often use ellipsis to indicate that I have snipped 'stuff in the
middle', others are more overt and will write "" or similar]
> You may find it helpful to use the pprint ("pretty printing"
library to
> print data-structures in a more readable/structured for
x27;rating': u'Requires improvement'},
truncating this to avoid a huge paste...
can you give an example of what it would look like "flattened"?
list flattening is pretty straightforward, and even has a standard
library method, itertools.chain, to help out.
to flatten a dict th
': u'Caring', u'rating': u'Requires improvement'},
{u'name': u'Responsive', u'rating': u'Requires improvement'}, {u'name':
u'Effective', u'rating': u'Good'}], u'rating': u
Even worse is that, in some cases, an addition called serviceRatings as a
key occur with new data unexpectedly.
How to produce a robust Python/Panda script to coping with all these?
Regards,
David
u'historicRatings': [{u'overall': {u'keyQuestionRatings': [{u'name':
u'Safe', u'rating': u'Require
On 3/1/2017, Sayth Renshaw wrote:
> How can I flatten just a specific sublist of each list in a list of lists?
>
> So if I had this data
>
>
> [ ['46295', 'Montauk', '3', '60', '85', ['19', '5',
> Replace the slice row[index:index+1] with row[index], either by building a
> new list or in place:
>
> >>> def show(data):
> ...for item in data: print(item)
> ...
> >>> def flatten_one(rows, index):
> ... return [r[:index] + r[index] + r[index+1:] for r in rows]
> ...
> >>> def fla
Sayth Renshaw wrote:
> How can I flatten just a specific sublist of each list in a list of lists?
>
> So if I had this data
>
>
> [ ['46295', 'Montauk', '3', '60', '85', ['19', '5', '
Sayth Renshaw writes:
> How can I flatten just a specific sublist of each list in a list of lists?
>
> So if I had this data
>
>
> [ ['46295', 'Montauk', '3', '60', '85', ['19', '5', '1&#x
How can I flatten just a specific sublist of each list in a list of lists?
So if I had this data
[ ['46295', 'Montauk', '3', '60', '85', ['19', '5', '1', '0 $277790.00']],
['46295', '
On Wed, Apr 9, 2014 at 10:39 AM, alex23 wrote:
>> int
>
>
> Shorthand for 'integerise'.
Not at all. "Integrate". It's a vital mathematical operation, that's
why you always get a number back.
... I'll get my coat, too.
ChrisA
--
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
On 8/04/2014 6:21 PM, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
Functions which are intended to return a value may be named as verbs:
[...]
or as nouns:
int
Shorthand for 'integerise'.
str
'stringify'
dict
'dictionarate'
coordinate
array
These are both verbs.
...I'll get me coat.
--
https://mail.
On Tuesday, April 8, 2014 7:03:31 AM UTC+5:30, Mark H. Harris wrote:
> I have another question for y'all, is a function (particularly a
> generator) a noun or a verb? Does a function (or generator) 'do'
> something (based on name and parms) or does it 'return' something based
> on name and
On Mon, 07 Apr 2014 20:33:31 -0500, Mark H Harris wrote:
> I have another question for y'all, is a function (particularly a
> generator) a noun or a verb?
Mu.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mu_%28negative%29#.22Unasking.22_the_question
Nouns and verbs are concepts from a completely differe
On 07-04-14 07:10, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
>
>> Restricting the usage of Python's flexibility does not make it another
>> language. It makes it the actual language that the vast majority of
>> programs are written in and that people assume when reading code.
> That's incorrect. If len were a keyword
On Tue, Apr 8, 2014 at 11:33 AM, Mark H Harris wrote:
> Does a function (or generator) 'do' something (based on name and parms) or
> does it 'return' something based on name and parms?
If it has no side effects, then it does something, where the
'something' is returning a value. "Return" is a ver
On 2014-04-08 02:33, Mark H Harris wrote:
On 4/6/14 12:31 PM, Rustom Mody wrote:
I think python wins because it (usually) lets people do their thing
(includes but not limited to CS-research)
and gets out of the way. To say therefore that it is irrelevant to the
research is a strange inversion
On 4/6/14 12:31 PM, Rustom Mody wrote:
I think python wins because it (usually) lets people do their thing
(includes but not limited to CS-research)
and gets out of the way. To say therefore that it is irrelevant to the
research is a strange inversion of its advantages.
I think so too. I f
On Mon, 07 Apr 2014 07:54:27 +0300, Marko Rauhamaa wrote:
> Steven D'Aprano :
>
>> On Sun, 06 Apr 2014 23:10:47 +0300, Marko Rauhamaa wrote:
>>> It is academic because the author, Raymond Smullyan, was a professor
>>> of philosophy and, more importantly, my professor selected that as a
>>> textbo
Steven D'Aprano :
> That's why optimizers like PyPy generally produce code like this:
>
> if some guard condition is true:
> run fast optimized branch
> else:
> fall back on standard Python
There you go! You are using Python-esque syntax to communicate a CS
idea.
Marko
On Sun, 06 Apr 2014 20:45:47 -0400, Terry Reedy wrote:
> On 4/6/2014 7:48 PM, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
>> On Sun, 06 Apr 2014 23:10:47 +0300, Marko Rauhamaa wrote:
>>
>>> Steven D'Aprano :
>>>
On Sun, 06 Apr 2014 12:05:16 +0300, Marko Rauhamaa wrote:
> Python, BTW, is perfectly suitable for
Steven D'Aprano :
> On Sun, 06 Apr 2014 23:10:47 +0300, Marko Rauhamaa wrote:
>> It is academic because the author, Raymond Smullyan, was a professor
>> of philosophy and, more importantly, my professor selected that as a
>> textbook for us graduate students.
>
> Ah. Well they do that, don't they?
On Monday, April 7, 2014 12:16:54 AM UTC+5:30, Chris Angelico wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 7, 2014 at 4:13 AM, Rustom Mody wrote:
> >> Using Python at the design stage would be what Steven's talking about
> >> - actually using it to build the theory of programming. I have about
> >> as much experience in
On Monday, April 7, 2014 6:15:47 AM UTC+5:30, Terry Reedy wrote:
> On 4/6/2014 7:48 PM, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
> > On Sun, 06 Apr 2014 23:10:47 +0300, Marko Rauhamaa wrote:
> >> Steven D'Aprano :
> >>> On Sun, 06 Apr 2014 12:05:16 +0300, Marko Rauhamaa wrote:
> Python, BTW, is perfectly suitab
On 4/6/2014 7:48 PM, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
On Sun, 06 Apr 2014 23:10:47 +0300, Marko Rauhamaa wrote:
Steven D'Aprano :
On Sun, 06 Apr 2014 12:05:16 +0300, Marko Rauhamaa wrote:
Python, BTW, is perfectly suitable for computer science.
I don't think it is. Python is not a pure functional la
On Sun, 06 Apr 2014 23:10:47 +0300, Marko Rauhamaa wrote:
> Steven D'Aprano :
>
>> On Sun, 06 Apr 2014 12:05:16 +0300, Marko Rauhamaa wrote:
>>> Python, BTW, is perfectly suitable for computer science.
>>
>> I don't think it is. Python is not a pure functional language, so it's
>> very difficult
On 06/04/2014 21:10, Marko Rauhamaa wrote:
Many classic CS ideas are expressed in terms of an Algol-like language.
Nothing would prevent you from framing those ideas in a Python-like
(pseudo)language. The question is mostly whether you prefer begin/end,
braces or indentation.
Of course whilst
Chris Angelico :
>>> * unfaithful husbands on an island ruled by female logicians
>>
>> I don't know that one.
>
> Me neither, although I can see elements of classic logic analysis
> elements. Islands ruled by logicians, people who always tell the truth
> / always tell exact falsehoods, etc, etc.
Steven D'Aprano :
> On Sun, 06 Apr 2014 12:05:16 +0300, Marko Rauhamaa wrote:
>> Python, BTW, is perfectly suitable for computer science.
>
> I don't think it is. Python is not a pure functional language, so it's
> very difficult to prove anything about the code apart from running it.
Many cla
On Mon, Apr 7, 2014 at 4:13 AM, Rustom Mody wrote:
> Is the diff between cvs/svn and git "just one vcs or another"?
The theory of version control, or source control, or whatever you want
to call it, can be found in some of the docs for those systems (git
goes into some depth about the Directed Ac
On Sunday, April 6, 2014 11:24:15 PM UTC+5:30, Chris Angelico wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 7, 2014 at 3:31 AM, Rustom Mody wrote:
> > However consider that some of the things that people did around 40 years
> > ago and do today
> > - use FORTRAN for numerical/simulation work -- now use scipy/sage etc
> >
On Mon, Apr 7, 2014 at 4:09 AM, Mark Lawrence wrote:
> On 06/04/2014 18:27, Chris Angelico wrote:
>>
>> (plus, why on earth can't they afford a few more forks in the
>> interests of hygiene??!?).
>
>
> They couldn't get the purchase order for these capital cost items past the
> accountants.
That
On 06/04/2014 18:27, Chris Angelico wrote:
(plus, why on earth can't they afford a few more forks in the
interests of hygiene??!?).
They couldn't get the purchase order for these capital cost items past
the accountants.
--
My fellow Pythonistas, ask not what our language can do for you, ask
On Mon, Apr 7, 2014 at 3:31 AM, Rustom Mody wrote:
> However consider that some of the things that people did around 40 years
> ago and do today
>
> - use FORTRAN for numerical/simulation work -- now use scipy/sage etc
> - NLP with Lisp/Prolog -- look at Nltk
> - ??? with Data Analysis in Pandas
On Sunday, April 6, 2014 10:22:21 PM UTC+5:30, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
> On Sun, 06 Apr 2014 12:05:16 +0300, Marko Rauhamaa wrote:
> > Mark H Harris :
> >> On 4/4/14 4:53 AM, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
> >>> Python is not a computer-science-ey language.
> >> Every programming language is interesting fr
On Mon, Apr 7, 2014 at 2:52 AM, Steven D'Aprano
wrote:
> (4) This is the category which I was referring to when I said that Python
> wasn't a "computer-science-ey language": do people use Python for
> research into language-independent fundamental principles of computation?
> I don't think so. I a
On Sun, 06 Apr 2014 12:05:16 +0300, Marko Rauhamaa wrote:
> Mark H Harris :
>
>> On 4/4/14 4:53 AM, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
>>> Python is not a computer-science-ey language.
>>
>> Every programming language is interesting from a comp sci standpoint.
>> Some are more useful for research; python is
Mark H Harris :
> On 4/4/14 4:53 AM, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
>> Python is not a computer-science-ey language.
>
> Every programming language is interesting from a comp sci standpoint.
> Some are more useful for research; python is one of those.
>
> For what reasons do you disagree?
Computer scienc
On 4/4/14 4:53 AM, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
> Python is not a computer-science-ey language.
Really ?
> It is of little or no
> interest to computer scientists involved in the mathematics of
> computation,
... you mean no one except me, then ?
> or compiler-theory, or type-theory, or any o
On 4/4/14 4:53 AM, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
Python is not a computer-science-ey language.
Really ?
It is of little or no
interest to computer scientists involved in the mathematics of
computation,
... you mean no one except me, then ?
or compiler-theory, or type-theory, or any of the
On 4/4/14 4:53 AM, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
Python is not a computer-science-ey language.
Every programming language is interesting from a comp sci standpoint.
Some are more useful for research; python is one of those.
For what reasons do you disagree?
marcus
--
https://mail.python.org/mail
In article <533fd894$0$29993$c3e8da3$54964...@news.astraweb.com>,
Steven D'Aprano wrote:
> Twisted has apparently said they cannot migrate to 3.x. They might, I
> suppose, take up maintenance of Python 2.7. But I doubt it. I expect
> that when push comes to shove in 4 or 5 years time, they'll
On 4/5/2014 6:19 AM, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
Oh, I dare say that when the core developers finally announce Python 2.7
is end-of-lifed, probably in another five or so years,
Bug fixing will end in May/June 2015 with 2.7.8, maybe 2.7.9. It will
probably start tapering off before that on the basi
On Sat, 05 Apr 2014 00:02:58 -0500, Mark H Harris wrote:
> Having said that, I do believe that the migration to C python3 has
> been too conservative.
Why? Is it a race? Does Python 2.x turn into PHP at midnight?
Some people think the move to Python 3 has been too radical and too fast
for
On Sat, Apr 5, 2014 at 5:59 PM, Rustom Mody wrote:
> Professionalism implies at bottom that a client is God even if
> he is being an asshole.
Not really :) Sometimes, your employer or client just has to go jump.
Professionalism implies that you treat your client at least as well as
s/he deserves,
On Sat, Apr 5, 2014 at 5:48 PM, Mark H Harris wrote:
> On 4/5/14 1:01 AM, Ben Finney wrote:
>>
>> Mark H Harris writes:
>>
>>> On 4/5/14 12:02 AM, Ian Kelly wrote:
A fork is undesirable because it fragments the community. I don't
think "fear" or "panic" are the right words for it.
On Saturday, April 5, 2014 11:27:08 AM UTC+5:30, Chris Angelico wrote:
> On Sat, Apr 5, 2014 at 4:29 PM, Ben Finney wrote:
> > Without actual data - which neither of us has on this matter - all of
> > these hypotheses are unfounded speculation. Let's not draw any
> > conclusions in the absence of e
On 4/5/14 1:01 AM, Ben Finney wrote:
Mark H Harris writes:
On 4/5/14 12:02 AM, Ian Kelly wrote:
A fork is undesirable because it fragments the community. I don't
think "fear" or "panic" are the right words for it.
Yes. I get that.
So, you get that “fear” and “panic” are not the right
Mark H Harris writes:
> On 4/5/14 12:02 AM, Ian Kelly wrote:
> > A fork is undesirable because it fragments the community. I don't
> > think "fear" or "panic" are the right words for it.
>
>Yes. I get that.
So, you get that “fear” and “panic” are not the right words to
characterise the unde
On Sat, Apr 5, 2014 at 4:29 PM, Ben Finney wrote:
> Chris Angelico writes:
>
>> I would suggest that the more prolific posters are going to be those
>> who use Python more (and thus it's worth investing more time in),
>> which is going to skew the post stats towards the professional end of
>> the
On Sat, Apr 5, 2014 at 4:23 PM, Mark H Harris wrote:
> The only advantage of C++ over C is polymorphism, really. There are in my
> view only three reasons to even use C++: 1) the iostream library, and 2)
> polymorphism, and 3) operator overloading. If you need to do all three, then
> C++ is a real
On 4/5/14 12:02 AM, Ian Kelly wrote:
A fork is undesirable because it fragments the community. I don't
think "fear" or "panic" are the right words for it.
Yes. I get that. I think what is desired (just thinking out loud
from my own vantage point) is a unified community, but also a foundat
Chris Angelico writes:
> I would suggest that the more prolific posters are going to be those
> who use Python more (and thus it's worth investing more time in),
> which is going to skew the post stats towards the professional end of
> the spectrum.
It's also plausible that the more prolific pos
On 4/4/14 11:49 PM, Chris Angelico wrote:
On Sat, Apr 5, 2014 at 3:31 PM, Mark H Harris wrote:
Its has always seemed to me that Java or C++ would be better suited to
creating python. I wonder will C always be the standard canonical PSF python
interpreter base language? Has the C python comm
On Sat, Apr 5, 2014 at 4:02 PM, Mark H Harris wrote:
>I know its just a gut feel, and I know there are a lot of lurkers here
> too, but it seems that there are *way* more folks from the professional camp
> on comp.lang.python than otherwise. Do you have a gut feel for the % of
> hobbyists vs.
On 4/4/14 11:40 PM, Chris Angelico wrote:
If it's too much work to make the changes to move something from
Python 2.7 to Python 3.3, it's *definitely* too much work to rewrite
it in a different language.
Totally, no doubt.
There would have to be some strong other
reason for shifting, espec
On Fri, Apr 4, 2014 at 10:40 PM, Chris Angelico wrote:
> On Sat, Apr 5, 2014 at 3:10 PM, Mark H Harris wrote:
>> we don't want folks to be driven away from Cpython as a language, and we
>> don't want them to fork the Cpython interpreter, so we'll take a very casual
>> and methodically conservativ
On 4/4/14 10:42 PM, Rustom Mody wrote:
Computer-hobbyists and computer-professionals are quite different sets of
people.
I know its just a gut feel, and I know there are a lot of lurkers
here too, but it seems that there are *way* more folks from the
professional camp on comp.lang.python
On Fri, Apr 4, 2014 at 10:10 PM, Mark H Harris wrote:
> On 4/4/14 6:16 PM, Mark Lawrence wrote:
>>
>> Fear/panic of a fork, where did that come from? It's certainly the
>> first I've ever heard of it.
>>
>
> hi Mark, it came from Ian; or, my interpretation of Ian. It comes out on the
> net too (f
On Sat, Apr 5, 2014 at 3:31 PM, Mark H Harris wrote:
>Its has always seemed to me that Java or C++ would be better suited to
> creating python. I wonder will C always be the standard canonical PSF python
> interpreter base language? Has the C python community considered making the
> standard b
On Sat, Apr 5, 2014 at 3:10 PM, Mark H Harris wrote:
> we don't want folks to be driven away from Cpython as a language, and we
> don't want them to fork the Cpython interpreter, so we'll take a very casual
> and methodically conservative approach to nudging people towards a Cpython3
> migration r
On 4/4/14 7:00 PM, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
Berp, Brython, CLPython, CPython, CapPython, ChinesePython, Compyler,
Copperhead, Cython, HoPe, HotPy, IronPython, Jython, Kivy, Mypy, Mython,
Nuitka, Numba, Parakeet, Parallel Python, Perthon, Pippy, Psyco, Py4A,
PyMite, PyMT, PyPad, PyPy, PyQNX, PyVM,
On 4/4/14 10:04 PM, Terry Reedy wrote:
I am a core developer and I am 99.99% sure that the core developers will
not produce a CPython 2.8. For one thing we will likely do instead, see
http://legacy.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0466/
Thanks Terry. The back-port sounds great; I find the "Rejected
al
On 4/4/14 6:16 PM, Mark Lawrence wrote:
Fear/panic of a fork, where did that come from? It's certainly the
first I've ever heard of it.
hi Mark, it came from Ian; or, my interpretation of Ian. It comes out on
the net too (from various places). Here is Ian's quote, then my comment:
Eventua
On 4/4/2014 11:22 PM, Chris Angelico wrote:
On Sat, Apr 5, 2014 at 2:04 PM, Terry Reedy wrote:
I am a core developer and I am 99.99% sure that the core developers will not
produce a CPython 2.8. For one thing we will likely do instead, see
http://legacy.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0466/
There's a
On Saturday, April 5, 2014 2:28:29 AM UTC+5:30, Mark H. Harris wrote:
> hi Mark, yes that's my point. I have heard rumors of python2.8? At some
> point I would expect that the Cpython interpreter would 'freeze' and no
> one would fix it any longer. I have a serious question, namely, why does
> t
On Sat, Apr 5, 2014 at 2:04 PM, Terry Reedy wrote:
> I am a core developer and I am 99.99% sure that the core developers will not
> produce a CPython 2.8. For one thing we will likely do instead, see
> http://legacy.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0466/
There's also been talk of a potential compiler chan
On 4/4/2014 6:07 PM, Mark H Harris wrote:
On 4/4/14 4:50 PM, Mark Lawrence wrote:
You could answer all of the above for yourself if you were to use your
favourite search engine.
hi Mark, yeah, condescending as that is, been there done that.
Since there *are* people who use python-list as a
On Sat, Apr 5, 2014 at 11:00 AM, Steven D'Aprano
wrote:
> As I said, some of these may be abandoned, obsolete, experimental, or
> even vapourware. Some are probably just ports of CPython to another
> platform rather than completely independent implementations.
Python for OS/2 is definitely just a
On Fri, 04 Apr 2014 11:01:48 -0600, Ian Kelly wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 4, 2014 at 4:08 AM, Steven D'Aprano
> wrote:
>> On Fri, 04 Apr 2014 02:13:13 -0600, Ian Kelly wrote:
>>
>>> On Fri, Apr 4, 2014 at 1:52 AM, Steven D'Aprano
>>> wrote:
py> from decimal import *
py> getcontext().prec = 16
On Fri, 04 Apr 2014 15:58:29 -0500, Mark H Harris wrote:
> Oh, I have another serious question about implementations. I'm not sure
> about (50) implementations,
Here's a list. Which ones you count as actual implementations of Python
and which are not may be a matter of opinion. (Do translators
On 04/04/2014 23:52, Mark H Harris wrote:
As Ian points out, you can't expect a complete migration on the PSF
schedule (2->3), because of the fear|panic of a fork. So,
comp.lang.python is the best place to find out where the Cpython
community is, and where they expect to go (for that discussion
On Sat, Apr 5, 2014 at 9:52 AM, Mark H Harris wrote:
> On 4/4/14 5:39 PM, Chris Angelico wrote:
>>
>> Yes, because python-list responses are *so* much more reliable than
>> official statements on python.org,
>
>
> {/sarcasm off}
>
> ... from some responders. The discussion following such posts is
On 4/4/14 5:39 PM, Chris Angelico wrote:
Yes, because python-list responses are *so* much more reliable than
official statements on python.org,
{/sarcasm off}
... from some responders. The discussion following such posts is also
*much* more valuable, too. IMHO
Python.org is the political p
On Sat, Apr 5, 2014 at 9:07 AM, Mark H Harris wrote:
> On 4/4/14 4:50 PM, Mark Lawrence wrote:
>
>> You could answer all of the above for yourself if you were to use your
>> favourite search engine.
>
>
> hi Mark, yeah, condescending as that is, been there done that.
>
>Its always better to ge
On 4/4/14 4:50 PM, Mark Lawrence wrote:
You could answer all of the above for yourself if you were to use your
favourite search engine.
hi Mark, yeah, condescending as that is, been there done that.
See this link as just one example:
http://blog.startifact.com/posts/python28-discussion-chann
On 04/04/2014 21:58, Mark H Harris wrote:
On 4/4/14 3:20 AM, Mark Lawrence wrote:
On 04/04/2014 03:29, Mark H Harris wrote:
Now, about Python2. It has not died. It appears to be 'useful'.
{snip}
For a lot of people, if it ain't broke, don't fix it.
hi Mark, yes that's my point. I h
On Fri, Apr 4, 2014 at 2:58 PM, Mark H Harris wrote:
> On 4/4/14 3:20 AM, Mark Lawrence wrote:
>>
>> On 04/04/2014 03:29, Mark H Harris wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> Now, about Python2. It has not died. It appears to be 'useful'.
>>> {snip}
>>>
>>
>> For a lot of people, if it ain't broke, don't fix it
On 4/4/14 3:20 AM, Mark Lawrence wrote:
On 04/04/2014 03:29, Mark H Harris wrote:
Now, about Python2. It has not died. It appears to be 'useful'.
{snip}
For a lot of people, if it ain't broke, don't fix it.
hi Mark, yes that's my point. I have heard rumors of python2.8? At some
poi
On Fri, Apr 4, 2014 at 4:08 AM, Steven D'Aprano
wrote:
> On Fri, 04 Apr 2014 02:13:13 -0600, Ian Kelly wrote:
>
>> On Fri, Apr 4, 2014 at 1:52 AM, Steven D'Aprano
>> wrote:
>>> py> from decimal import *
>>> py> getcontext().prec = 16
>>> py> x = Decimal("0.77787516") py> y =
>>> Decimal("
On 4/4/2014 5:53 AM, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
On Thu, 03 Apr 2014 11:38:13 -0500, Mark H Harris wrote:
On 4/1/14 5:33 PM, Terry Reedy wrote:
If you narrowly meant "The python interpreter only starting using
unicode as the default text class in 3.0", then you are, in that narrow
sense, correct.
On Friday, April 4, 2014 3:23:31 PM UTC+5:30, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
> On Thu, 03 Apr 2014 11:38:13 -0500, Mark H Harris wrote:
>
> > On 4/1/14 5:33 PM, Terry Reedy wrote:
> >
> > hi Terry, hope you are well today, despite gmane difficulties;
> >
> >> If you narrowly meant "The python interp
On Fri, 04 Apr 2014 02:13:13 -0600, Ian Kelly wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 4, 2014 at 1:52 AM, Steven D'Aprano
> wrote:
>> py> from decimal import *
>> py> getcontext().prec = 16
>> py> x = Decimal("0.77787516") py> y =
>> Decimal("0.77787518") py> (x + y) / 2
>> Decimal('0.777875
On Thu, 03 Apr 2014 11:38:13 -0500, Mark H Harris wrote:
> On 4/1/14 5:33 PM, Terry Reedy wrote:
>
> hi Terry, hope you are well today, despite gmane difficulties;
>
>> If you narrowly meant "The python interpreter only starting using
>> unicode as the default text class in 3.0", then you ar
On 04/04/2014 03:29, Mark H Harris wrote:
Now, about Python2. It has not died. It appears to be 'useful'.
The perceived reality is that Python2 is 'useful'. Or, is it as I
perceive it, python2 is embedded in so many places that it must be
maintained for a long time because so many code(s)
On Fri, Apr 4, 2014 at 1:52 AM, Steven D'Aprano
wrote:
> py> from decimal import *
> py> getcontext().prec = 16
> py> x = Decimal("0.77787516")
> py> y = Decimal("0.77787518")
> py> (x + y) / 2
> Decimal('0.77787515')
>
> "Guido, why can't Python do maths???"
Well, you nee
On Fri, Apr 4, 2014 at 6:52 PM, Steven D'Aprano
wrote:
> py> x = Decimal("0.77787516")
> py> y = Decimal("0.77787518")
> py> (x + y) / 2
> Decimal('0.77787515')
>
> I've changed my mind about Python using Decimal as the default numeric
> type. I think that would send a very
On Fri, 04 Apr 2014 09:43:15 +1100, Chris Angelico wrote:
> While I am interested in seeing a Decimal literal syntax in Python, and
> I would support a shift to have "1.2" evaluate as a Decimal (but not
> soon - it'd break backward compat *hugely*)
I used to think the same thing, but have since l
On 4/3/14 2:43 PM, Marko Rauhamaa wrote:
What does computer science have to show of late? A better mutual
exclusion algorithm? Dancing trees?
Ok, cryptography has been pretty exciting. The back and forth between
feasibility and unfeasibility. The ongoing cat and mouse.
Computer science i
On 4/3/14 9:07 PM, alex23 wrote:
On 4/04/2014 2:38 AM, Mark H Harris wrote:
If I speak of the python community, and I rarely do
Maybe you speak "of" them rarely but you claim to speak "for" them
fairly often.
I am sorry, and I do apologize (genuinely). I knowingly speak for my
users, bec
On 4/3/14 5:43 PM, Chris Angelico wrote:
So your definition of "useful" for the Decimal module is "fast" and
your definition of "useful" for Unicode is "mandated into use".
No. I did not define 'useful'. I placed 'useful' on a continuum
whereby 'useful' is non definitive & relative. Go re
On 4/04/2014 2:38 AM, Mark H Harris wrote:
If I speak of the python community, and I rarely do
Maybe you speak "of" them rarely but you claim to speak "for" them
fairly often.
Python3 is not perfect; but python3 is *way* more consistent than
python2 and consequently *way* more useful th
On Fri, Apr 4, 2014 at 3:38 AM, Mark H Harris wrote:
>'Useful' must always be taken in context, and also contextually evaluated
> with an on-going methodology which constantly informs 'usefulness' on a
> continuum. I admire and encourage the core devs, in their pursuit of
> excellence. Asking
Mark H Harris :
> computer science covers everything from a linked list to virtual
> reality, from cpu pipe lining to flash memory, from punched tape i/o
> to plasma displays--- to led back-lit flat panels.
From the point of view of computer science, those barely register. We
have had a revolutio
On 4/3/14 12:14 PM, Marko Rauhamaa wrote:
Mark H Harris :
So, python(3)'s use of unicode is exciting, not only as a step forward
for the python interpreter, but also as a leadership step forward in
computer science around the world.
Big words. I don't think computer science has experienced ma
On Thursday, April 3, 2014 10:44:16 PM UTC+5:30, Marko Rauhamaa wrote:
> Mark H Harris:
> > So, python(3)'s use of unicode is exciting, not only as a step forward
> > for the python interpreter, but also as a leadership step forward in
> > computer science around the world.
> Big words. I don't t
Mark H Harris :
> So, python(3)'s use of unicode is exciting, not only as a step forward
> for the python interpreter, but also as a leadership step forward in
> computer science around the world.
Big words. I don't think computer science has experienced major steps
forward since the 1930's: comb
On 4/1/14 5:33 PM, Terry Reedy wrote:
hi Terry, hope you are well today, despite gmane difficulties;
If you narrowly meant "The python interpreter only starting using
unicode as the default text class in 3.0", then you are, in that narrow
sense, correct.
Yes. When I speak of 'python' I
On 4/1/2014 5:26 PM, Mark H Harris wrote:
I didn't really start using unicode
until about 5 years ago; python has only really used it since python3.
right?
If you narrowly meant "The python interpreter only starting using
unicode as the default text class in 3.0", then you are, in that narro
On 4/1/14 4:49 PM, Chris Angelico wrote:
On Wed, Apr 2, 2014 at 8:26 AM, Mark H Harris wrote:
Python3 finally started getting unicode right. The fact that it 'existed'
in some form prior to (3) is not meaningful, nor helpful.
When I said, "python has only really used it since python3, right
On Wed, Apr 2, 2014 at 8:26 AM, Mark H Harris wrote:
>Python3 finally started getting unicode right. The fact that it 'existed'
> in some form prior to (3) is not meaningful, nor helpful.
> When I said, "python has only really used it since python3, right?," I meant
> that unicode in python2 w
1 - 100 of 364 matches
Mail list logo
