On 2024-04-01 12:35, Joel Goldstick via Python-list wrote:
On Mon, Apr 1, 2024 at 1:26 PM Piergiorgio Sartor via Python-list
^^^
from math import *
a = 2
b = 3
print( a * b )
I guess the operator "*" can be imported from any module... :-)
No import is necessary.
Of
On 2023-11-07 08:40, Grant Edwards via Python-list wrote:
If you, as a web developer, want the user to enter a text-message
capable phone number, then ASK FOR THAT!
And you may as well ask if they even want you to send texts whether they
can technically receive them or not.
--
D'Arcy J.M.
On 2023-11-05 06:48, Jon Ribbens via Python-list wrote:
Sometimes I think that these sorts of stupid, wrong, validation are the
fault of idiot managers. When it's apostrophes though I'm suspicious
that it may be idiot programmers who don't know how to prevent SQL
injection attacks without just
On 2023-11-05 00:39, Grant Edwards via Python-list wrote:
Definitely. Syntactic e-mail address "validation" is one of the most
useless and widely broken things on the Interwebs. People who do
anything other than require an '@' (and optionally make you enter the
same @-containing string twice)
On 2023-11-02 00:18, AVI GROSS via Python-list wrote:
Yes, it would be nice if there was a syntax for sending a test message sort
of like an ACK that is not delivered to the recipient but merely results in
some status being sent back such as DELIVERABLE or NO SUCH USER or even
MAILBOX FULL.
It
On 2023-11-02 02:04, Chris Angelico via Python-list wrote:
On Thu, 2 Nov 2023 at 15:20, AVI GROSS via Python-list
wrote:
Yes, it would be nice if there was a syntax for sending a test message sort
of like an ACK that is not delivered to the recipient but merely results in
some status being
On 2023-11-01 17:17, Chris Angelico via Python-list wrote:
On Thu, 2 Nov 2023 at 08:09, Grant Edwards via Python-list
wrote:
Make sure it has an '@' in it. Possibly require at least one '.'
after the '@'.
No guarantee that there'll be a dot after the at. (Technically there's
no guarantee of
