On Sunday 08 May 2005 06:29 pm, James Stroud wrote:
> If "__call__" allows anobject() and "__getitem__" allows anobject[arange],
> why
> not have "__brace__" (or some other, better name) for anobject{something}.
> Such braces might be useful for cross-sectioning nested data structures:
[...]
> T
James Stroud wrote:
> Hello All,
>
> If "__call__" allows anobject() and "__getitem__" allows anobject[arange],
> why
> not have "__brace__" (or some other, better name) for anobject{something}.
> Such braces might be useful for cross-sectioning nested data structures:
>
> anary = [[1,2,3],[4,
Roy Smith wrote:
> "Kay Schluehr" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > Roy Smith wrote:
> >
> > > foo->bar ==> foo.__arrrow__(bar)
> > > foo$bar ==> foo.__dollar__(bar)
> > > foo#bar ==> foo.__hash__(bar)
> > > foo::bar ==> foo.__scope__(bar)
> >
> > I'm strongly in favor for the arrow ( but with two "
"Kay Schluehr" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Roy Smith wrote:
>
> > foo->bar ==> foo.__arrrow__(bar)
> > foo$bar ==> foo.__dollar__(bar)
> > foo#bar ==> foo.__hash__(bar)
> > foo::bar ==> foo.__scope__(bar)
>
> I'm strongly in favor for the arrow ( but with two "r" only ). The
> question is simpl
Roy Smith wrote:
> foo->bar ==> foo.__arrrow__(bar)
> foo$bar ==> foo.__dollar__(bar)
> foo#bar ==> foo.__hash__(bar)
> foo::bar ==> foo.__scope__(bar)
I'm strongly in favor for the arrow ( but with two "r" only ). The
question is simply: for what?
> and so on down the list of non-alphanumeric c
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
James Stroud <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Sunday 08 May 2005 05:15 pm, Roy Smith wrote:
> > This seems like a pretty esoteric operation to devote a bit of syntax to.
> > It doesn't seem like something people want to do very often.
>
> Similar to __call__, I don
On Sunday 08 May 2005 05:15 pm, Roy Smith wrote:
> This seems like a pretty esoteric operation to devote a bit of syntax to.
> It doesn't seem like something people want to do very often.
Similar to __call__, I don't think that this syntax would be neccessarily
devoted to any particular operation
On Sun, 8 May 2005 16:29:03 -0700, James Stroud <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Hello All,
>
>If "__call__" allows anobject() and "__getitem__" allows anobject[arange], why
>not have "__brace__" (or some other, better name) for anobject{something}.
>Such braces might be useful for cross-sectioning nest
James Stroud <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> why not have "__brace__" (or some other, better name)
> for anobject{something}. Such braces might be useful for
> cross-sectioning nested data structures:
This seems like a pretty esoteric operation to devote a bit of syntax to.
It doesn't seem like s
Hello All,
If "__call__" allows anobject() and "__getitem__" allows anobject[arange], why
not have "__brace__" (or some other, better name) for anobject{something}.
Such braces might be useful for cross-sectioning nested data structures:
anary = [[1,2,3],[4,5,6]]
anary{2} ==> [3,6]
or for a
10 matches
Mail list logo