On 2012-10-16 12:59, Stephen J. Turnbull wrote:
Antoine Pitrou writes:
> But, yes, I would call it "higher level" rather than "easy to use"
> (I don't think there's a need for hyphens, by the way).
You don't need them to get the point across, but elderly grammar
pedants will think better of
On 2012-10-19 02:03, Victor Stinner wrote:
Hi,
I would like to know if there a reason for not using the hash of
(bytes or unicode) strings when comparing two objects and the hash of
the two objects was already been computed. Using the hash would speed
up comparaison of long strings when the two
On 2012-11-06 15:02, Rob Cliffe wrote:
On 06/11/2012 12:01, Nick Coghlan wrote:
As noted, it's really only counterintuitive if your intuition is
primed to expect C style right to left chained assignments.
Python, on the other hand, is able to preserve primarily left to right
evaluation in thi
On 2012-11-14 20:53, Mark Adam wrote:
On Wed, Nov 14, 2012 at 1:37 PM, Xavier Morel wrote:
On 2012-11-14, at 19:54 , Mark Adam wrote:
Merging of two dicts is done with dict.update.
No, dict.update merges one dict (or two) into a third one.
No. I think you need to read the docs.
How do
On 2012-11-14 21:20, MRAB wrote:
On 2012-11-14 20:53, Mark Adam wrote:
On Wed, Nov 14, 2012 at 1:37 PM, Xavier Morel wrote:
On 2012-11-14, at 19:54 , Mark Adam wrote:
Merging of two dicts is done with dict.update.
No, dict.update merges one dict (or two) into a third one.
No. I think
On 2012-11-14 21:40, Greg Ewing wrote:
Chris Angelico wrote:
Perhaps an alternative question: What can be done to make the latter
less unpalatable?
* We could introduce a new syntax such as {a = 1, b = 2}.
* If the compiler were allowed to recognise builtins, it could
turn dict(a = 1, b = 2)
On 2012-12-06 02:12, Stephen J. Turnbull wrote:
I understand the PEP author's frustration with continued discussion,
but I think this subthread on Obsoletes vs. Obsoleted-By is not mere
bikeshedding on names. It matters *which package* presents the
information.
Donald Stufft writes:
> On Wed
On 2012-12-08 20:18, PJ Eby wrote:
On Sat, Dec 8, 2012 at 5:06 AM, Nick Coghlan wrote:
On Sat, Dec 8, 2012 at 4:46 PM, PJ Eby wrote:
So if package A includes a "Conflicts: B" declaration, I recommend the
following:
* An attempt to install A with B already present refuses to install A
withou
On 2012-12-09 01:15, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
On 09/12/12 08:14, MRAB wrote:
If package A says that it conflicts with package B, it may or may not
be symmetrical, because it's possible that package B has been updated
since the author of package A discovered the conflict, so it's
On 2012-12-09 22:22, Mark Shannon wrote:
Hi all,
The current CPython bytecode interpreter is rather more complex than it
needs to be. A number of bytecodes could be eliminated and a few more
simplified by moving the work involved in handling compound statements
(loops, try-blocks, etc) from the
On 2012-12-10 01:44, Raymond Hettinger wrote:
The current memory layout for dictionaries is
unnecessarily inefficient. It has a sparse table of
24-byte entries containing the hash value, key pointer,
and value pointer.
Instead, the 24-byte entries should be stored in a
dense table referenced by
On 2012-12-12 23:33, Lennart Regebro wrote:
On Thu, Dec 13, 2012 at 12:23 AM, Terry Reedy wrote:
As a Windows user, I would like there to be one tz data file used by all
Python versions on my machine, including ones included with other apps.
That would be nice, but where would that be install
On 2013-02-12 21:44, Antoine Pitrou wrote:
On Tue, 12 Feb 2013 16:40:38 -0500
Ned Batchelder wrote:
But the only reason "".join() is a Python idiom in the first place is
because it was "the fast way" to do what everyone initially coded as "s
+= ...". Just because we all learned a long time a
On 2013-02-13 13:23, Lennart Regebro wrote:
On Wed, Feb 13, 2013 at 1:10 PM, Serhiy Storchaka wrote:
I prefer "x = '%s%s%s%s' % (a, b, c, d)" when string's number is more than 3
and some of them are literal strings.
This has the benefit of being slow both on CPython and PyPy. Although
using .
501 - 514 of 514 matches
Mail list logo
