Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]


Groups > comp.lang.python > #94282

Re: Devanagari int literals [was Re: Should non-security 2.7 bugs be fixed?]

Path csiph.com!usenet.pasdenom.info!news.redatomik.org!newsfeed.xs4all.nl!newsfeed8.news.xs4all.nl!newsgate.cistron.nl!newsgate.news.xs4all.nl!post.news.xs4all.nl!not-for-mail
Return-Path <python-python-list@m.gmane.org>
X-Original-To python-list@python.org
Delivered-To python-list@mail.python.org
X-Spam-Status OK 0.003
X-Spam-Evidence '*H*': 0.99; '*S*': 0.00; 'from:addr:yahoo.co.uk': 0.05; 'counting': 0.07; 'creighton': 0.09; 'defined.': 0.09; 'received:80.91': 0.09; 'received:80.91.229': 0.09; 'received:gmane.org': 0.09; 'received:list': 0.09; 'subject:2.7': 0.09; 'subject: \n ': 0.15; '...,': 0.16; 'ah,': 0.16; 'digits)': 0.16; 'received:80.91.229.3': 0.16; 'received:plane.gmane.org': 0.16; 'subject:non': 0.16; 'wrote:': 0.16; 'laura': 0.18; 'language': 0.19; '>>>': 0.20; '2015': 0.20; 'prevent': 0.20; 'saying': 0.22; 'lawrence': 0.22; 'trying': 0.22; 'defined': 0.23; '(or': 0.23; 'header:In-Reply-To:1': 0.24; 'mon,': 0.24; 'header :User-Agent:1': 0.26; 'header:X-Complaints-To:1': 0.26; 'equivalent': 0.27; '-0700,': 0.29; 'subject: [': 0.29; 'url:wikipedia': 0.29; 'url:wiki': 0.30; '"the': 0.32; 'language.': 0.32; 'getting': 0.33; 'definition': 0.34; 'something': 0.35; 'but': 0.36; 'url:org': 0.36; 'to:addr:python- list': 0.36; 'subject:: ': 0.37; 'received:org': 0.37; 'mean': 0.38; 'url:en': 0.39; 'subject:-': 0.39; 'to:addr:python.org': 0.40; 'mark': 0.40; 'some': 0.40; 'skip:u 10': 0.61; 'ago.': 0.61; 'charset:windows-1252': 0.62; 'our': 0.64; 'you.': 0.64; 'jul': 0.72; 'inform': 0.79; 'century': 0.84; 'pythonistas,': 0.84; 'roman': 0.84; 'essence': 0.91
X-Injected-Via-Gmane http://gmane.org/
To python-list@python.org
From Mark Lawrence <breamoreboy@yahoo.co.uk>
Subject Re: Devanagari int literals [was Re: Should non-security 2.7 bugs be fixed?]
Date Tue, 21 Jul 2015 11:34:32 +0100
References <moenuj$f11$1@ger.gmane.org> <moeqtn$mh0$1@ger.gmane.org> <moeurf$a6f$1@ger.gmane.org> <mailman.695.1437273248.3674.python-list@python.org> <7083e494-6192-4acb-aea9-216d858171bc@googlegroups.com> <55ab2b57$0$1664$c3e8da3$5496439d@news.astraweb.com> <76252f32-64e9-405b-84a2-996200a6fa6f@googlegroups.com> <mailman.808.1437466239.3674.python-list@python.org> <87twsxj2ot.fsf@elektro.pacujo.net>
Mime-Version 1.0
Content-Type text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding 7bit
X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host host-78-147-188-8.as13285.net
User-Agent Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.3; WOW64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.1.0
In-Reply-To <87twsxj2ot.fsf@elektro.pacujo.net>
X-BeenThere python-list@python.org
X-Mailman-Version 2.1.20+
Precedence list
List-Id General discussion list for the Python programming language <python-list.python.org>
List-Unsubscribe <https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-list>, <mailto:python-list-request@python.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-list/>
List-Post <mailto:python-list@python.org>
List-Help <mailto:python-list-request@python.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe <https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list>, <mailto:python-list-request@python.org?subject=subscribe>
Newsgroups comp.lang.python
Message-ID <mailman.811.1437474897.3674.python-list@python.org> (permalink)
Lines 35
NNTP-Posting-Host 2001:888:2000:d::a6
X-Trace 1437474897 news.xs4all.nl 2833 [2001:888:2000:d::a6]:48817
X-Complaints-To abuse@xs4all.nl
Xref csiph.com comp.lang.python:94282

Show key headers only | View raw


On 21/07/2015 10:10, Marko Rauhamaa wrote:
> Laura Creighton <lac@openend.se>:
>
>> In a message of Mon, 20 Jul 2015 20:30:48 -0700, Rustom Mody writes:
>>
>>> Can some unicode/Chinese literate person inform me whether that
>>> ideograph is equivalent to roman '9' or roman 'nine'?
>>
>> Ah, I don't understand you. What do you mean roman 'nine'? a phonetic
>> way of saying things? What bankers use to help prevent forgeries?
>> Something else?
>
> This is getting deep. It is an embarrassing metamathematical fact that
> numbers cannot be defined. At least, mathematicians gave up trying a
> century ago.
>
>     In mathematics, the essence of counting a set and finding a result n,
>     is that it establishes a one to one correspondence (or bijection) of
>     the set with the set of numbers {1, 2, ..., n}.
>     <URL: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Counting#Counting_in_mathematics>
>
> Our ancestors defined the fingers (or digits) as "the set of numbers."
> Modern mathematicians have managed to enhance the definition
> quantitatively but not qualitatively.
>

Not all of them 
http://www.languagesandnumbers.com/how-to-count-in-paici/en/pri/

-- 
My fellow Pythonistas, ask not what our language can do for you, ask
what you can do for our language.

Mark Lawrence

Back to comp.lang.python | Previous | NextPrevious in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread


Thread

Re: Should non-security 2.7 bugs be fixed? Devin Jeanpierre <jeanpierreda@gmail.com> - 2015-07-18 19:33 -0700
  Re: Should non-security 2.7 bugs be fixed? Rick Johnson <rantingrickjohnson@gmail.com> - 2015-07-18 19:49 -0700
  Re: Should non-security 2.7 bugs be fixed? Rustom Mody <rustompmody@gmail.com> - 2015-07-18 20:52 -0700
    Re: Should non-security 2.7 bugs be fixed? Rick Johnson <rantingrickjohnson@gmail.com> - 2015-07-18 21:18 -0700
    Devanagari int literals [was Re: Should non-security 2.7 bugs be fixed?] Steven D'Aprano <steve@pearwood.info> - 2015-07-19 14:45 +1000
      Re: Devanagari int literals [was Re: Should non-security 2.7 bugs be fixed?] Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2015-07-19 15:06 +1000
        Re: Devanagari int literals [was Re: Should non-security 2.7 bugs be fixed?] Marko Rauhamaa <marko@pacujo.net> - 2015-07-19 10:16 +0300
          Re: Devanagari int literals [was Re: Should non-security 2.7 bugs be fixed?] Rustom Mody <rustompmody@gmail.com> - 2015-07-19 00:32 -0700
            Re: Devanagari int literals [was Re: Should non-security 2.7 bugs be fixed?] Marko Rauhamaa <marko@pacujo.net> - 2015-07-19 10:44 +0300
            Re: Devanagari int literals [was Re: Should non-security 2.7 bugs be fixed?] Terry Reedy <tjreedy@udel.edu> - 2015-07-19 19:13 -0400
              Re: Devanagari int literals [was Re: Should non-security 2.7 bugs be fixed?] Rustom Mody <rustompmody@gmail.com> - 2015-07-19 19:02 -0700
      Re: Devanagari int literals [was Re: Should non-security 2.7 bugs be fixed?] Anuradha Laxminarayan <lanuradha@gmail.com> - 2015-07-18 23:25 -0700
      Re: Devanagari int literals [was Re: Should non-security 2.7 bugs be fixed?] Terry Reedy <tjreedy@udel.edu> - 2015-07-19 04:26 -0400
      Re: Devanagari int literals [was Re: Should non-security 2.7 bugs be fixed?] Tim Chase <python.list@tim.thechases.com> - 2015-07-19 07:56 -0500
      Re: Devanagari int literals [was Re: Should non-security 2.7 bugs be fixed?] Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2015-07-20 04:07 +1000
      Re: Devanagari int literals [was Re: Should non-security 2.7 bugs be fixed?] Tim Chase <python.list@tim.thechases.com> - 2015-07-19 14:55 -0500
      Re: Devanagari int literals [was Re: Should non-security 2.7 bugs be fixed?] Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2015-07-20 07:16 +1000
        Re: Devanagari int literals [was Re: Should non-security 2.7 bugs be fixed?] wxjmfauth@gmail.com - 2015-07-20 00:43 -0700
      Re: Devanagari int literals [was Re: Should non-security 2.7 bugs be fixed?] MRAB <python@mrabarnett.plus.com> - 2015-07-19 23:13 +0100
      Re: Devanagari int literals [was Re: Should non-security 2.7 bugs be fixed?] Rustom Mody <rustompmody@gmail.com> - 2015-07-20 20:30 -0700
        Re: Devanagari int literals [was Re: Should non-security 2.7 bugs be fixed?] Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2015-07-21 13:43 +1000
          Re: Devanagari int literals [was Re: Should non-security 2.7 bugs be fixed?] Rustom Mody <rustompmody@gmail.com> - 2015-07-20 23:11 -0700
        Re: Devanagari int literals [was Re: Should non-security 2.7 bugs be fixed?] Laura Creighton <lac@openend.se> - 2015-07-21 10:10 +0200
          Re: Devanagari int literals [was Re: Should non-security 2.7 bugs be fixed?] Marko Rauhamaa <marko@pacujo.net> - 2015-07-21 12:10 +0300
            Re: Devanagari int literals [was Re: Should non-security 2.7 bugs be fixed?] Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2015-07-21 19:18 +1000
              Re: Devanagari int literals [was Re: Should non-security 2.7 bugs be fixed?] Marko Rauhamaa <marko@pacujo.net> - 2015-07-21 13:13 +0300
            Re: Devanagari int literals [was Re: Should non-security 2.7 bugs be fixed?] Mark Lawrence <breamoreboy@yahoo.co.uk> - 2015-07-21 11:34 +0100
            Re: Devanagari int literals [was Re: Should non-security 2.7 bugs be fixed?] Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2015-07-21 20:39 +1000
              Re: Devanagari int literals [was Re: Should non-security 2.7 bugs be fixed?] Marko Rauhamaa <marko@pacujo.net> - 2015-07-21 13:54 +0300
                Re: Devanagari int literals [was Re: Should non-security 2.7 bugs be fixed?] Marko Rauhamaa <marko@pacujo.net> - 2015-08-09 00:27 +0300
                Re: OT Re: Math-embarrassment results in CS [was: Should non-security 2.7 bugs be fixed?] Rustom Mody <rustompmody@gmail.com> - 2015-08-09 09:29 -0700
              Re:  Math-embarrassment results in CS [was: Should non-security 2.7 bugs be fixed?] Rustom Mody <rustompmody@gmail.com> - 2015-07-22 06:34 -0700
                OT Re: Math-embarrassment results in CS [was: Should non-security 2.7 bugs be fixed?] Steven D'Aprano <steve@pearwood.info> - 2015-07-23 02:58 +1000
                Re: OT Re: Math-embarrassment results in CS [was: Should non-security 2.7 bugs be fixed?] Laura Creighton <lac@openend.se> - 2015-07-22 19:17 +0200
                Re: OT Re: Math-embarrassment results in CS [was: Should non-security 2.7 bugs be fixed?] Rustom Mody <rustompmody@gmail.com> - 2015-07-22 10:49 -0700
                Re: OT Re: Math-embarrassment results in CS [was: Should non-security 2.7 bugs be fixed?] Laura Creighton <lac@openend.se> - 2015-07-22 20:14 +0200
                Re: OT Re: Math-embarrassment results in CS [was: Should non-security 2.7 bugs be fixed?] Mark Lawrence <breamoreboy@yahoo.co.uk> - 2015-07-22 21:59 +0100
                Re: OT Re: Math-embarrassment results in CS [was: Should non-security 2.7 bugs be fixed?] Steven D'Aprano <steve@pearwood.info> - 2015-07-23 03:21 +1000
                Re: OT Re: Math-embarrassment results in CS [was: Should non-security 2.7 bugs be fixed?] Dennis Lee Bieber <wlfraed@ix.netcom.com> - 2015-07-22 21:44 -0400
                Re: OT Re: Math-embarrassment results in CS [was: Should non-security 2.7 bugs be fixed?] Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2015-07-23 12:00 +1000
                Re: OT Re: Math-embarrassment results in CS [was: Should non-security 2.7 bugs be fixed?] Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2015-07-22 10:48 -0700
                Re: OT Re: Math-embarrassment results in CS [was: Should non-security 2.7 bugs be fixed?] Rustom Mody <rustompmody@gmail.com> - 2015-07-22 10:51 -0700
                Re: OT Re: Math-embarrassment results in CS [was: Should non-security 2.7 bugs be fixed?] Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2015-07-23 15:14 +1000
                Re: OT Re: Math-embarrassment results in CS [was: Should non-security 2.7 bugs be fixed?] Rustom Mody <rustompmody@gmail.com> - 2015-07-22 11:09 -0700
                Re: OT Re: Math-embarrassment results in CS [was: Should non-security 2.7 bugs be fixed?] Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2015-07-23 15:41 +1000
                Re: OT Re: Math-embarrassment results in CS [was: Should non-security 2.7 bugs be fixed?] Marko Rauhamaa <marko@pacujo.net> - 2015-07-23 23:59 +0300
                Re: OT Re: Math-embarrassment results in CS [was: Should non-security 2.7 bugs be fixed?] Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2015-07-24 07:03 +1000
                Re: OT Re: Math-embarrassment results in CS [was: Should non-security 2.7 bugs be fixed?] Marko Rauhamaa <marko@pacujo.net> - 2015-07-24 00:29 +0300
                Re: OT Re: Math-embarrassment results in CS [was: Should non-security 2.7 bugs be fixed?] Mark Lawrence <breamoreboy@yahoo.co.uk> - 2015-07-23 22:50 +0100
                Re: OT Re: Math-embarrassment results in CS [was: Should non-security 2.7 bugs be fixed?] Laura Creighton <lac@openend.se> - 2015-07-23 23:52 +0200
                Re: OT Re: Math-embarrassment results in CS [was: Should non-security 2.7 bugs be fixed?] Marko Rauhamaa <marko@pacujo.net> - 2015-07-24 00:59 +0300
                Re: OT Re: Math-embarrassment results in CS [was: Should non-security 2.7 bugs be fixed?] Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2015-07-24 08:02 +1000
                Re: OT Re: Math-embarrassment results in CS [was: Should non-security 2.7 bugs be fixed?] Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2015-07-24 08:00 +1000
                Re: OT Re: Math-embarrassment results in CS [was: Should non-security 2.7 bugs be fixed?] MRAB <python@mrabarnett.plus.com> - 2015-07-23 23:01 +0100
                Re: OT Re: Math-embarrassment results in CS [was: Should non-security 2.7 bugs be fixed?] Laura Creighton <lac@openend.se> - 2015-07-24 00:19 +0200
                Re: OT Re: Math-embarrassment results in CS [was: Should non-security 2.7 bugs be fixed?] Mark Lawrence <breamoreboy@yahoo.co.uk> - 2015-07-23 23:56 +0100
                Re: OT Re: Math-embarrassment results in CS [was: Should non-security 2.7 bugs be fixed?] Grant Edwards <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2015-07-24 00:07 +0000
                Re: OT Re: Math-embarrassment results in CS [was: Should non-security 2.7 bugs be fixed?] Rick Johnson <rantingrickjohnson@gmail.com> - 2015-07-23 18:40 -0700
                Re: OT Re: Math-embarrassment results in CS [was: Should non-security 2.7 bugs be fixed?] Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2015-07-23 19:03 -0700
                Re: OT Re: Math-embarrassment results in CS [was: Should non-security 2.7 bugs be fixed?] Rick Johnson <rantingrickjohnson@gmail.com> - 2015-07-23 20:16 -0700
                Re: OT Re: Math-embarrassment results in CS [was: Should non-security 2.7 bugs be fixed?] Grant Edwards <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2015-07-24 14:13 +0000
                Re: OT Re: Math-embarrassment results in CS [was: Should non-security 2.7 bugs be fixed?] Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2015-07-24 08:45 -0700
                Re: OT Re: Math-embarrassment results in CS [was: Should non-security 2.7 bugs be fixed?] Mark Lawrence <breamoreboy@yahoo.co.uk> - 2015-07-24 16:58 +0100
                Re: OT Re: Math-embarrassment results in CS [was: Should non-security 2.7 bugs be fixed?] Rustom Mody <rustompmody@gmail.com> - 2015-07-23 22:15 -0700
                Re: OT Re: Math-embarrassment results in CS [was: Should non-security   2.7 bugs be fixed?] Gregory Ewing <greg.ewing@canterbury.ac.nz> - 2015-07-23 18:57 +1200
                Re: OT Re: Math-embarrassment results in CS [was: Should non-security 2.7 bugs be fixed?] Rustom Mody <rustompmody@gmail.com> - 2015-07-23 02:12 -0700
                Re: OT Re: Math-embarrassment results in CS [was: Should non-security 2.7 bugs be fixed?] Rustom Mody <rustompmody@gmail.com> - 2015-07-23 05:52 -0700
                Re: OT Re: Math-embarrassment results in CS [was: Should non-security 2.7 bugs be fixed?] Marko Rauhamaa <marko@pacujo.net> - 2015-07-23 11:24 +0300
        Re: Devanagari int literals [was Re: Should non-security 2.7 bugs be fixed?] Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2015-07-21 18:57 +1000
    Re: Should non-security 2.7 bugs be fixed? Terry Reedy <tjreedy@udel.edu> - 2015-07-19 02:44 -0400
    Re: Should non-security 2.7 bugs be fixed? Terry Reedy <tjreedy@udel.edu> - 2015-07-19 05:11 -0400
      Re: Should non-security 2.7 bugs be fixed? Rustom Mody <rustompmody@gmail.com> - 2015-07-19 07:30 -0700
    Re: Should non-security 2.7 bugs be fixed? Mark Lawrence <breamoreboy@yahoo.co.uk> - 2015-07-19 15:00 +0100
  Re: Should non-security 2.7 bugs be fixed? Steven D'Aprano <steve@pearwood.info> - 2015-07-19 14:45 +1000
    Re: Should non-security 2.7 bugs be fixed? Devin Jeanpierre <jeanpierreda@gmail.com> - 2015-07-19 18:20 -0700
      Re: Should non-security 2.7 bugs be fixed? Steven D'Aprano <steve@pearwood.info> - 2015-07-20 13:05 +1000
        Re: Should non-security 2.7 bugs be fixed? Devin Jeanpierre <jeanpierreda@gmail.com> - 2015-07-19 20:41 -0700
    Re: Should non-security 2.7 bugs be fixed? Mark Lawrence <breamoreboy@yahoo.co.uk> - 2015-07-20 02:46 +0100
      Re: Should non-security 2.7 bugs be fixed? Rustom Mody <rustompmody@gmail.com> - 2015-07-19 19:16 -0700
        Re: Should non-security 2.7 bugs be fixed? Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2015-07-20 12:59 +1000
        Re: Should non-security 2.7 bugs be fixed? Mark Lawrence <breamoreboy@yahoo.co.uk> - 2015-07-20 11:59 +0100
        Re: Should non-security 2.7 bugs be fixed? Rick Johnson <rantingrickjohnson@gmail.com> - 2015-07-20 20:04 -0700
          Re: Should non-security 2.7 bugs be fixed? Rustom Mody <rustompmody@gmail.com> - 2015-07-20 20:15 -0700
            Re: Should non-security 2.7 bugs be fixed? Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2015-07-21 13:33 +1000
            Re: Should non-security 2.7 bugs be fixed? Terry Reedy <tjreedy@udel.edu> - 2015-07-21 00:45 -0400
          Re: Should non-security 2.7 bugs be fixed? breamoreboy@gmail.com - 2015-07-21 14:22 -0700
            Re: Should non-security 2.7 bugs be fixed? Rick Johnson <rantingrickjohnson@gmail.com> - 2015-07-21 19:07 -0700
              Re: Should non-security 2.7 bugs be fixed? Terry Reedy <tjreedy@udel.edu> - 2015-07-22 02:51 -0400
                Re: Should non-security 2.7 bugs be fixed? Rick Johnson <rantingrickjohnson@gmail.com> - 2015-07-22 16:37 -0700
    Re: Should non-security 2.7 bugs be fixed? Terry Reedy <tjreedy@udel.edu> - 2015-07-20 02:25 -0400
    Re: Should non-security 2.7 bugs be fixed? dieter <dieter@handshake.de> - 2015-07-20 08:58 +0200
    Re: Should non-security 2.7 bugs be fixed? Devin Jeanpierre <jeanpierreda@gmail.com> - 2015-07-20 00:13 -0700

csiph-web