> On 21 Nov 2022, at 21:23, r...@zedat.fu-berlin.de wrote:
>
> dn writes:
>> Now, at the config stage, take the instructions to define whichever the
>> user prefers, and instantiate that class. Then the 'calling-routine' can
>> use the instantiated object as an interface to whichever type of
On 11/21/2022 12:24 AM, dn wrote:
My original question probably was intended to be something
like: "Today, we can add attributes to a module from the
outside. How large is the risk that this will be forbidden
one day, so that all code using this will stop working?".
This can happen tod
On Mon, 21 Nov 2022 at 16:26, dn wrote:
> Am put-off by the 'smell' of subverting/adapting names like print() =
> surprise/confusion factor - but I think I understand where you're going.
To be fair, redefining the "print" function IS one of the reasons that
it's no longer a statement. Though I wo
On 21/11/2022 01.29, Stefan Ram wrote:
dn writes:
A 'standard' solution is to collect all such configuration-data at the
start of the application, into an object (or other data-structure) - I
usually call it "env" (an instantiation of "Environment").
Yeah, I had some functions of my librar
On 11/21/2022 12:01 AM, dn wrote:
On 21/11/2022 12.07, Dan Kolis wrote:
If you understand its meaning, it achieves my purpose. If you don't I
you're perhaps not a programmer...
Ouch!
Does the first sentence imply who is the more important person in the
interaction? Does the second further th
On 21/11/2022 12.07, Dan Kolis wrote:
If you understand its meaning, it achieves my purpose. If you don't I you're
perhaps not a programmer...
Ouch!
Does the first sentence imply who is the more important person in the
interaction? Does the second further the idea that anyone/everyone who
i
On 11/20/2022 4:07 PM, Roel Schroeven wrote:
Thomas Passin schreef op 20/11/2022 om 20:33:
https://devblogs.microsoft.com/oldnewthing/20050607-00/?p=35413
https://devblogs.microsoft.com/oldnewthing/20101125-00/?p=12203
Now that I think about it, The Old New Thing is also where I got the
global
Its advice, I don't think the style issue is particularly important.
If you understand its meaning, it achieves my purpose. If you don't I you're
perhaps not a programmer...
I like the abruptness of technical writing as a style, actually. If that is how
machine learning ( aka 'A.I.' ) tends to
On Mon, 21 Nov 2022 at 09:37, Dan Kolis wrote:
>
> Using sys.stdout / is simply nonsense. The more I think about it, the more I
> realise how bad it is.
>
> Going on about it endlessly seems pointless.
>
> If the even mini threading thing is turned on, now what ? some other module
> eats the mes
Using sys.stdout / is simply nonsense. The more I think about it, the more I
realise how bad it is.
Going on about it endlessly seems pointless.
If the even mini threading thing is turned on, now what ? some other module
eats the message intended for a different module ? A state machine with it
Thomas Passin schreef op 20/11/2022 om 20:33:
https://devblogs.microsoft.com/oldnewthing/20050607-00/?p=35413
https://devblogs.microsoft.com/oldnewthing/20101125-00/?p=12203
Now that I think about it, The Old New Thing is also where I got the
global vs local thing: "Don’t use global state to ma
On 11/20/2022 1:50 PM, Roel Schroeven wrote:
Stefan Ram schreef op 20/11/2022 om 11:39:
The idea is about parameterizing the behavior of a module.
For example, the module "M" may contain functions that contain
"input.read()" to get input and "output.write()" to write
output. Then one
On 21/11/2022 01.03, Stefan Ram wrote:
dn writes:
In some respects we have the (OP) problem because Python does not have
"interfaces" as a formal component of the language.
What one can do today is,
class my_interface( metaclass=abc.ABCMeta ):
"""This interface ..."""
@abc.abst
Stefan Ram schreef op 20/11/2022 om 11:39:
The idea is about parameterizing the behavior of a module.
For example, the module "M" may contain functions that contain
"input.read()" to get input and "output.write()" to write
output. Then one would write code like (the following is
no
It's certainly not an "incredibly bad idea", it is a mildly bad idea however.
Why be stuck with maybe's and just text strings ?
Functions as "first class operators" and object oriented languages are a
natural pair with a bit of heavy thinking.
The problem is... there is nobody giving you a 3
There is no guarantee that argv is consulted earlier in the program than
other modules will use it for communication.
Consider a case where a program does look at argv but later wants to call
another program using some or all of the components of argv and now there
are added components there. That
In a module mostly for this purpose; ( big program means many modules aka files
):
--
globalIdeas.py
--
# Empty object maker ( M T ) ...
On 18Nov2022 10:53, Stefan Ram wrote:
Can I use "sys.argv" to pass information between modules
as follows? [...]
Stefan, it looks like most of the replies take the form: yes you can do
that but it is probably a bad idea.
Could you outline the larger situation where you want to do this? O
On 11/19/2022 3:46 PM, Michael F. Stemper wrote:
On 18/11/2022 04.53, Stefan Ram wrote:
Can I use "sys.argv" to pass information between modules
as follows?
in module A:
import sys
sys.argv.append( "Hi there!" )
in module B:
import sys
message = sys.argv[ -1 ]
I just tried and
On 11/19/2022 4:28 PM, Thomas Passin wrote:
On 11/19/2022 3:46 PM, Michael F. Stemper wrote:
On 18/11/2022 04.53, Stefan Ram wrote:
Can I use "sys.argv" to pass information between modules
as follows?
in module A:
import sys
sys.argv.append( "Hi there!" )
in module B:
import sys
On 18/11/2022 04.53, Stefan Ram wrote:
Can I use "sys.argv" to pass information between modules
as follows?
in module A:
import sys
sys.argv.append( "Hi there!" )
in module B:
import sys
message = sys.argv[ -1 ]
I just tried and it appears that one can append to sys.argv. Howeve
On 18/11/2022 23.53, Stefan Ram wrote:
Can I use "sys.argv" to pass information between modules
as follows?
in module A:
import sys
sys.argv.append( "Hi there!" )
in module B:
import sys
message = sys.argv[ -1 ]
. "sys.argv" is said to be a list by the standard
documentatio
On 18/11/2022 10:53, Stefan Ram wrote:
Can I use "sys.argv" to pass information between modules
as follows?
in module A:
import sys
sys.argv.append( "Hi there!" )
in module B:
import sys
message = sys.argv[ -1 ]
This idea has a couple of flaws so can be regarded as bad.
However
On 11/18/2022 10:19 AM, Tobiah wrote:
On 11/18/22 02:53, Stefan Ram wrote:
Can I use "sys.argv" to pass information between modules
as follows?
in module A:
import sys
sys.argv.append( "Hi there!" )
in module B:
import sys
message = sys.argv[ -1 ]
Kind of seems like a code smel
On 11/18/22 02:53, Stefan Ram wrote:
Can I use "sys.argv" to pass information between modules
as follows?
in module A:
import sys
sys.argv.append( "Hi there!" )
in module B:
import sys
message = sys.argv[ -1 ]
Kind of seems like a code smell. I think you would normally
just inj
25 matches
Mail list logo
