On 2019-07-29 03:59, Cameron Simpson wrote:
On 29Jul2019 10:15, Chris Angelico wrote:
On Mon, Jul 29, 2019 at 10:06 AM Richard Damon wrote:
When talking of empty strings, we need to look a bit at context. "The
empty string" implies that there is only one of them, and if we are
talking about
On 29Jul2019 10:15, Chris Angelico wrote:
On Mon, Jul 29, 2019 at 10:06 AM Richard Damon wrote:
When talking of empty strings, we need to look a bit at context. "The
empty string" implies that there is only one of them, and if we are
talking about values, then there is only one empty string v
On 28Jul2019 20:11, Richard Damon wrote:
On 7/28/19 11:13 AM, MRAB wrote:
On 2019-07-28 13:30, Cameron Simpson wrote:
The collection is "the things". "all" qualifies it, versus, say,
"some of the things" or "the first of the things" etc.
[snip]
It's strange that "all the things" (meaning "a
On Mon, Jul 29, 2019 at 10:06 AM Richard Damon wrote:
> When talking of empty strings, we need to look a bit at context. "The
> empty string" implies that there is only one of them, and if we are
> talking about values, then there is only one empty string values, so
> "The empty string value" wou
On 7/28/19 11:13 AM, MRAB wrote:
> On 2019-07-28 13:30, Cameron Simpson wrote:
>>
>> The collection is "the things". "all" qualifies it, versus, say, "some
>> of the things" or "the first of the things" etc.
>>
> [snip]
>
> It's strange that "all the things" (meaning "all of the things") is
> OK, b
On 7/28/19 7:04 PM, Chris Angelico wrote:
> On Sun, Jul 28, 2019 at 5:36 PM Marko Rauhamaa wrote:
>> So it depends on the context if the relevant equivalence is "is" or
>> "==". Maybe the rule of thumb is that if we are talking about strings,
>> integers and similar things, we should think about i
On 2019-07-29 00:04, Chris Angelico wrote:
On Sun, Jul 28, 2019 at 5:36 PM Marko Rauhamaa wrote:
So it depends on the context if the relevant equivalence is "is" or
"==". Maybe the rule of thumb is that if we are talking about strings,
integers and similar things, we should think about it from
On Sun, Jul 28, 2019 at 5:36 PM Marko Rauhamaa wrote:
> So it depends on the context if the relevant equivalence is "is" or
> "==". Maybe the rule of thumb is that if we are talking about strings,
> integers and similar things, we should think about it from the point of
> view of Python's data mod
On 28/07/2019 17:13, MRAB wrote:
> [snip]
>
> It's strange that "all the things" (meaning "all of the things") is OK,
> but otherwise it's "one of the things", "some of the things", etc.
Is it?
It's the same in French, Dutch and German. Can't tell if it just makes
sense or if it's Common Average
On 2019-07-28 13:30, Cameron Simpson wrote:
On 28Jul2019 10:32, Peter Otten <__pete...@web.de> wrote:
Chris Angelico wrote:
When talking about indistinguishable objects, is it correct to talk
about "the " or "an "?
Example:
def f(s):
"""Frob a thing.
If s is an empty string, frobs a
On 27/07/2019 17.43, Stefan Ram wrote:
> Terry Reedy writes:
>> In mathematics, *every* set is 'the'.
This is correct, at least in ZF, where the Axiom of Extensionality says
that (in English) if A and B have exactly the same elements, they are
the same set.
> |Example 2 Let T be an non-empty s
On 28Jul2019 10:32, Peter Otten <__pete...@web.de> wrote:
Chris Angelico wrote:
When talking about indistinguishable objects, is it correct to talk
about "the " or "an "?
Example:
def f(s):
"""Frob a thing.
If s is an empty string, frobs all the things.
OR
If s is the empty s
Chris Angelico wrote:
> When talking about indistinguishable objects, is it correct to talk
> about "the " or "an "?
>
> Example:
>
> def f(s):
> """Frob a thing.
>
> If s is an empty string, frobs all the things.
> OR
> If s is the empty string, frobs all the things.
> """
Ethan Furman :
> On 07/27/2019 02:10 PM, Chris Angelico wrote:
>> When talking about indistinguishable objects, is it correct to talk
>> about "the " or "an "?
>
> Multiple indistinguishable objects are still multiple, so "an".
>
> Implementation details should only enter the conversation when
> s
On 28/07/19 9:10 AM, Chris Angelico wrote:
When talking about indistinguishable objects, is it correct to talk
about "the " or "an "?
Example:
def f(s):
"""Frob a thing.
If s is an empty string, frobs all the things.
OR
If s is the empty string, frobs all the things.
"""
On 7/27/2019 5:10 PM, Chris Angelico wrote:
When talking about indistinguishable objects, is it correct to talk
about "the " or "an "?
Example:
def f(s):
"""Frob a thing.
If s is an empty string, frobs all the things.
OR
If s is the empty string, frobs all the things.
Am 27.07.2019 um 23:10 schrieb Chris Angelico:
> When talking about indistinguishable objects, is it correct to talk
> about "the " or "an "?
>
> Example:
>
> def f(s):
> """Frob a thing.
>
> If s is an empty string, frobs all the things.
> OR
> If s is the empty string, frobs al
On 07/27/2019 02:10 PM, Chris Angelico wrote:
When talking about indistinguishable objects, is it correct to talk
about "the " or "an "?
Multiple indistinguishable objects are still multiple, so "an".
Implementation details should only enter the conversation when specifically
discussing the
On 28Jul2019 07:10, Chris Angelico wrote:
When talking about indistinguishable objects, is it correct to talk
about "the " or "an "?
Example:
def f(s):
"""Frob a thing.
If s is an empty string, frobs all the things.
OR
If s is the empty string, frobs all the things.
"""
It's e
When talking about indistinguishable objects, is it correct to talk
about "the " or "an "?
Example:
def f(s):
"""Frob a thing.
If s is an empty string, frobs all the things.
OR
If s is the empty string, frobs all the things.
"""
It's entirely possible that a Python implement
20 matches
Mail list logo
