Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.lang.python > #21634 > unrolled thread
| Started by | Kiuhnm <kiuhnm03.4t.yahoo.it> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2012-03-15 00:34 +0100 |
| Last post | 2012-03-18 18:19 +0000 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 201 — 36 participants |
Back to article view | Back to comp.lang.python
Python is readable Kiuhnm <kiuhnm03.4t.yahoo.it> - 2012-03-15 00:34 +0100
Re: Python is readable Arnaud Delobelle <arnodel@gmail.com> - 2012-03-14 23:54 +0000
Re: Python is readable Tony the Tiger <tony@tiger.invalid> - 2012-03-14 19:18 -0500
Re: Python is readable Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2012-03-15 11:27 +1100
Re: Python is readable Rick Johnson <rantingrickjohnson@gmail.com> - 2012-03-14 20:02 -0700
Re: Python is readable alex23 <wuwei23@gmail.com> - 2012-03-14 23:23 -0700
Re: Python is readable Kiuhnm <kiuhnm03.4t.yahoo.it> - 2012-03-15 11:44 +0100
Re: Python is readable Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2012-03-15 21:50 +1100
Re: Python is readable Kiuhnm <kiuhnm03.4t.yahoo.it> - 2012-03-15 12:27 +0100
Re: Python is readable Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2012-03-15 22:47 +1100
Re: Python is readable Kiuhnm <kiuhnm03.4t.yahoo.it> - 2012-03-15 12:59 +0100
Re: Python is readable Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2012-03-15 23:21 +1100
Re: Python is readable Ben Finney <ben+python@benfinney.id.au> - 2012-03-15 23:31 +1100
Re: Python is readable Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2012-03-15 23:38 +1100
Re: Python is readable Ben Finney <ben+python@benfinney.id.au> - 2012-03-16 00:16 +1100
Re: Python is readable Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2012-03-16 00:33 +1100
Re: Python is readable Ben Finney <ben+python@benfinney.id.au> - 2012-03-16 00:50 +1100
RE: Python is readable "Prasad, Ramit" <ramit.prasad@jpmorgan.com> - 2012-03-15 17:43 +0000
Re: Python is readable Kiuhnm <kiuhnm03.4t.yahoo.it> - 2012-03-15 15:16 +0100
Re: Python is readable Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2012-03-16 01:29 +1100
Re: Python is readable Kiuhnm <kiuhnm03.4t.yahoo.it> - 2012-03-15 15:37 +0100
Re: Python is readable Roy Smith <roy@panix.com> - 2012-03-15 11:14 -0400
Re: Python is readable Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2012-03-16 02:27 +1100
Re: Python is readable Roy Smith <roy@panix.com> - 2012-03-15 11:44 -0400
Re: Python is readable Alec Taylor <alec.taylor6@gmail.com> - 2012-03-16 03:01 +1100
Re: Python is readable Mark Lawrence <breamoreboy@yahoo.co.uk> - 2012-03-15 17:41 +0000
Re: Python is readable Thomas Rachel <nutznetz-0c1b6768-bfa9-48d5-a470-7603bd3aa915@spamschutz.glglgl.de> - 2012-03-15 12:14 +0100
Re: Python is readable Kiuhnm <kiuhnm03.4t.yahoo.it> - 2012-03-15 12:48 +0100
Re: Python is readable Mark Lawrence <breamoreboy@yahoo.co.uk> - 2012-03-15 14:06 +0000
Re: Python is readable Kiuhnm <kiuhnm03.4t.yahoo.it> - 2012-03-15 15:19 +0100
Re: Python is readable Tim Golden <mail@timgolden.me.uk> - 2012-03-15 14:28 +0000
Re: Python is readable Kiuhnm <kiuhnm03.4t.yahoo.it> - 2012-03-15 15:55 +0100
Re: Python is readable Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2012-03-16 02:08 +1100
Re: Python is readable Kiuhnm <kiuhnm03.4t.yahoo.it> - 2012-03-15 20:40 +0100
Re: Python is readable Michael Torrie <torriem@gmail.com> - 2012-03-15 16:12 -0600
Re: Python is readable Ben Finney <ben+python@benfinney.id.au> - 2012-03-16 09:35 +1100
Re: Python is readable Arnaud Delobelle <arnodel@gmail.com> - 2012-03-15 23:00 +0000
Re: Python is readable Kiuhnm <kiuhnm03.4t.yahoo.it> - 2012-03-16 00:46 +0100
Re: Python is readable Mark Lawrence <breamoreboy@yahoo.co.uk> - 2012-03-15 23:58 +0000
Re: Python is readable Kiuhnm <kiuhnm03.4t.yahoo.it> - 2012-03-16 12:41 +0100
Re: Python is readable Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2012-03-16 00:15 +0000
Re: Python is readable Ben Finney <ben+python@benfinney.id.au> - 2012-03-16 10:57 +1100
Re: Python is readable Robert Kern <robert.kern@gmail.com> - 2012-03-15 15:13 +0000
Re: Python is readable Serhiy Storchaka <storchaka@gmail.com> - 2012-03-15 21:43 +0200
Re: Python is readable Alec Taylor <alec.taylor6@gmail.com> - 2012-03-16 01:17 +1100
Re: Python is readable Duncan Booth <duncan.booth@invalid.invalid> - 2012-03-15 14:23 +0000
Re: Python is readable Kiuhnm <kiuhnm03.4t.yahoo.it> - 2012-03-15 15:30 +0100
Re: Python is readable Robert Kern <robert.kern@gmail.com> - 2012-03-15 14:43 +0000
Re: Python is readable Kiuhnm <kiuhnm03.4t.yahoo.it> - 2012-03-15 16:18 +0100
Re: Python is readable Michael Torrie <torriem@gmail.com> - 2012-03-15 16:17 -0600
Re: Python is readable Kiuhnm <kiuhnm03.4t.yahoo.it> - 2012-03-16 00:32 +0100
Re: Python is readable Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2012-03-16 03:55 +0000
Re: Python is readable Kiuhnm <kiuhnm03.4t.yahoo.it> - 2012-03-16 13:10 +0100
Re: Python is readable Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2012-03-16 16:48 +0000
Re: Python is readable Michael Torrie <torriem@gmail.com> - 2012-03-16 17:39 -0600
Re: Python is readable Kiuhnm <kiuhnm03.4t.yahoo.it> - 2012-03-17 22:22 +0100
Re: Python is readable Kiuhnm <kiuhnm03.4t.yahoo.it> - 2012-03-17 20:59 +0100
Re: Python is readable Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2012-03-18 08:20 +1100
Re: Python is readable Kiuhnm <kiuhnm03.4t.yahoo.it> - 2012-03-17 22:28 +0100
Re: Python is readable Michael Torrie <torriem@gmail.com> - 2012-03-17 17:04 -0600
Re: Python is readable Kiuhnm <kiuhnm03.4t.yahoo.it> - 2012-03-19 12:15 +0100
Re: Python is readable Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2012-03-19 11:57 +0000
Re: Python is readable Ben Finney <ben+python@benfinney.id.au> - 2012-03-18 11:42 +1100
Re: Python is readable Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2012-03-18 01:36 +0000
Re: Python is readable Kiuhnm <kiuhnm03.4t.yahoo.it> - 2012-03-19 12:34 +0100
Re: Python is readable Lie Ryan <lie.1296@gmail.com> - 2012-03-31 16:56 +1100
Re: Python is readable MRAB <python@mrabarnett.plus.com> - 2012-03-31 18:27 +0100
Re: Python is readable Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2012-03-16 01:48 +1100
Re: Python is readable Kiuhnm <kiuhnm03.4t.yahoo.it> - 2012-03-15 16:05 +0100
Re: Python is readable Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2012-03-16 02:14 +1100
Re: Python is readable Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2012-03-15 23:52 +0000
Re: Python is readable Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2012-03-16 14:12 +1100
Re: Python is readable Kiuhnm <kiuhnm03.4t.yahoo.it> - 2012-03-16 13:36 +0100
Re: Python is readable Neil Cerutti <neilc@norwich.edu> - 2012-03-16 12:50 +0000
Re: Python is readable Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2012-03-16 13:03 +0000
Re: Python is readable Neil Cerutti <neilc@norwich.edu> - 2012-03-16 13:08 +0000
Re: Python is readable Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2012-03-16 16:28 +0000
Re: Python is readable Neil Cerutti <neilc@norwich.edu> - 2012-03-16 17:53 +0000
Re: Python is readable Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2012-03-16 18:50 +0000
Re: Python is readable Neil Cerutti <neilc@norwich.edu> - 2012-03-16 19:35 +0000
RE: Python is readable "Prasad, Ramit" <ramit.prasad@jpmorgan.com> - 2012-03-16 20:04 +0000
Re: Python is readable Kiuhnm <kiuhnm03.4t.yahoo.it> - 2012-03-17 21:54 +0100
Re: Python is readable Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2012-03-18 00:57 +0000
Re: Python is readable Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2012-03-18 12:07 +1100
Re: Python is readable Steven D'Aprano <steve+usenet@pearwood.info> - 2012-03-18 02:05 +0000
Re: Python is readable Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2012-03-18 13:15 +1100
Re: Python is readable Kiuhnm <kiuhnm03.4t.yahoo.it> - 2012-03-21 00:57 +0100
Re: Python is readable Mel Wilson <mwilson@the-wire.com> - 2012-03-16 16:01 -0400
Re: Python is readable Ethan Furman <ethan@stoneleaf.us> - 2012-03-16 13:30 -0700
Re: Python is readable Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2012-03-17 07:59 +1100
Re: Python is readable Terry Reedy <tjreedy@udel.edu> - 2012-03-17 01:09 -0400
Re: Python is readable Neil Cerutti <neilc@norwich.edu> - 2012-03-19 11:26 +0000
Re: Python is readable Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2012-03-19 11:51 +0000
Re: Python is readable Neil Cerutti <neilc@norwich.edu> - 2012-03-19 12:53 +0000
Re: Python is readable Robert Kern <robert.kern@gmail.com> - 2012-03-19 14:38 +0000
Re: Python is readable Kiuhnm <kiuhnm03.4t.yahoo.it> - 2012-03-17 21:23 +0100
Re: Python is readable Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2012-03-18 01:46 +0000
Re: Python is readable Kiuhnm <kiuhnm03.4t.yahoo.it> - 2012-03-19 12:44 +0100
Re: Python is readable Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2012-03-19 15:27 +0000
Re: Python is readable Kiuhnm <kiuhnm03.4t.yahoo.it> - 2012-03-21 00:27 +0100
Re: Python is readable Thomas Rachel <nutznetz-0c1b6768-bfa9-48d5-a470-7603bd3aa915@spamschutz.glglgl.de> - 2012-03-15 16:41 +0100
Re: Python is readable Duncan Booth <duncan.booth@invalid.invalid> - 2012-03-16 09:30 +0000
Re: Python is readable John Ladasky <ladasky@my-deja.com> - 2012-03-18 14:30 -0700
Re: Python is readable Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2012-03-19 09:02 +1100
Re: Python is readable Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2012-03-19 01:23 +0000
Re: Python is readable Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2012-03-19 15:33 +1100
Re: Python is readable Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2012-03-19 13:37 +0000
Re: Python is readable Albert van der Horst <albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl> - 2012-03-20 12:20 +0000
Re: Python is readable alex23 <wuwei23@gmail.com> - 2012-03-18 20:15 -0700
Re: Python is readable Chris Rebert <clp2@rebertia.com> - 2012-03-18 21:14 -0700
Re: Python is readable Nathan Rice <nathan.alexander.rice@gmail.com> - 2012-03-20 12:55 -0400
Re: Python is readable Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2012-03-20 17:48 +0000
Re: Python is readable Terry Reedy <tjreedy@udel.edu> - 2012-03-20 14:09 -0400
Re: Python is readable Nathan Rice <nathan.alexander.rice@gmail.com> - 2012-03-20 15:28 -0400
Re: Python is readable Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2012-03-21 00:22 +0000
Re: Python is readable Steve Howell <showell30@yahoo.com> - 2012-03-20 18:28 -0700
Re: Python is readable Ben Finney <ben+python@benfinney.id.au> - 2012-03-21 13:28 +1100
Re: Python is readable Steve Howell <showell30@yahoo.com> - 2012-03-20 19:44 -0700
Re: Python is readable Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2012-03-21 15:16 +1100
Re: Python is readable Steve Howell <showell30@yahoo.com> - 2012-03-20 21:58 -0700
Re: Python is readable Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2012-03-21 16:40 +1100
Re: Python is readable Steve Howell <showell30@yahoo.com> - 2012-03-20 23:52 -0700
Re: Python is readable Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2012-03-21 17:59 +1100
Re: Python is readable Chris Rebert <clp2@rebertia.com> - 2012-03-21 00:16 -0700
Re: Python is readable Steve Howell <showell30@yahoo.com> - 2012-03-21 00:57 -0700
Re: Python is readable Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2012-03-21 19:15 +1100
Re: Re: Python is readable Evan Driscoll <driscoll@cs.wisc.edu> - 2012-03-21 11:22 -0500
Re: Python is readable Steve Howell <showell30@yahoo.com> - 2012-03-21 09:30 -0700
Re: Python is readable Nathan Rice <nathan.alexander.rice@gmail.com> - 2012-03-21 14:06 -0400
Re: Python is readable Steve Howell <showell30@yahoo.com> - 2012-03-21 18:35 -0700
Re: Python is readable Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2012-03-22 08:56 +0000
Re: Python is readable (OT) Jon Clements <joncle@googlemail.com> - 2012-03-22 04:18 -0700
Re: Python is readable Nathan Rice <nathan.alexander.rice@gmail.com> - 2012-03-22 08:47 -0400
Re: Python is readable Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2012-03-22 17:18 +0000
Re: Python is readable Nathan Rice <nathan.alexander.rice@gmail.com> - 2012-03-22 14:26 -0400
Re: Python is readable Albert van der Horst <albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl> - 2012-03-29 13:44 +0000
Re: Python is readable Nathan Rice <nathan.alexander.rice@gmail.com> - 2012-03-29 14:37 -0400
Re: Python is readable Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2012-03-30 01:42 +0000
Re: Python is readable Nathan Rice <nathan.alexander.rice@gmail.com> - 2012-03-29 22:26 -0400
Re: Python is readable Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2012-03-30 03:36 +0000
Re: Python is readable Nathan Rice <nathan.alexander.rice@gmail.com> - 2012-03-30 00:38 -0400
Re: Python is readable Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2012-03-30 10:47 +0000
Re: Python is readable Nathan Rice <nathan.alexander.rice@gmail.com> - 2012-03-30 09:46 -0400
Re: Python is readable Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2012-03-31 03:20 +1100
Re: Python is readable Nathan Rice <nathan.alexander.rice@gmail.com> - 2012-03-30 14:15 -0400
Re: Python is readable Neil Cerutti <neilc@norwich.edu> - 2012-03-30 20:30 +0000
Re: Python is readable alex23 <wuwei23@gmail.com> - 2012-04-01 20:38 -0700
Re: Python is readable Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2012-03-31 05:29 +1100
Re: Python is readable Nathan Rice <nathan.alexander.rice@gmail.com> - 2012-03-30 15:55 -0400
Re: Python is readable Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2012-03-31 07:20 +1100
Re: Python is readable Steve Howell <showell30@yahoo.com> - 2012-03-30 22:07 -0700
Re: Python is readable Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2012-04-03 08:06 +1000
Re: Python is readable Dan Sommers <dan@tombstonezero.net> - 2012-03-30 16:51 -0400
Re: Python is readable Nathan Rice <nathan.alexander.rice@gmail.com> - 2012-03-30 16:58 -0400
Re: Python is readable Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2012-03-31 08:45 +1100
Re: Python is readable Nathan Rice <nathan.alexander.rice@gmail.com> - 2012-03-30 19:01 -0400
Re: Python is readable Terry Reedy <tjreedy@udel.edu> - 2012-03-31 00:03 -0400
Re: Python is readable Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2012-03-31 19:05 +1100
Re: Python is readable Nathan Rice <nathan.alexander.rice@gmail.com> - 2012-03-31 10:43 -0400
Re: Python is readable rusi <rustompmody@gmail.com> - 2012-03-30 11:17 -0700
Re: Python is readable Steve Howell <showell30@yahoo.com> - 2012-03-30 09:02 -0700
Re: Python is readable alex23 <wuwei23@gmail.com> - 2012-04-01 20:30 -0700
Re: Python is readable Steve Howell <showell30@yahoo.com> - 2012-04-01 21:01 -0700
Re: Python is readable Steve Howell <showell30@yahoo.com> - 2012-03-29 23:44 -0700
RE: Python is readable "Prasad, Ramit" <ramit.prasad@jpmorgan.com> - 2012-03-30 16:40 +0000
Re: Python is readable Steve Howell <showell30@yahoo.com> - 2012-03-30 00:27 -0700
Re: Python is readable Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2012-03-23 06:08 +1100
Re: Python is readable Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2012-03-23 00:17 +1100
Re: Python is readable Nathan Rice <nathan.alexander.rice@gmail.com> - 2012-03-22 10:29 -0400
Re: Python is readable Steve Howell <showell30@yahoo.com> - 2012-03-22 09:12 -0700
Re: Python is readable Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2012-03-22 17:44 +0000
Re: Python is readable Steve Howell <showell30@yahoo.com> - 2012-03-22 19:42 -0700
Re: Python is readable rusi <rustompmody@gmail.com> - 2012-03-22 20:20 -0700
Re: Python is readable Steve Howell <showell30@yahoo.com> - 2012-03-22 21:16 -0700
Re: Python is readable MRAB <python@mrabarnett.plus.com> - 2012-03-23 04:43 +0000
Re: Python is readable Steve Howell <showell30@yahoo.com> - 2012-03-22 23:58 -0700
Re: Python is readable Nathan Rice <nathan.alexander.rice@gmail.com> - 2012-03-23 00:20 -0400
Re: Python is readable Steve Howell <showell30@yahoo.com> - 2012-03-22 08:33 -0700
Re: Python is readable Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2012-03-23 06:21 +1100
Re: Python is readable Nathan Rice <nathan.alexander.rice@gmail.com> - 2012-03-22 15:33 -0400
Re: Python is readable Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2012-03-23 06:48 +1100
Re: Python is readable Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2012-03-23 06:49 +1100
Re: Python is readable Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2012-03-21 23:34 +0000
Re: Python is readable Steve Howell <showell30@yahoo.com> - 2012-03-21 17:54 -0700
Re: Python is readable Lie Ryan <lie.1296@gmail.com> - 2012-03-31 17:25 +1100
Re: Python is readable Steve Howell <showell30@yahoo.com> - 2012-03-31 09:59 -0700
Re: Python is readable Nathan Rice <nathan.alexander.rice@gmail.com> - 2012-03-21 00:55 -0400
Re: Python is readable Terry Reedy <tjreedy@udel.edu> - 2012-03-20 16:01 -0400
Re: Python is readable Nathan Rice <nathan.alexander.rice@gmail.com> - 2012-03-20 16:34 -0400
Re: Python is readable Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2012-03-21 00:01 +0000
Re: Python is readable Lie Ryan <lie.1296@gmail.com> - 2012-03-31 17:15 +1100
Re: Python is readable Devin Jeanpierre <jeanpierreda@gmail.com> - 2012-03-15 13:51 -0400
Re: Python is readable Arnaud Delobelle <arnodel@gmail.com> - 2012-03-15 20:54 +0000
Re: Python is readable Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2012-03-16 02:03 +0000
Re: Python is readable Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2012-03-16 01:53 +0000
Re: Python is readable Mark Lawrence <breamoreboy@yahoo.co.uk> - 2012-03-16 02:16 +0000
Re: Python is readable Kiuhnm <kiuhnm03.4t.yahoo.it> - 2012-03-16 13:55 +0100
Re: Python is readable Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2012-03-16 16:25 +0000
Re: Python is readable Kiuhnm <kiuhnm03.4t.yahoo.it> - 2012-03-16 17:58 +0100
RE: Python is readable "Prasad, Ramit" <ramit.prasad@jpmorgan.com> - 2012-03-16 17:01 +0000
Re: Python is readable alister <alister.ware@ntlworld.com> - 2012-03-18 18:19 +0000
Page 2 of 11 — ← Prev page 1 [2] 3 4 … 11 Next page →
| From | Kiuhnm <kiuhnm03.4t.yahoo.it> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2012-03-15 15:37 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <4f61fea4$0$1378$4fafbaef@reader2.news.tin.it> |
| In reply to | #21675 |
On 3/15/2012 15:29, Chris Angelico wrote: > On Fri, Mar 16, 2012 at 1:16 AM, Kiuhnm > <kiuhnm03.4t.yahoo.it@mail.python.org> wrote: >> Don't worry. Soon you'll be using C++0x :))) > > I use gcc/g++ with most of the new features enabled. There's some > pretty handy features in it. Frankly, though, if I'd known about > Cython when I started the current project, I would have argued to > write it all in Python and Cify (is that a word?) the most > performance-critical sections afterwards, instead of writing it in > C++. Wise words. Indeed, I was joking :) I don't like what C++ is becoming. C++ should be rewritten from scratch but then who would use it? Kiuhnm
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Roy Smith <roy@panix.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2012-03-15 11:14 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <roy-27226A.11140215032012@news.panix.com> |
| In reply to | #21675 |
In article <mailman.678.1331821755.3037.python-list@python.org>, Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> wrote: > I use gcc/g++ with most of the new features enabled. There's some > pretty handy features in it. Frankly, though, if I'd known about > Cython when I started the current project, I would have argued to > write it all in Python and Cify (is that a word?) the most > performance-critical sections afterwards, instead of writing it in > C++. +1. With the exception of the client-side javascript, virtually 100% of the application code behind songza.com is python. We use django, tornado, and gunicorn (all pure python). The ORM layer (mongoengine) is pure python. Of course, there's plenty of C/C++ code in the database (MongoDB), HTTP proxies (nginx and haproxy), and search engine (Xapian), but the core application code is all python. About 80,000 lines worth. Every time we look at performance, we discover the same thing. The time spent running python code is insignificant. It's all about network I/O and database queries. The only time we ever see any significant time running python code is when we do something stupid and write some O(n^2) code that can be replaced by a more appropriate algorithm. While it's nice to know that we've got the ability to write extensions in C, not once have we ever felt the need. I suppose if you're running a CPU-bound application, that might not be the case, but surprisingly few applications really are compute bound these days. I had an interesting experience the other day. We had a job applicant implement one of our coding tests in Java. It's a data mining exercise where you need to generate some summary statistics from a 700,000 line log file we give you. My Python version takes under a second. His Java version came up with the right numbers but took 2 minutes. I looked at his code and didn't any any obvious problem. It turned out he used a regex that started with '.*', and apparently the Java regex library implements that badly. Eliminating the leading '.*' got his Java running in the same time as my Python.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2012-03-16 02:27 +1100 |
| Message-ID | <mailman.685.1331825254.3037.python-list@python.org> |
| In reply to | #21684 |
On Fri, Mar 16, 2012 at 2:14 AM, Roy Smith <roy@panix.com> wrote: > While it's nice to know that we've got the ability to write extensions > in C, not once have we ever felt the need. I suppose if you're running > a CPU-bound application, that might not be the case, but surprisingly > few applications really are compute bound these days. My boss and I have these discussions now and then. A topic of performance comes up, and we debate whether or not, for instance, it's worth doing a separate check of an input file to see if it's properly-formed UTF-8 before parsing it (this is in PHP, or it'd be easy - just do a UTF-8 decode and work with Unicode). The debate ended, as they inevitably do, with "We're talking about a file that someone's uploaded to us, so it won't matter". Whatever processing we do is massively dwarfed by network time, and both scale linearly with the size of the file. ChrisA
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Roy Smith <roy@panix.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2012-03-15 11:44 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <roy-C51B2F.11440715032012@news.panix.com> |
| In reply to | #21688 |
In article <mailman.685.1331825254.3037.python-list@python.org>, Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> wrote: > "We're talking about a file that someone's uploaded to us, so it > won't matter". Whatever processing we do is massively dwarfed by > network time, and both scale linearly with the size of the file. That last part (both scaling linearly) may not be true. There's an overhead of one RTT (Round Trip Time) to open a TCP connection. Add at least (handwave) one more RTT if you're negotiating encryption (i.e. https). If you're sending lots of small files, this can easily swamp the data transfer time. The single biggest optimization we've made recently was using a persistent https connection to an external data provider. Fortunately, the truly awesome requests library (http://docs.python-requests.org/) made that trivial to implement.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Alec Taylor <alec.taylor6@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2012-03-16 03:01 +1100 |
| Message-ID | <mailman.686.1331827305.3037.python-list@python.org> |
| In reply to | #21670 |
On Fri, Mar 16, 2012 at 1:16 AM, Kiuhnm <kiuhnm03.4t.yahoo.it@mail.python.org> wrote: > On 3/15/2012 13:21, Chris Angelico wrote: >> >> On Thu, Mar 15, 2012 at 10:59 PM, Kiuhnm >> <kiuhnm03.4t.yahoo.it@mail.python.org> wrote: >>> >>> On 3/15/2012 12:47, Chris Angelico wrote: >>>> >>>> It's a little odd, perhaps, if seen in a vacuum. But everything counts >>>> from zero - list indices, etc - so it makes sense for range(len(lst)) >>>> to return indices valid for lst. >>> >>> >>> Maybe range uses [...) intervals? So range(a,b) is a,a+1,a+2,...,b-1 and >>> range(b) is just short-hand for range(0,b)? >> >> >> Yup. It's amazing how accurate your conjectures are - it's almost like >> you've been reading the docs! :D > > > Come on... that was easy! :) > > >> But yeah, that's pretty logical IMHO; >> and having gotten used to [) intervals in many areas of computing, >> I've come to find [] intervals disconcerting. Bible passages are >> described as, for instance, John 14:5-7, which is a three-verse >> passage (5, 6, 7), even though 7-5=2. > > > Common people use mainly inclusive intervals as far as I can tell. > For instance, "from" and "to" are inclusive. > They could tell you they don't like your intervals because 8-5+1 = 4 instead > of 3. > > >> However, inclusive-inclusive intervals have the benefit that they >> don't require the element "beyond the last" to be indexable. This is >> important if you're working with something that takes up all of >> addressable memory - going back to the IBM PCs on which I learned to >> code, you could use one 64KB segment for an array, but then there's no >> way for a 16-bit integer to indicate "past the end". > > > But you lose the empty interval (a,a). You're forced to use (a,a-1) or > something similar. There's always a drawback. > >>>> List comps are pretty readable if you know how programming languages >>>> work. Python need not be readable by everyone and his grandmother, and >>>> it does a fairly good job of being grokkable to someone who has a few >>>> ranks in Coding. (Yeah, I'm a D&D nerd. ) >>> >>> >>> I like what I've seen so far. >> >> >> Python has its problems, but it's a good language. I personally prefer >> to delimit blocks of code with braces than with indentation, > > > I, on the other hand, prefer indentation. I find braces redundant (in fact, > I never use them in pseudo-code). > > >> and I >> also prefer explicit declaration of variables (yes, it's extra work, >> but you can have infinitely nested scopes and easily-caught syntax >> errors when you misspell one), but they're relatively minor. > > > I usually declare my variables but close to where I need them. > > >> One of my >> favorite aspects of Python is that *everything* is an object. There's >> no magic syntax that gives you a piece of an object, or something >> special about variables that contain this, that, or the other. A >> literal list [like, this, one] can be used in exactly the same ways as >> the name of a variable containing a list or a function call returning >> a list - there is no difference. Oh how I yearn for that when working >> in C++ or PHP! > > > Don't worry. Soon you'll be using C++0x :))) > > Kiuhnm > -- > http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list C++0x? You mean C++11? :P On that note, is Python upgrading to use C11? :V
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Mark Lawrence <breamoreboy@yahoo.co.uk> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2012-03-15 17:41 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <mailman.691.1331833308.3037.python-list@python.org> |
| In reply to | #21670 |
On 15/03/2012 16:01, Alec Taylor wrote: > > C++0x? You mean C++11? :P > > On that note, is Python upgrading to use C11? :V Not for Windows given http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2012-February/116258.html. I've no idea regarding *nix, os x or whatever. -- Cheers. Mark Lawrence.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Thomas Rachel <nutznetz-0c1b6768-bfa9-48d5-a470-7603bd3aa915@spamschutz.glglgl.de> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2012-03-15 12:14 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <jjsiup$rd7$1@r03.glglgl.gl> |
| In reply to | #21651 |
Am 15.03.2012 11:44 schrieb Kiuhnm:
> Let's try that.
> Show me an example of "list comprehensions" and "with" (whatever they are).
with open("filename", "w") as f:
f.write(stuff)
with lock:
do_something_exclusively()
Thomas
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Kiuhnm <kiuhnm03.4t.yahoo.it> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2012-03-15 12:48 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <4f61d728$0$1375$4fafbaef@reader2.news.tin.it> |
| In reply to | #21653 |
On 3/15/2012 12:14, Thomas Rachel wrote:
> Am 15.03.2012 11:44 schrieb Kiuhnm:
>
>> Let's try that.
>> Show me an example of "list comprehensions" and "with" (whatever they
>> are).
>
> with open("filename", "w") as f:
> f.write(stuff)
Here f is created before executing the block and destroyed right after
leaving the block. f's destructor will probably close the file handle.
> with lock:
> do_something_exclusively()
It's clear what it does, but I don't know if that's special syntax.
Maybe objects can have two special methods that are called respect. on
entering and leaving the with-block.
Or, more likely, lock creates an object which keeps the lock "acquired".
The lock is released when we leave the block.
So we could inspect the lock with
with lock as l:
inspect l...
do_some.....
BTW, aren't those ':' redundant?
Kiuhnm
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Mark Lawrence <breamoreboy@yahoo.co.uk> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2012-03-15 14:06 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <mailman.675.1331820337.3037.python-list@python.org> |
| In reply to | #21656 |
On 15/03/2012 11:48, Kiuhnm wrote:
> On 3/15/2012 12:14, Thomas Rachel wrote:
>> Am 15.03.2012 11:44 schrieb Kiuhnm:
>>
>>> Let's try that.
>>> Show me an example of "list comprehensions" and "with" (whatever they
>>> are).
>>
>> with open("filename", "w") as f:
>> f.write(stuff)
>
> Here f is created before executing the block and destroyed right after
> leaving the block. f's destructor will probably close the file handle.
>
>> with lock:
>> do_something_exclusively()
>
> It's clear what it does, but I don't know if that's special syntax.
> Maybe objects can have two special methods that are called respect. on
> entering and leaving the with-block.
> Or, more likely, lock creates an object which keeps the lock "acquired".
> The lock is released when we leave the block.
> So we could inspect the lock with
> with lock as l:
> inspect l...
> do_some.....
>
> BTW, aren't those ':' redundant?
>
> Kiuhnm
Nope.
Python 2.7.2 (default, Jun 12 2011, 15:08:59) [MSC v.1500 32 bit
(Intel)] on win32
Type "help", "copyright", "credits" or "license" for more information.
>>> with open("filename", "w") as f
File "<stdin>", line 1
with open("filename", "w") as f
^
SyntaxError: invalid syntax
--
Cheers.
Mark Lawrence.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Kiuhnm <kiuhnm03.4t.yahoo.it> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2012-03-15 15:19 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <4f61fa8a$0$1381$4fafbaef@reader2.news.tin.it> |
| In reply to | #21669 |
On 3/15/2012 15:06, Mark Lawrence wrote:
> On 15/03/2012 11:48, Kiuhnm wrote:
>> On 3/15/2012 12:14, Thomas Rachel wrote:
>>> Am 15.03.2012 11:44 schrieb Kiuhnm:
>>>
>>>> Let's try that.
>>>> Show me an example of "list comprehensions" and "with" (whatever they
>>>> are).
>>>
>>> with open("filename", "w") as f:
>>> f.write(stuff)
>>
>> Here f is created before executing the block and destroyed right after
>> leaving the block. f's destructor will probably close the file handle.
>>
>>> with lock:
>>> do_something_exclusively()
>>
>> It's clear what it does, but I don't know if that's special syntax.
>> Maybe objects can have two special methods that are called respect. on
>> entering and leaving the with-block.
>> Or, more likely, lock creates an object which keeps the lock "acquired".
>> The lock is released when we leave the block.
>> So we could inspect the lock with
>> with lock as l:
>> inspect l...
>> do_some.....
>>
>> BTW, aren't those ':' redundant?
>>
>> Kiuhnm
>
> Nope.
>
> Python 2.7.2 (default, Jun 12 2011, 15:08:59) [MSC v.1500 32 bit
> (Intel)] on win32
> Type "help", "copyright", "credits" or "license" for more information.
> >>> with open("filename", "w") as f
> File "<stdin>", line 1
> with open("filename", "w") as f
> ^
> SyntaxError: invalid syntax
Ok, so they're mandatory, but I was mainly talking of design. Why are
they needed?
Kiuhnm
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Tim Golden <mail@timgolden.me.uk> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2012-03-15 14:28 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <mailman.677.1331821722.3037.python-list@python.org> |
| In reply to | #21672 |
On 15/03/2012 14:19, Kiuhnm wrote:
> On 3/15/2012 15:06, Mark Lawrence wrote:
>> On 15/03/2012 11:48, Kiuhnm wrote:
>>> BTW, aren't those ':' redundant?
>>>
>>> Kiuhnm
>>
>> Nope.
>>
>> Python 2.7.2 (default, Jun 12 2011, 15:08:59) [MSC v.1500 32 bit
>> (Intel)] on win32
>> Type "help", "copyright", "credits" or "license" for more information.
>> >>> with open("filename", "w") as f
>> File "<stdin>", line 1
>> with open("filename", "w") as f
>> ^
>> SyntaxError: invalid syntax
>
> Ok, so they're mandatory, but I was mainly talking of design. Why are
> they needed?
>
> Kiuhnm
http://docs.python.org/faq/design.html#why-are-colons-required-for-the-if-while-def-class-statements
TJG
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Kiuhnm <kiuhnm03.4t.yahoo.it> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2012-03-15 15:55 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <4f6202cb$0$1377$4fafbaef@reader2.news.tin.it> |
| In reply to | #21674 |
On 3/15/2012 15:28, Tim Golden wrote:
> On 15/03/2012 14:19, Kiuhnm wrote:
>> On 3/15/2012 15:06, Mark Lawrence wrote:
>>> On 15/03/2012 11:48, Kiuhnm wrote:
>>>> BTW, aren't those ':' redundant?
>>>>
>>>> Kiuhnm
>>>
>>> Nope.
>>>
>>> Python 2.7.2 (default, Jun 12 2011, 15:08:59) [MSC v.1500 32 bit
>>> (Intel)] on win32
>>> Type "help", "copyright", "credits" or "license" for more information.
>>> >>> with open("filename", "w") as f
>>> File "<stdin>", line 1
>>> with open("filename", "w") as f
>>> ^
>>> SyntaxError: invalid syntax
>>
>> Ok, so they're mandatory, but I was mainly talking of design. Why are
>> they needed?
>>
>> Kiuhnm
>
> http://docs.python.org/faq/design.html#why-are-colons-required-for-the-if-while-def-class-statements
The second one is slightly easier to read because it's
syntax-highlighted. Was that on purpose?
By the way, the more elaborate parsing consists of looking for an
END_OF_LINE followed by one or more spaces. It doesn't sound that
complicated.
And what about an editor which indent when you press the spacebar or tab?
Kiuhnm
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2012-03-16 02:08 +1100 |
| Message-ID | <mailman.682.1331824120.3037.python-list@python.org> |
| In reply to | #21681 |
On Fri, Mar 16, 2012 at 1:55 AM, Kiuhnm <kiuhnm03.4t.yahoo.it@mail.python.org> wrote: > By the way, the more elaborate parsing consists of looking for an > END_OF_LINE followed by one or more spaces. It doesn't sound that > complicated. Only in the trivial case. What if you want to break your condition over multiple lines? (Although you have to parenthesize or backslash, so that's still unambig.) It's helpful to be explicit. > And what about an editor which indent when you press the spacebar or tab? Sure, but a good editor helps out by noticing that you did something that begs for indentation. If I put an open brace, SciTE will indent - very simple rule. With Python, if there were no colon markers, it would be quite complicated to figure out whether or not to indent; with the colons, it's simply "if/while/etc" followed by text followed by colon, and then no further non-comment text. (This sounds involved. It's not. It's right enough. -- Lady Blanche) ChrisA
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Kiuhnm <kiuhnm03.4t.yahoo.it> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2012-03-15 20:40 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <4f6245c5$0$1384$4fafbaef@reader2.news.tin.it> |
| In reply to | #21683 |
On 3/15/2012 16:08, Chris Angelico wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 16, 2012 at 1:55 AM, Kiuhnm
> <kiuhnm03.4t.yahoo.it@mail.python.org> wrote:
>> By the way, the more elaborate parsing consists of looking for an
>> END_OF_LINE followed by one or more spaces. It doesn't sound that
>> complicated.
>
> Only in the trivial case. What if you want to break your condition
> over multiple lines? (Although you have to parenthesize or backslash,
> so that's still unambig.) It's helpful to be explicit.
You said it yourself. Just look out for parentheses or backslashes.
C and C++ editors do that all the time with single-statement
control-flow constructs.
>> And what about an editor which indent when you press the spacebar or tab?
>
> Sure, but a good editor helps out by noticing that you did something
> that begs for indentation. If I put an open brace, SciTE will indent -
> very simple rule.
What about braces in strings? There's always some parsing going on and
since you probably want syntax highlighting and maybe code
autocompletion, what's the problem with missing colons?
Moreover, I think that
if (............
............
............):
............
............
............
is not very readable anyway.
Kiuhnm
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Michael Torrie <torriem@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2012-03-15 16:12 -0600 |
| Message-ID | <mailman.707.1331849562.3037.python-list@python.org> |
| In reply to | #21706 |
On 03/15/2012 01:40 PM, Kiuhnm wrote:
> Moreover, I think that
> if (............
> ............
> ............):
> ............
> ............
> ............
> is not very readable anyway.
Sure but neither is
if (............ \
............ \
............)
............
............
............
In other words, with or without the : if you format your if statements
in an unreadable way, it will be unreadable. Nothing to do with
python's syntax at all.
Now,
if ............
............
............:
............
............
............
isn't too bad for readability. In other words the C-ism of putting the
IF predicate in parenthesis normally doesn't belong in python, though
there are cases when you need to enforce a certain operator precedence,
granted.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Ben Finney <ben+python@benfinney.id.au> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2012-03-16 09:35 +1100 |
| Message-ID | <873999pk52.fsf@benfinney.id.au> |
| In reply to | #21706 |
Kiuhnm <kiuhnm03.4t.yahoo.it> writes: > Moreover, I think that > if (............ > ............ > ............): > ............ > ............ > ............ > is not very readable anyway. I agree, and am glad PEP 8 has been updated to recommend an extra level of indentation for continuation, to distinguish from the new block that follows <URL:http://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0008/#indentation>. -- \ “From the moment I picked your book up until I laid it down I | `\ was convulsed with laughter. Someday I intend reading it.” | _o__) —Groucho Marx | Ben Finney
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Arnaud Delobelle <arnodel@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2012-03-15 23:00 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <mailman.709.1331852426.3037.python-list@python.org> |
| In reply to | #21719 |
On 15 March 2012 22:35, Ben Finney <ben+python@benfinney.id.au> wrote:
> Kiuhnm <kiuhnm03.4t.yahoo.it> writes:
>
>> Moreover, I think that
>> if (............
>> ............
>> ............):
>> ............
>> ............
>> ............
>> is not very readable anyway.
>
> I agree, and am glad PEP 8 has been updated to recommend an extra level
> of indentation for continuation, to distinguish from the new block that
> follows <URL:http://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0008/#indentation>.
Personally I solve this by never writing if conditions that span more
than one line. If the worst comes to the worst, I would write:
aptly_named_condition = (
very long condition
that goes over
plenty of lines
)
if aptly_named_condition:
do stuff
--
Arnaud
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Kiuhnm <kiuhnm03.4t.yahoo.it> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2012-03-16 00:46 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <4f627f5c$0$1389$4fafbaef@reader2.news.tin.it> |
| In reply to | #21720 |
On 3/16/2012 0:00, Arnaud Delobelle wrote:
> On 15 March 2012 22:35, Ben Finney<ben+python@benfinney.id.au> wrote:
>> Kiuhnm<kiuhnm03.4t.yahoo.it> writes:
>>
>>> Moreover, I think that
>>> if (............
>>> ............
>>> ............):
>>> ............
>>> ............
>>> ............
>>> is not very readable anyway.
>>
>> I agree, and am glad PEP 8 has been updated to recommend an extra level
>> of indentation for continuation, to distinguish from the new block that
>> follows<URL:http://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0008/#indentation>.
>
> Personally I solve this by never writing if conditions that span more
> than one line. If the worst comes to the worst, I would write:
>
> aptly_named_condition = (
> very long condition
> that goes over
> plenty of lines
> )
> if aptly_named_condition:
> do stuff
Will I be able to use extra indentation in Python code?
For instance,
res = and(or(cond1,
cond2),
cond3,
or(and(cond4,
cond5,
cond6),
and(cond7,
cond8)))
I like it because it reads like a tree.
Kiuhnm
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Mark Lawrence <breamoreboy@yahoo.co.uk> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2012-03-15 23:58 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <mailman.710.1331855919.3037.python-list@python.org> |
| In reply to | #21722 |
On 15/03/2012 23:46, Kiuhnm wrote: > On 3/16/2012 0:00, Arnaud Delobelle wrote: >> On 15 March 2012 22:35, Ben Finney<ben+python@benfinney.id.au> wrote: >>> Kiuhnm<kiuhnm03.4t.yahoo.it> writes: >>> >>>> Moreover, I think that >>>> if (............ >>>> ............ >>>> ............): >>>> ............ >>>> ............ >>>> ............ >>>> is not very readable anyway. >>> >>> I agree, and am glad PEP 8 has been updated to recommend an extra level >>> of indentation for continuation, to distinguish from the new block that >>> follows<URL:http://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0008/#indentation>. >> >> Personally I solve this by never writing if conditions that span more >> than one line. If the worst comes to the worst, I would write: >> >> aptly_named_condition = ( >> very long condition >> that goes over >> plenty of lines >> ) >> if aptly_named_condition: >> do stuff > > Will I be able to use extra indentation in Python code? > For instance, > > res = and(or(cond1, > cond2), > cond3, > or(and(cond4, > cond5, > cond6), > and(cond7, > cond8))) > > I like it because it reads like a tree. > > Kiuhnm Why not find out for yourself by slapping the code into an interactive Python interpreter and seeing what the result is? -- Cheers. Mark Lawrence.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Kiuhnm <kiuhnm03.4t.yahoo.it> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2012-03-16 12:41 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <4f6326fe$0$1381$4fafbaef@reader1.news.tin.it> |
| In reply to | #21725 |
On 3/16/2012 0:58, Mark Lawrence wrote: > On 15/03/2012 23:46, Kiuhnm wrote: >> On 3/16/2012 0:00, Arnaud Delobelle wrote: >>> On 15 March 2012 22:35, Ben Finney<ben+python@benfinney.id.au> wrote: >>>> Kiuhnm<kiuhnm03.4t.yahoo.it> writes: >>>> >>>>> Moreover, I think that >>>>> if (............ >>>>> ............ >>>>> ............): >>>>> ............ >>>>> ............ >>>>> ............ >>>>> is not very readable anyway. >>>> >>>> I agree, and am glad PEP 8 has been updated to recommend an extra level >>>> of indentation for continuation, to distinguish from the new block that >>>> follows<URL:http://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0008/#indentation>. >>> >>> Personally I solve this by never writing if conditions that span more >>> than one line. If the worst comes to the worst, I would write: >>> >>> aptly_named_condition = ( >>> very long condition >>> that goes over >>> plenty of lines >>> ) >>> if aptly_named_condition: >>> do stuff >> >> Will I be able to use extra indentation in Python code? >> For instance, >> >> res = and(or(cond1, >> cond2), >> cond3, >> or(and(cond4, >> cond5, >> cond6), >> and(cond7, >> cond8))) >> >> I like it because it reads like a tree. >> >> Kiuhnm > > Why not find out for yourself by slapping the code into an interactive > Python interpreter and seeing what the result is? Ok, it works. I had to use different names though. Kiuhnm
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 2 of 11 — ← Prev page 1 [2] 3 4 … 11 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | comp.lang.python
csiph-web