Change by Nicko van Someren :
--
keywords: +patch
pull_requests: +29903
stage: -> patch review
pull_request: https://github.com/python/cpython/pull/31802
___
Python tracker
<https://bugs.python.org/issu
New submission from Nicko van Someren :
Objects/typeobject.c uses slots to implement various operators and the IBSLOT
macro is used to define slot entries for in-place binary operators. This macro
creates a __doc__ string for the operators of the form "Return selfvalue."
This
On Jan 24, 9:26 pm, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
If you really have a 2GB file and only 2GB of RAM, I suggest that you don't
hold your breath.
I am limited with resources. Unfortunately.
As long as you have at least as much disc space spare as you need to
hold a copy of the file then this is
in range(1,n+1 if n
= 0 else None
If you don't like the rounding errors you could try:
def fact(n):
d = {p:1L}
def f(i): d[p] *= i
map(f, range(1,n+1))
return d[p]
It is left as an exercise to the reader as to why this code will not
work on Py3K
Nicko
On Aug 30, 7:00 pm, Steve Holden [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
You can also generate the files that are in one directory but ot the
other with
(afiles | bfiles) - (afiles bfiles)
Or just (afiles ^ bfiles).
Nicko
--
(lambda f: lambda *a:f(f,*a))(
lambda f,l,i:l[i][1]+f(f,l,l[i][0]) if l
Jim wrote:
I have an application that will maintain an in-memory database in the
form of a list of lists. Does anyone know of a way to search for and
retreive records from such a structure?
The answer very much depends on the manner in which you want to do the
look-up. If you only need to do
On Apr 10, 1:10 pm, Nicko [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
If you expect to do exact-match look-up where the keys are not unique
then build a dictionary containing 'set' objects which are the sets of
records which have the given key. This lets you neatly find the
intersection of selections on multiple
On Feb 2, 4:21 pm, Bart Ogryczak [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Feb 1, 2:00 pm, Nicko [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
precision and the answer that they were looking for was:
a = (b * 045L) 32
Note that the constant there is in octal.
045L? Shouldn´t it be 044
)
approximation of 1/7 but the principle is the same as the solution I
proposed above.
Nicko
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
.
Nicko
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
= addThreeThings(aaa, bbb, ccc)
I note that in both of those tests you didn't actually ever realise the
concatenated string. Can you give us figures for these tests having
forced the concatenated string to be computed?
Cheers,
Nicko
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Steve Holden wrote:
Nicko wrote:
Fredrik Lundh wrote:
if you cannot refrain from pulling arguments out of your ass, you not
really the right person to talk about hygiene.
I'm impressed but your mature argument. Clearly, in the face of such
compelling reasoning, I shall have to concede
Fredrik Lundh wrote:
Nicko wrote:
... In the case of the idiom for i in
range(x):... there absolutely no utility whatsoever in creating and
recording the list of objects.
for short lists, both objects create the *same* number of objects.
This is true for long lists too, if you iterate
is tiny
anyway. On any substantial loop it is quite a bit slower and has been
since python 2.3
Nicko
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
. If you log in using telnet,
and have to enter passwords that allow configurations to be changed,
then anyone on the local net can get those passwords. Use SSH instead.
Even SSH with passwords is hugely more secure than telnet.
Nicko
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
15 matches
Mail list logo
