On Apr 25, 6:05 pm, Mark Wooding wrote:
> Carl Banks writes:
> > Graham, for his part, doesn't seem to appreciate that what he does is
> > beyond hope for average people, and that sometimes reality requires
> > average people to write programs.
>
> I think he understands that perfectly well. But
In message <_vqdnf6pny1gymzunz2dnuvz_qcdn...@posted.visi>, Grant Edwards
wrote:
> ... if one didn't care about backwards-compatiblity with old e-mail
> apps, then one would use a less broken mailbox format like
> maildir.
It's only in the proprietary-software world that we need to worry about
b
I developed an application using pyGTK to download the MP3 music that are
hosted on GoEar http://www.goear.com/.
It's not totally finished, but the main functions are working and some other
interesting features too.
It works well in Windows and Linux (not tested in MAC).
To download: http://cod
This is a two part question:
1. Is there a minimal binary diff comparison library for Python (like difflib,
but able to create a minimal diff)?
2. Has anyone ever tried to implement some form of version control in Python
(if so, where)?
I was just wonder about creating something small to ha
On Sat, Apr 25, 2009 at 7:47 PM, Kevin Ar18 wrote:
>
> 2. Has anyone ever tried to implement some form of version control in Python
> (if so, where)?
Both Bazaar (http://bazaar-vcs.org/) and Mercurial
(http://www.selenic.com/mercurial/wiki/), two popular distributed
VCS-es, are written in Python
On Apr 25, 9:05 pm, Mark Wooding wrote:
> Carl Banks writes:
> > Graham, for his part, doesn't seem to appreciate that
> > what he does is beyond hope for average people, and
> > that sometimes reality requires average people to write
> > programs.
>
> I think he understands that perfectly well.
Paul Rubin wrote:
Carl Banks writes:
Python programmer:
a == b. Next question.
in lisp you'd use (equal a b)
I see you walk both sides. :)
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
That was amusing, but that's not a question of Lisp vs Python
programmers, just one of fun vs practicality. Mark Tarver is the
implementor of Qi, a higher order Lisp of sorts. He's writing a
compiler from Qi to Python and was learning Python along the way.
He's having fun with it, not writin
On Fri, 24 Apr 2009 23:06:30 -0700, Carl Banks wrote:
> Lisp programmer:
>
> Well, there is a standard function called mismatch that does it, but I
> can't recommend it. First of all, you don't know where that function's
> been. Anyone and their mother could have worked on it, did they have
>
On Fri, 24 Apr 2009 21:01:10 -0700, Carl Banks wrote:
> That's because Python lists aren't lists.
Surely you meant to say that Lisp lists aren't lists?
It-all-depends-on-how-you-define-lists-ly y'rs,
--
Steven
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
On Apr 25, 10:26 pm, Carl Banks wrote:
> I totally disagree. Scheme might be a pure language with no
> compromises and impurities, but Common Lisp is certainly not.
I can assure you that even Scheme is a language full
of compromises and inconsistencies :-/
Michele, who is now writing a book a
On Sat, 25 Apr 2009 10:50:50 +0300, Ciprian Dorin, Craciun wrote:
> On Sat, Apr 25, 2009 at 10:43 AM, wrote:
>> Ciprian Dorin, Craciun:
>>> Python way:
>>> -
>>> def eq (a, b) :
>>> return a == b
>>>
>>> def compare (a, b, comp = eq) :
>>> if len (a) != len (b) :
>>> retu
On Sat, 25 Apr 2009 10:30:56 +0200, Martin v. Löwis wrote:
Ok... Then what's pythonic? Please give a pythonic
implementation...
>>> Use the builtin a==b, similar to (equal a b)
>>
>> But how about extensibility?
>
> == is extensible. To compare two things for equality, use
On Apr 25, 2:06 am, Carl Banks wrote:
> In answering the recent question by Mark Tarver, I think I finally hit
> on why Lisp programmers are the way they are (in particular, why they
> are often so hostile to the "There should only be one obvious way to
> do it" Zen).
>
> Say you put this task to
Paul Rubin wrote:
Python tries to be simple and pragmatic while not aiming for as
heavy-duty applications as Common Lisp. Scheme is more of a research
language that's way past its prime. If you like Scheme, you should
try Haskell. Python has the motto "practicality beats purity".
With Haskell,
On Sun, Apr 26, 2009 at 7:54 AM, Steven D'Aprano
wrote:
> On Sat, 25 Apr 2009 10:50:50 +0300, Ciprian Dorin, Craciun wrote:
>
>> On Sat, Apr 25, 2009 at 10:43 AM, wrote:
>>> Ciprian Dorin, Craciun:
Python way:
-
def eq (a, b) :
return a == b
def compare
On Sun, Apr 26, 2009 at 8:11 AM, Steven D'Aprano
wrote:
> On Sat, 25 Apr 2009 10:30:56 +0200, Martin v. Löwis wrote:
>
> Ok... Then what's pythonic? Please give a pythonic
> implementation...
Use the builtin a==b, similar to (equal a b)
>>>
>>> But how about extensibility?
Ciprian Dorin, Craciun wrote:
On Sun, Apr 26, 2009 at 7:54 AM, Steven D'Aprano
wrote:
I liked very much your implementation for the compare function, it
is very short and at the same time readable:
def compare(a, b, comp=operator.eq):
return (len(a) == len(b)) and all(comp(*t) for t in
On Apr 25, 4:34 am, Michele Simionato
wrote:
> which has some feature you may like. For instance,
> there is a weak form of pattern matching built-in:
>
> >>> head, *tail = [1,2,3] # Python 3.0 only!
> >>> head
> 1
> >>> tail
>
> [2, 3]
Good seeing yet another long time Perl feature finally broug
On Apr 26, 1:31 am, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
> On Fri, 24 Apr 2009 21:01:10 -0700, Carl Banks wrote:
> > That's because Python lists aren't lists.
>
> Surely you meant to say that Lisp lists aren't lists?
>
> It-all-depends-on-how-you-define-lists-ly y'rs,
Yeah, the List Processing language got it
101 - 120 of 120 matches
Mail list logo
