On Fri, May 8, 2015 at 4:36 PM, Rustom Mody rustompm...@gmail.com wrote:
On Friday, May 8, 2015 at 10:39:38 AM UTC+5:30, Chris Angelico wrote:
Why have the concept of a procedure?
On Friday, Chris Angelico ALSO wrote:
With print(), you have a conceptual procedure...
So which do you want to
On Friday, May 8, 2015 at 10:39:38 AM UTC+5:30, Chris Angelico wrote:
Why have the concept of a procedure?
On Friday, Chris Angelico ALSO wrote:
With print(), you have a conceptual procedure...
So which do you want to stand by?
Just to be clear I am not saying python should be any different
On Fri, May 8, 2015 at 9:53 PM, Dave Angel da...@davea.name wrote:
One thing newbies get tripped up by is having some path through their code
that doesn't explicitly return. And in Python that path therefore returns
None. It's most commonly confusing when there are nested ifs, and one of
the
On 05/08/2015 02:42 AM, Chris Angelico wrote:
On Fri, May 8, 2015 at 4:36 PM, Rustom Mody rustompm...@gmail.com wrote:
On Friday, May 8, 2015 at 10:39:38 AM UTC+5:30, Chris Angelico wrote:
Why have the concept of a procedure?
On Friday, Chris Angelico ALSO wrote:
With print(), you have a
On Fri, May 8, 2015 at 2:53 PM, Rustom Mody rustompm...@gmail.com wrote:
Yeah I know
And if python did not try to be so clever, I'd save some time with
student-surprises
In a program, an expression
statement simply discards its result, whether it's None or 42 or
[1,2,3] or anything else.
On Wednesday, May 6, 2015 at 11:19:07 AM UTC+5:30, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
On Wednesday 06 May 2015 14:47, Rustom Mody wrote:
It strikes me that the FP crowd has stretched the notion of function
beyond recognition And the imperative/OO folks have distorted it beyond
redemption.
In what
On Fri, May 8, 2015 at 2:06 PM, Rustom Mody rustompm...@gmail.com wrote:
If the classic Pascal (or Fortran or Basic) sibling balanced abstractions
of function-for-value procedure-for-effect were more in the collective
consciousness rather than C's travesty of function, things might not have
On Friday, May 8, 2015 at 10:24:06 AM UTC+5:30, Rustom Mody wrote:
get is very much a function and the None return is semantically significant.
print is just round peg -- what you call conceptual function -- stuffed into
square hole -- function the only available syntax-category
Sorry
On Wednesday, May 6, 2015 at 6:41:38 PM UTC+5:30, Dennis Lee Bieber wrote:
On Tue, 5 May 2015 21:47:17 -0700 (PDT), Rustom Mody declaimed the following:
If the classic Pascal (or Fortran or Basic) sibling balanced abstractions of
function-for-value
procedure-for-effect were more in the
On Friday, May 8, 2015 at 10:04:02 AM UTC+5:30, Chris Angelico wrote:
On Fri, May 8, 2015 at 2:06 PM, Rustom Mody wrote:
If the classic Pascal (or Fortran or Basic) sibling balanced abstractions
of function-for-value procedure-for-effect were more in the collective
consciousness rather
On Tuesday, May 5, 2015 at 11:15:42 PM UTC+5:30, Marko Rauhamaa wrote:
Personally, I have never found futures a very useful idiom in any
language (Scheme, Java, Python). Or more to the point, concurrency and
the notion of a function don't gel well in my mind.
Interesting comment.
It strikes
On Wednesday 06 May 2015 14:47, Rustom Mody wrote:
It strikes me that the FP crowd has stretched the notion of function
beyond recognition And the imperative/OO folks have distorted it beyond
redemption.
In what way?
And the middle road shown by Pascal has been overgrown with weeds for
I'm working my way through the asyncio documentation. I have got to the Tasks
and coroutines section, but I'm frankly confused as to the difference between
the various things described in that section: coroutines, tasks, and futures.
I think can understand a coroutine. Correct me if I'm wrong,
On 5/5/2015 1:46 PM, Ian Kelly wrote:
On Tue, May 5, 2015 at 9:22 AM, Paul Moore p.f.mo...@gmail.com wrote:
I'm working my way through the asyncio documentation. I have got to the Tasks and
coroutines section, but I'm frankly confused as to the difference between the
various things described
On Tue, May 5, 2015 at 9:22 AM, Paul Moore p.f.mo...@gmail.com wrote:
I'm working my way through the asyncio documentation. I have got to the
Tasks and coroutines section, but I'm frankly confused as to the difference
between the various things described in that section: coroutines, tasks,
On Tuesday, 5 May 2015 18:48:09 UTC+1, Ian wrote:
Fundamentally, a future is a placeholder for something that isn't
available yet. You can use it to set a callback to be called when that
thing is available, and once it's available you can get that thing
from it.
OK, that makes a lot of
On Tue, May 5, 2015 at 10:22 AM, Paul Moore p.f.mo...@gmail.com wrote:
I'm working my way through the asyncio documentation. I have got to the
Tasks and coroutines section, but I'm frankly confused as to the difference
between the various things described in that section: coroutines, tasks,
On 5/5/2015 11:22 AM, Paul Moore wrote:
I'm working my way through the asyncio documentation. I have got to
the Tasks and coroutines section, but I'm frankly confused as to
the difference between the various things described in that section:
coroutines, tasks, and futures.
I think can
Paul Moore p.f.mo...@gmail.com:
But I don't understand what a Future is.
A future stands for a function that is scheduled to execute in the
background.
Personally, I have never found futures a very useful idiom in any
language (Scheme, Java, Python). Or more to the point, concurrency and
the
On Tuesday, 5 May 2015 17:11:39 UTC+1, Zachary Ware wrote:
On Tue, May 5, 2015 at 10:22 AM, Paul Moore wrote:
I'm working my way through the asyncio documentation. I have got to the
Tasks and coroutines section, but I'm frankly confused as to the
difference between the various things
Paul ... I'm frankly confused ...
You and me both. I'm pretty sure I understand what a Future is, and
until the long discussion about PEP 492 (?) started up, I thought I
understood what a coroutine was from my days in school many years ago.
Now I'm not so sure.
Calling Dave Beazley... Calling
21 matches
Mail list logo
