In article [EMAIL PROTECTED],
Ivan Van Laningham [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
.
.
.
25
25
(_ | _)
25
There's clearly some interesting biometrics research to be done here,
although there is a well-known ass-capturing
Hi All--
Cameron Laird wrote:
Welcome back, Ivan. Your follow-ups make one wonder about the
span of related topics clp has been missing in your absence.
Thanks for the welcome. Absence was more a consequence of working for
idiots for four years (at 60-80 hours/week) than anything else.
The free wikipedia is adopting a standard pseudocode:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Wikicode/Specification
MShonle says something nice:
I support the idea of wikicode. Basically I think we should present
code in a Python-like language that doesn't carry so much baggage. For
example,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
(Further, Python has the baggage that there are no block-terminators:
i.e., no } or ends or fis or repeats. By adding such
terminators, we can make it a lot less ambiguous to all readers.) In
otherwords, we're basically right on track: removing the quirks of
Python, and
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
The free wikipedia is adopting a standard pseudocode:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Wikicode/Specification
MShonle says something nice:
Calling a feature 'baggage' is not especially nice. Neither is getting
facts
Is anybody else bothered by those stupid pascal-like := assignment
operators?
Maybe, for the sake of adding more variety to the world, wiki should come up
with a new assignment operator, like ==. I like that one because then it
could really be original:
if (bob = 4):
bob == bob + 2
See how
On Apr 1, 2005 3:15 PM, James Stroud [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Is anybody else bothered by those stupid pascal-like := assignment
operators?
I actually like them. I think that the = should be a comparison
operator, not a silly ==. I think that comparisons using = are much
clearer, especially
On Fri, 1 Apr 2005 12:15:35 -0800, James Stroud [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Is anybody else bothered by those stupid pascal-like := assignment
operators?
Maybe, for the sake of adding more variety to the world, wiki should come up
with a new assignment operator, like ==. I like that one because
Ron_Adam wrote:
To me := could mean to create a copy of an object... or should it
be =: ?
Or how about :=) to mean is equal and :=( to mean it's not.
Then there is ;=), to indicate 'True', and ':=O' to indicate 'False'
Not to mention (_ | _) for asserts!
--
On Fri, 01 Apr 2005 16:02:53 -0500, Gabriel Cooper wrote:
Ron_Adam wrote:
To me := could mean to create a copy of an object... or should it
be =: ?
Or how about :=) to mean is equal and :=( to mean it's not.
Then there is ;=), to indicate 'True', and ':=O' to indicate 'False'
Not to
Hi All--
Jeremy Bowers wrote:
Your ass is your identity function.
Python 2.3.5 (#1, Mar 3 2005, 17:32:12)
[GCC 3.4.3 (Gentoo Linux 3.4.3, ssp-3.4.3-0, pie-8.7.6.6)] on linux2
Type help, copyright, credits or license for more information.
25
25
(_ | _)
25
There's clearly some
James Stroud wrote:
bob == (carol = 2):
if bob = (bob or carol):
bob == 4
But no one could figure out what bob was supposed to equal anyway.
Wouldn't bob equal the boolean result of the expression (carol = 2)?
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
12 matches
Mail list logo
