On Wed, Dec 10, 2008 at 4:17 AM, Lance Larsen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Finally got a few moments to put the implicit subs syntax code
together and get it ready to submit. Here it is.
The patch looks good to me, +1. I'll wait for others and if they are
ok as well, push this in.
Thanks!
Finally got a few moments to put the implicit subs syntax code
together and get it ready to submit. Here it is.
-Lance
# HG changeset patch
# User [EMAIL PROTECTED]
# Date 1228878177 25200
# Node ID dc86dcc8d059f0a2cd3eb498b595c8a45775aa92
# Parent d1019a5c66d12d524fe64359c1bd8054cab0cfa9
This patch doesn't treat dummies well, but I guess that can be fixed
later:
In [6]: a_d = Symbol('a',dummy=True)
In [7]: a = Symbol('alpha',dummy=True)
In [8]: f = 2*a*a_d*x
In [9]: f
Out[9]: 2*x*a*alpha
In [10]: f(a=2)
Out[10]: 2*x*a*alpha
In [11]: f(a_d=2)
Out[11]: 2*x*a*alpha
In [12]:
Sorry if I am being a pain in the #%%, I just want to make sure that
we get the desig of this right as someone else said you only get to
implement __call__ once.
No worries. I appreciate you clarifying your viewpoint. You may not
like what you get if you don't give your opinion.
The patch
On Thu, Nov 20, 2008 at 2:18 AM, Ondrej Certik [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wed, Nov 19, 2008 at 10:42 PM, Lance Larsen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
For what it is worth, I fixed the errors in the last patch submitted.
Looks like a previous patch has already been applied in main
repository
On Thu, Nov 20, 2008 at 2:22 AM, Ondrej Certik [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Thu, Nov 20, 2008 at 2:18 AM, Ondrej Certik [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wed, Nov 19, 2008 at 10:42 PM, Lance Larsen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
For what it is worth, I fixed the errors in the last patch submitted.
Looks
Which patch was applied in the main repo?
I did a pull from the main line and it looked like one of my original
patches was included in my repository. If this wasn't from the main
repo (and it sounds like it wasn't), I must have committed the hg
patch locally when I was experimenting with hg
This patch looks good to me. Brian -- is it ok with you as well?
As much as I can tell from looking at the diff, yes, it is OK. I say
go ahead, if we want to add the bindings thing later we can, but even
this is a nice improvement.
Brian
Ondrej
