On Thursday, March 16, 2017 at 7:07:17 PM UTC-7, Deborah Swanson wrote:
> Steve D'Aprano wrote,on March 16, 2017 5:07 AM
> >
> > On Thu, 16 Mar 2017 09:03 am, Gregory Ewing wrote:
> >
> > > Steve D'Aprano wrote:
> > >> You probably can't make a whale fly just by changing the class to
> > >>
On Sat, Mar 18, 2017 at 8:24 AM, wrote:
> On Thursday, March 16, 2017 at 9:27:56 PM UTC-7, Gregory Ewing wrote:
>> Chris Angelico wrote:
>> > Maybe what the ISS does isn't flying - it's falling with style?
>>
>> Yep. They didn't really launch it into orbit with rockets,
>> that
On Thursday, March 16, 2017 at 9:27:56 PM UTC-7, Gregory Ewing wrote:
> Chris Angelico wrote:
> > Maybe what the ISS does isn't flying - it's falling with style?
>
> Yep. They didn't really launch it into orbit with rockets,
> that was all faked. They actually hauled it up there with
> a crane,
On 17/03/17 04:18, Gregory Ewing wrote:
Dennis Lee Bieber wrote:
I'd say satellites do "not" fly, as they have no force/action
opposing
the fall caused by the pull of gravity.
Arrows, bullets, thrown stones, etc. are often said to be
flying.
Seems to me the word gets applied to anything
Chris Angelico wrote:
Maybe what the ISS does isn't flying - it's falling with style?
Yep. They didn't really launch it into orbit with rockets,
that was all faked. They actually hauled it up there with
a crane, let it go and pulled the earth away at the last
moment.
--
Greg
--
Dennis Lee Bieber wrote:
I'd say satellites do "not" fly, as they have no force/action opposing
the fall caused by the pull of gravity.
Arrows, bullets, thrown stones, etc. are often said to be
flying.
Seems to me the word gets applied to anything that is
moving while not contacting
On Fri, Mar 17, 2017 at 1:52 PM, Ian Kelly wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 16, 2017 at 7:56 PM, Dennis Lee Bieber
> wrote:
>> On Fri, 17 Mar 2017 10:03:04 +1300, Gregory Ewing
>> declaimed the following:
>>
>>>Chris Angelico wrote:
On Thu, Mar 16, 2017 at 7:56 PM, Dennis Lee Bieber
wrote:
> On Fri, 17 Mar 2017 10:03:04 +1300, Gregory Ewing
> declaimed the following:
>
>>Chris Angelico wrote:
>>> I just asked my father, and he believes that a satellite DOES fly, on
>>> the
Steve D'Aprano wrote,on March 16, 2017 5:07 AM
>
> On Thu, 16 Mar 2017 09:03 am, Gregory Ewing wrote:
>
> > Steve D'Aprano wrote:
> >> You probably can't make a whale fly just by changing the class to
> >> bird. It will need wings, and feathers, at the very least.
> >
> > Some things succeed
Chris Angelico wrote:
I just asked my father, and he believes that a satellite DOES fly, on
the basis that it is perpetually falling and forever missing the
ground.
Also, NASA people talk about "flying" the ISS, so it seems your
father is in good company.
--
Greg
--
On Thu, 16 Mar 2017 14:04:19 +, Jon Ribbens wrote:
> On 2017-03-16, Robin Becker wrote:
>> On 15/03/2017 13:53, Steve D'Aprano wrote:
>>> You probably can't make a whale fly just by changing the class to
>>> bird. It will need wings, and feathers, at the very least.
>>
Robin Becker wrote:
> On 16/03/2017 14:03, D'Arcy Cain wrote:
> > On 2017-03-16 09:45 AM, Robin Becker wrote:
> >> On 15/03/2017 13:53, Steve D'Aprano wrote:
> >>> You probably can't make a whale fly just by changing the class to
> >>> bird. It
> >>> will need wings, and
On Fri, Mar 17, 2017 at 1:21 AM, Robin Becker wrote:
>> Falling is not the same as flying unless you accidentally miss the ground.
>>
> well in English an arrow flies as well as time, the whale was very
> interested in the approaching ground and perhaps forgot to conjure up
>
On 16/03/2017 14:03, D'Arcy Cain wrote:
On 2017-03-16 09:45 AM, Robin Becker wrote:
On 15/03/2017 13:53, Steve D'Aprano wrote:
You probably can't make a whale fly just by changing the class to
bird. It
will need wings, and feathers, at the very least.
the whale in the Hitchhiker's Guide
On 16/03/17 13:45, Robin Becker wrote:
On 15/03/2017 13:53, Steve D'Aprano wrote:
You probably can't make a whale fly just by changing the class to
bird. It
will need wings, and feathers, at the very least.
the whale in the Hitchhiker's Guide found itself flying without feathers
or wings
It
On 2017-03-16, Robin Becker wrote:
> On 15/03/2017 13:53, Steve D'Aprano wrote:
>> You probably can't make a whale fly just by changing the class to bird. It
>> will need wings, and feathers, at the very least.
>
> the whale in the Hitchhiker's Guide found itself flying
On 2017-03-16 09:45 AM, Robin Becker wrote:
On 15/03/2017 13:53, Steve D'Aprano wrote:
You probably can't make a whale fly just by changing the class to
bird. It
will need wings, and feathers, at the very least.
the whale in the Hitchhiker's Guide found itself flying without feathers
or wings
On 15/03/2017 13:53, Steve D'Aprano wrote:
You probably can't make a whale fly just by changing the class to bird. It
will need wings, and feathers, at the very least.
the whale in the Hitchhiker's Guide found itself flying without feathers or
wings
--
Robin Becker
--
On Thu, 16 Mar 2017 09:03 am, Gregory Ewing wrote:
> Steve D'Aprano wrote:
>> You probably can't make a whale fly just by changing the class to bird.
>> It will need wings, and feathers, at the very least.
>
> Some things succeed in flying with neither wings nor feathers.
> Helicopters, for
On Wed, 15 Mar 2017 19:10:17 -0700, Deborah Swanson wrote:
> MRAB wrote, on Wednesday, March 15, 2017 3:19 PM
>>
>> On 2017-03-15 22:03, Gregory Ewing wrote:
>> > Steve D'Aprano wrote:
>> >> You probably can't make a whale fly just by changing the class to
>> >> bird. It will need wings, and
On Thu, 16 Mar 2017 11:03:56 +1300, Gregory Ewing wrote:
> Steve D'Aprano wrote:
>> You probably can't make a whale fly just by changing the class to bird.
>> It will need wings, and feathers, at the very least.
>
> Some things succeed in flying with neither wings nor feathers.
> Helicopters,
MRAB wrote:
Could you argue that the blades were a kind of wing? After all, they
rely on the same principle of moving through the air to produce lift.
Balloons, on the other hand, ... :-)
Also rockets.
--
Greg
--
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
MRAB wrote, on Wednesday, March 15, 2017 3:19 PM
>
> On 2017-03-15 22:03, Gregory Ewing wrote:
> > Steve D'Aprano wrote:
> >> You probably can't make a whale fly just by changing the class to
> >> bird. It will need wings, and feathers, at the very least.
> >
> > Some things succeed in flying
On Thu, Mar 16, 2017 at 9:19 AM, MRAB wrote:
> On 2017-03-15 22:03, Gregory Ewing wrote:
>>
>> Steve D'Aprano wrote:
>>>
>>> You probably can't make a whale fly just by changing the class to bird.
>>> It
>>> will need wings, and feathers, at the very least.
>>
>>
>>
On 2017-03-15 22:03, Gregory Ewing wrote:
Steve D'Aprano wrote:
You probably can't make a whale fly just by changing the class to bird. It
will need wings, and feathers, at the very least.
Some things succeed in flying with neither wings nor feathers.
Helicopters, for example.
Could you
On Thu, Mar 16, 2017 at 9:03 AM, Gregory Ewing
wrote:
> Steve D'Aprano wrote:
>>
>> You probably can't make a whale fly just by changing the class to bird. It
>> will need wings, and feathers, at the very least.
>
>
> Some things succeed in flying with neither wings
Steve D'Aprano wrote:
You probably can't make a whale fly just by changing the class to bird. It
will need wings, and feathers, at the very least.
Some things succeed in flying with neither wings nor feathers.
Helicopters, for example.
--
Greg
--
Hi,
You can subclass M2 from M1 and override only what you need.
Regards,
--
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
On Wed, 15 Mar 2017 08:54 pm, marco.naw...@colosso.nl wrote:
> Dear All,
>
> Summary of the question:
> Is it generally safe to dynamically change an objects class; if not
> under which conditions can it be considered safe.
*Generally* safe? No. You cannot expect to take an arbitrary object and
On Wednesday, March 15, 2017 at 11:33:56 AM UTC+1, Peter Otten wrote:
> marco.naw...@colosso.nl wrote:
>
> > Dear All,
> >
> > Summary of the question:
> > Is it generally safe to dynamically change an objects class; if not
> > under which conditions can it be considered safe.
> >
> > Context:
marco.naw...@colosso.nl wrote:
> Dear All,
>
> Summary of the question:
> Is it generally safe to dynamically change an objects class; if not
> under which conditions can it be considered safe.
>
> Context:
> Given the code below, I have no direct control over Base and M1. M1
> is a
Dear All,
Summary of the question:
Is it generally safe to dynamically change an objects class; if not
under which conditions can it be considered safe.
Context:
Given the code below, I have no direct control over Base and M1. M1
is a instantiated by 'calling' the read-only property of Base.
I
32 matches
Mail list logo