terry Reedy wrote:
> >> On 5/4/2011 10:06 AM, Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton wrote:
> >>> pyjamasis a suite of projects, including a python-to-javascript
> >>> compiler
> >> As you well know, there
Andrew Berg, 17.05.2011 03:05:
lxml looks promising, but it doesn't say anywhere whether it'll work on
Python 3 or not
Well, it pretty clearly states that on the PyPI page, but I also added it
to the project home page now. lxml 2.3 works with any CPython version from
2.3 to 3.2.
Stefan
--
["Followup-To:" header set to comp.lang.python.]
On 17 May 2011 23:42:20 -0700, Thomas A. Russ
wrote:
: Tree walks are the canonical example of what can't be done in an
: iterative fashion without the addition of an explicitly managed stack
Of course you can do it. It isn't nice, but it is p
Hans Georg Schaathun writes:
> On Unix, the directory is just a file, listing other files by name
> and disk location. Then it is perfectly natural (although very
> rarely smart) to delete a directory without any concequences to the
> contents.
Ironically, the only unix I know of where this m
On Tue, 17 May 2011 15:26:42 -0700 (PDT), Xah Lee
wrote:
: If you look at Windows or Mac OS X world, i don't think they ever
: refer to dealing with whole dir as “recursive” in user interface.
That's purely due to a difference in the level of abstraction.
Mac OS introduced its own vocabulary
On May 18, 3:31 am, "Ori L." wrote:
> See here for a workaround:https://bugs.launchpad.net/ipython/+bug/290228
>
> First result on Google for the query "ipython emacs windows", BTW.
Thanks -- I did find that before asking.
That link starts by recommending a small change (add -i flag) to
ipython.
"Pascal J. Bourguignon" writes:
> Roland Hutchinson writes:
> > Tail recursion can always be turned into an iteration when it is
> > executed.
>
> All recursions can be turned into iterations, before execution.
True, but only by simulating the call stack in the iterative code. To
my mind
On May 18, 12:05 pm, Sebastien Douche wrote:
> On Thu, May 12, 2011 at 17:27, Jorge Romero wrote:
> > I tried Googling about Python 2.7 on Debian Squeeze, but did not find
> > anything but discussions -.-. Anyone out there that can point me some
> > helpful material or anyone who had luck running
On Mon, 16 May 2011 23:42:40 +0100, Rhodri James
wrote:
: ...which is, of course, not exactly secure either. A sufficiently
: determined hacker won't have much trouble disassembling a shared library
: even if you do strip out all the debug information. By chance I'm having
: to do so
On May 18, 11:50 am, Harrison Hill wrote:
> Rusi wrote
> > I could continue down 2,3,4 but really it may be worthwhile if the
> > arguers first read the wikipedia disambiguation pages on recursion...
>
> No need - I have the Dictionary definition of recursion here:
>
> Recursion: (N). See recursio
On May 18, 11:58 am, Ian Kelly wrote:
> On Wed, May 18, 2011 at 12:06 AM, rusi wrote:
> > 4. Recursion in 'recursion theory' aka 'computability theory' is
> > somehow different from recursion in programming.
>
> Um, it is. Consider the simple function (lambda x, y: x + y).
> Mathematically, this
On Thu, May 12, 2011 at 17:27, Jorge Romero wrote:
> I tried Googling about Python 2.7 on Debian Squeeze, but did not find
> anything but discussions -.-. Anyone out there that can point me some
> helpful material or anyone who had luck running 2.7 on Debian?
I use pythonbrew :
http://pypi.pytho
On Wed, May 18, 2011 at 12:06 AM, rusi wrote:
> 4. Recursion in 'recursion theory' aka 'computability theory' is
> somehow different from recursion in programming.
Um, it is. Consider the simple function (lambda x, y: x + y).
Mathematically, this function is recursive. Algorithmically, it is
no
http://trisha4uuu.blogspot.com/2011/01/mumaith-khan-wall-papers.html
mumaith khan wallpapers and photos and pictures watch and enjoy
Mumaith Khan
Includes mumaith khan photos, mumaith khan gossip, mumaith khan
biography, mumaith khan wallpapers, mumaith khan filmography, mumaith
khan videos, muma
88 matches
Mail list logo
