Re: Py 2.6 changes

2008-09-02 Thread Chris Rebert
On Mon, Sep 1, 2008 at 6:02 PM, Mensanator <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Sep 1, 6:55�pm, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: >> Steven D'Aprano: >> >> > productory() -- I don't know that function, and googling mostly comes up >> > with retail product searches. Do you mean product(), >> >> Darn my English, y

Re: Numeric literal syntax (was: Py 2.6 changes)

2008-09-02 Thread Patrick Maupin
On Sep 2, 6:35 am, Nick Craig-Wood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >  It's not just my familiarity, Ada language too uses underscore for > >  that purpose, I think, so there's a precedent, and Ada is a language > >  designed to always minimize programmin

Re: Numeric literal syntax (was: Py 2.6 changes)

2008-09-02 Thread Peter Pearson
On 02 Sep 2008 06:10:51 GMT, Steven D'Aprano wrote: > At the risk of bike-shedding, [snip] (startled noises) It is a delight to find a reference to that half-century-old essay (High Finance) by the wonderful C. Northcote Parkinson, but how many readers will catch the allusion? -- To email me, s

Re: Numeric literal syntax (was: Py 2.6 changes)

2008-09-02 Thread Nick Craig-Wood
[EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Ben Finney: > > I don't see any good reason (other than your familiarity with the D > > language) to use underscores for this purpose, and much more reason > > (readability, consistency, fewer arbitrary differences in syntax, > > perhaps simpler imple

Re: Numeric literal syntax (was: Py 2.6 changes)

2008-09-01 Thread Steven D'Aprano
On Tue, 02 Sep 2008 11:13:27 +1000, Ben Finney wrote: > [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: > >> For Python 2.7/3.1 I'd now like to write a PEP regarding the >> underscores into the number literals, like: 0b_0101_, 268_435_456 >> etc. > > +1 on such a capability. > > -1 on underscore as the separator

Re: Numeric literal syntax (was: Py 2.6 changes)

2008-09-01 Thread bearophileHUGS
Ben Finney: > I don't see any good reason (other than your familiarity with the D > language) to use underscores for this purpose, and much more reason > (readability, consistency, fewer arbitrary differences in syntax, > perhaps simpler implementation) to use whitespace just as with string > liter

Numeric literal syntax (was: Py 2.6 changes)

2008-09-01 Thread Ben Finney
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: > For Python 2.7/3.1 I'd now like to write a PEP regarding the > underscores into the number literals, like: 0b_0101_, 268_435_456 > etc. +1 on such a capability. -1 on underscore as the separator. When you proposed this last year, the counter-proposal was made htt

Re: Py 2.6 changes

2008-09-01 Thread Mensanator
On Sep 1, 2:15�pm, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > I have just re-read the list of changes in Python 2.6, it's huge, > there are tons of changes and improvements, I'm really > impressed:http://docs.python.org/dev/whatsnew/2.6.html > > I'll need many days to learn all those changes! I can see it fixes >

Re: Py 2.6 changes

2008-09-01 Thread Mensanator
On Sep 1, 6:55�pm, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > Steven D'Aprano: > > > productory() -- I don't know that function, and googling mostly comes up > > with retail product searches. Do you mean product(), > > Darn my English, you are right, sorry, I meant a product() of > course :-) But the name product

Re: Py 2.6 changes

2008-09-01 Thread bearophileHUGS
Steven D'Aprano: > productory() -- I don't know that function, and googling mostly comes up > with retail product searches. Do you mean product(), Darn my English, you are right, sorry, I meant a product() of course :-) Bye, bearophile -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list

Re: Py 2.6 changes

2008-09-01 Thread Steven D'Aprano
On Mon, 01 Sep 2008 12:15:53 -0700, bearophileHUGS wrote: > Now math has factorial: > http://docs.python.org/dev/library/math.html#math.factorial Seen how > reduce() is removed from Python 3 (I know it's in itertools), and seeing > that for me to write a productory() function was the first usage I

Re: Py 2.6 changes

2008-09-01 Thread Alan G Isaac
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Now math has factorial: http://docs.python.org/dev/library/math.html#math.factorial That's rather underdocumented. Does it really attempt exact calculation for arbitrary integers?? Is there any way to request a nice fast approximation for large integers (e.g., with Gos

Re: Py 2.6 changes

2008-09-01 Thread Christian Heimes
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I presume it's better for me to not hold my breath while I wait CPython to be written in C99 :-) First you have to convince Microsoft to release C99 compiler ... good luck! Christian -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list

Py 2.6 changes

2008-09-01 Thread bearophileHUGS
I have just re-read the list of changes in Python 2.6, it's huge, there are tons of changes and improvements, I'm really impressed: http://docs.python.org/dev/whatsnew/2.6.html I'll need many days to learn all those changes! I can see it fixes several of the missing things/problems I have found in