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

Groups > comp.lang.python > #82698 > unrolled thread

very weird pandas behavior

Back to article view | Back to comp.lang.python

Contents

  very weird pandas behavior ryguy7272 <ryanshuell@gmail.com> - 2014-12-20 07:46 -0800
    Re: very weird pandas behavior Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2014-12-21 13:22 +1100
    Re: very weird pandas behavior ryguy7272 <ryanshuell@gmail.com> - 2014-12-21 04:44 -0800
      Re: very weird pandas behavior Dave Angel <davea@davea.name> - 2014-12-21 09:19 -0500
    Re: very weird pandas behavior ryguy7272 <ryanshuell@gmail.com> - 2014-12-21 17:01 -0800
      Re: very weird pandas behavior Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-12-22 12:15 +1100
      Re: very weird pandas behavior Dave Angel <davea@davea.name> - 2014-12-21 20:40 -0500
    Re: very weird pandas behavior oldknackers@googlemail.com - 2014-12-21 17:25 -0800
    Re: very weird pandas behavior ryguy7272 <ryanshuell@gmail.com> - 2014-12-21 18:07 -0800
      Re: very weird pandas behavior Mark Lawrence <breamoreboy@yahoo.co.uk> - 2014-12-22 02:51 +0000
    Re: very weird pandas behavior ryguy7272 <ryanshuell@gmail.com> - 2014-12-21 18:09 -0800
    Re: very weird pandas behavior ryguy7272 <ryanshuell@gmail.com> - 2014-12-21 18:25 -0800
      Re: very weird pandas behavior Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-12-22 13:50 +1100
      Re: very weird pandas behavior Rustom Mody <rustompmody@gmail.com> - 2014-12-21 18:53 -0800
        Re: very weird pandas behavior wxjmfauth@gmail.com - 2014-12-22 00:16 -0800
      Re: very weird pandas behavior Steven D'Aprano <steve@pearwood.info> - 2014-12-22 04:11 +0000
      Re: very weird pandas behavior Dennis Lee Bieber <wlfraed@ix.netcom.com> - 2014-12-22 15:50 -0500
    Re: very weird pandas behavior oldknackers@googlemail.com - 2014-12-21 22:21 -0800
    Re: very weird pandas behavior ryguy7272 <ryanshuell@gmail.com> - 2014-12-22 07:55 -0800
      Re: very weird pandas behavior Mark Lawrence <breamoreboy@yahoo.co.uk> - 2014-12-22 16:39 +0000
      Re: very weird pandas behavior Dave Angel <davea@davea.name> - 2014-12-22 11:47 -0500
      Re: very weird pandas behavior Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-12-23 04:29 +1100
      Re: very weird pandas behavior Rick Johnson <rantingrickjohnson@gmail.com> - 2014-12-22 14:15 -0800
        Re: very weird pandas behavior Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-12-23 09:33 +1100
        Re: very weird pandas behavior wxjmfauth@gmail.com - 2014-12-23 01:35 -0800
          Re: very weird pandas behavior Rick Johnson <rantingrickjohnson@gmail.com> - 2014-12-23 14:35 -0800
            Re: very weird pandas behavior Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2014-12-24 13:23 +1100
              Re: very weird pandas behavior wxjmfauth@gmail.com - 2014-12-24 00:00 -0800
              Re: very weird pandas behavior wxjmfauth@gmail.com - 2014-12-24 06:19 -0800
      Re: very weird pandas behavior wxjmfauth@gmail.com - 2014-12-26 00:59 -0800

Page 2 of 2 — ← Prev page 1 [2]

#82789

On 12/22/2014 10:55 AM, ryguy7272 wrote:

I just uninstalled Python and deleted 15 Python books that I found 
online.  AHHHHHhhhhhhhhhhhh!  I feel great!!!!!!!!!!!!
>

That's the way i felt when I uninstalled Windows.  It's better not to 
not have something installed that you won't run.  Likewise, it's best to 
delete books that you haven't actually studied.

If you had downloaded just one book, and actually used it the way it was 
designed, and on the corresponding version of Python, the outcome might 
have been very different.

(I lied.  I kept Windows, in a Virtualbox, so I can resurrect it on demand)

-- 
DaveA

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#82793

On Tue, Dec 23, 2014 at 3:47 AM, Dave Angel <davea@davea.name> wrote:
> (I lied.  I kept Windows, in a Virtualbox, so I can resurrect it on demand)

You remind me of the evil sorcerers who keep their defeated foes
around in undead form, so they can torment them whenever they feel
like it. Only difference is, resurrecting Windows doesn't torment
Windows, it torments you... "WHY doesn't my program work properly
here? It ought to!"

ChrisA

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#82810

On Monday, December 22, 2014 9:56:11 AM UTC-6, ryguy7272 wrote:

I've been using Python for quite a few years now an i can
only once remember using any type of "python installation
tools" (easy_install or pip... puke!). I've always found the
easiest route to be just downloading a zip/tar file, and
then extracting it into my PythonXX/Lib/SitePackages
directory -- of course, not without inspecting the source
code first!!!

> To everyone else, I'm going back to VBA, VB, C#, Java,
> SQL, SSIS, R, & Matlab, simply because all of those work
> perfectly fine. [...] Learning Python was both fun &
> frustrating.  If you need to waste time, work with Python.
> If you need to do real work, use any on the following:
> VBA, VB, C#, Java, SQL, R, & Matlab. 

Well if you're coming from *that* background then Python is
not going to make sense to you. VB has the power to ruin
almost anyone. Naive folks tend to believe that if a
language offers a Graphical front-end then that language
must be "more advanced"...HA! When i see a graphical GUI
builder i run the other direction screaming because i know
that graphic builders *ONLY* exist as shoe polish for
"turdious API's"

 Polish a turd, it's still a turd!

Now don't get me wrong, i understand the *vital* importance
of abstractions, and without them, even the smallest
programs would require more finger gymnastics than a mortal
human could endure. But there *MUST* be a balance drawn
between high level and low level API's, because as you ascend
up the abstraction scale, you may feel good for a while, but
eventually you will find yourself trapped in a prison API of
claustrophobia

You could say that Graphical GUI builders are the highest
possible abstraction, and you would be correct, but it's not
the mere fact that they are "high level" that i find
troublesome, no, because *ANY* text based API could be
abstracted to a level that becomes suitable for even the
laziest programmer, it the fact that they shield you from
the architecture of the underlying code, and what inevitably
happens is that you find yourself needing a functionality
that the Graphical interface does not provide, for which the
only solution is sit down and learn the API you have so
desperately tried to avoid.

  Anyone care for a piping hot cup of irony?

> I just uninstalled Python and deleted 15 Python books that
> I found online.

That seems excessive. I'm sorry but if you need 15 books to
learn how to write Python code, and you already had prior
programming experience, then i am going to say that Python
is definitely not for you.

Instead of taking the graphical route and attempting to
shield you from the harsh realities of life, Python has
devoted all it's energy to providing a clean syntax, an
integrated documentation capability (via doc strings on the
code author's side, and and the help() function on the users
side), interactivity, introspection, and a quite extensive
stdlib. Granted Python has it's warts, and i'm not here to
apologize for *ANY* them, but all in all it's a damn good
language that allows me to be far more productive than any
other language has.

No language can be perfect, but giving up on Python because
you could not get a 3rd party package to install is quite
ridiculous. I mean, if you were dumping it because of it's
shameless herd-conformity to the Unicode standard then AT
LEAST that would make sense me!

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#82812

On Tue, Dec 23, 2014 at 9:15 AM, Rick Johnson
<rantingrickjohnson@gmail.com> wrote:
> I mean, if you were dumping it because of it's
> shameless herd-conformity to the Unicode standard then AT
> LEAST that would make sense me!

Wait, which of our trolls are you?

ChrisA

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#82832

Le lundi 22 décembre 2014 23:15:24 UTC+1, Rick Johnson a écrit :
> 
> No language can be perfect, but giving up on Python because
> you could not get a 3rd party package to install is quite
> ridiculous. I mean, if you were dumping it because of it's
> shameless herd-conformity to the Unicode standard then AT
> LEAST that would make sense me!

The are simply not a single Python application,
which is now working properly.

As I already pointed, I can make Python failing
or crashing with any string I wish.

I'm not only able to reproduce this with my code,
I'm also able to reproduce this with LibreOffice.

Qt derivatives? No one is now working.

I'm not a database guy, but if database wrappers
are working lile the GUI toolkits...

There are also plenty of things no woking for
miscellaneous reasons, all related to characters/text.

Wait for ther 3.5 release. I will still show
you how to make Idle, tkinter, Python crashing
in 10 seconds.

Discussing with (some) core devs is simply impossible,
they do not whish to discuss!

All this can be explained with a sheet of paper,
a pencil and some basic mathematical knowledge.

jmf

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#82862

On Tuesday, December 23, 2014 3:35:20 AM UTC-6, wxjm...@gmail.com wrote:
>
> [...]
>
> Wait for ther 3.5 release. I will still show
> you how to make Idle, tkinter, Python crashing
> in 10 seconds.
> 
> Discussing with (some) core devs is simply impossible,
> they do not whish to discuss!
> 
> All this can be explained with a sheet of paper,
> a pencil and some basic mathematical knowledge.
> 
> jmf

Hello "Jmf". I'm confused by your interjection. Are you the OP? Or are you speaking on behalf of the OP? Or did you forget to switch accounts -- gawd that can be so embarrassing! (Urm, not that i have any experience in the area).

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#82872

Rick Johnson wrote:

> On Tuesday, December 23, 2014 3:35:20 AM UTC-6, wxjm...@gmail.com wrote:
>>
>> [...]
>>
>> Wait for ther 3.5 release. I will still show
>> you how to make Idle, tkinter, Python crashing
>> in 10 seconds.
>> 
>> Discussing with (some) core devs is simply impossible,
>> they do not whish to discuss!
>> 
>> All this can be explained with a sheet of paper,
>> a pencil and some basic mathematical knowledge.
>> 
>> jmf
> 
> Hello "Jmf". I'm confused by your interjection. Are you the OP? Or are you
> speaking on behalf of the OP? Or did you forget to switch accounts -- gawd
> that can be so embarrassing! (Urm, not that i have any experience in the
> area).


JMF is our resident Unicode crackpot, he is obsessed with the idea that a
minor performance regression on some artificial and simplistic string
operations which nobody would ever actually use in real life is categorical
proof that Python's Unicode implementation is fundamentally and
mathematically broken.

I don't think he is trolling, I think he really is obsessed with this idea,
like the circle-squarers, pi-is-a-rational-number cranks, "Queen Elizabeth
and the Pope are space-aliens" nutters, Einstein-was-wrong maniacs and all
the rest.



-- 
Steven

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#82875

Le mercredi 24 décembre 2014 03:24:10 UTC+1, Steven D'Aprano a écrit :
> Rick Johnson wrote:
> 
> > On Tuesday, December 23, 2014 3:35:20 AM UTC-6, wxjm...@gmail.com wrote:
> >>
> >> [...]
> >>
> >> Wait for ther 3.5 release. I will still show
> >> you how to make Idle, tkinter, Python crashing
> >> in 10 seconds.
> >> 
> >> Discussing with (some) core devs is simply impossible,
> >> they do not whish to discuss!
> >> 
> >> All this can be explained with a sheet of paper,
> >> a pencil and some basic mathematical knowledge.
> >> 
> >> jmf
> > 
> > Hello "Jmf". I'm confused by your interjection. Are you the OP? Or are you
> > speaking on behalf of the OP? Or did you forget to switch accounts -- gawd
> > that can be so embarrassing! (Urm, not that i have any experience in the
> > area).
> 
> 
> JMF is our resident Unicode crackpot, he is obsessed with the idea that a
> minor performance regression on some artificial and simplistic string
> operations which nobody would ever actually use in real life is categorical
> proof that Python's Unicode implementation is fundamentally and
> mathematically broken.
> 
> I don't think he is trolling, I think he really is obsessed with this idea,
> like the circle-squarers, pi-is-a-rational-number cranks, "Queen Elizabeth
> and the Pope are space-aliens" nutters, Einstein-was-wrong maniacs and all
> the rest.
> 
> 

I will not refrain users to write applications that
are simply not (or no more) working. Two recent examples
from this list: eric5 and leo.

Regression: If the same py33+ just becomes 50 times
slower that its equivalent py32 app. It just becomes
50 times slower.

Now, if some devs are prounded to annouce a gain
5-20% on some method (see bug tracker, ...) on
something that is wrong by design (compared with
my comment above), I wonder if there is not a problem
somewhere.

---

I'm working like Rick. I always uses Python source and
not installers if possible.
An interesting example:
I downloaded win_unicode_console, v. 012, I modified it
a little bit to make it portable. It worked very well.
The creator of thes app did what I always wanted to
do, but I never understood how to do it.

In version 03, there is a supposed optimization.
Unfortunately no wore working, a wrong understanding
of the interaction unicode/keyboard/python handling...

jmf

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#82890

Le mercredi 24 décembre 2014 03:24:10 UTC+1, Steven D'Aprano a écrit :
> Rick Johnson wrote:
> 
> > On Tuesday, December 23, 2014 3:35:20 AM UTC-6, wxjm...@gmail.com wrote:
> >>
> >> [...]
> >>
> >> Wait for ther 3.5 release. I will still show
> >> you how to make Idle, tkinter, Python crashing
> >> in 10 seconds.
> >> 
> >> Discussing with (some) core devs is simply impossible,
> >> they do not whish to discuss!
> >> 
> >> All this can be explained with a sheet of paper,
> >> a pencil and some basic mathematical knowledge.
> >> 
> >> jmf
> > 
> > Hello "Jmf". I'm confused by your interjection. Are you the OP? Or are you
> > speaking on behalf of the OP? Or did you forget to switch accounts -- gawd
> > that can be so embarrassing! (Urm, not that i have any experience in the
> > area).
> 
> 
> JMF is our resident Unicode crackpot, he is obsessed with the idea that a
> minor performance regression on some artificial and simplistic string
> operations which nobody would ever actually use in real life is categorical
> proof that Python's Unicode implementation is fundamentally and
> mathematically broken.
> 
> I don't think he is trolling, I think he really is obsessed with this idea,
> like the circle-squarers, pi-is-a-rational-number cranks, "Queen Elizabeth
> and the Pope are space-aliens" nutters, Einstein-was-wrong maniacs and all
> the rest.
> 
> 

Btw, thank you for pointing I'm not trolling.

You see, "selling" a product which is supposed to
be unicode compliant and in fact does the opposite
of the products endorsing the Unicode.org work
on the side of memoery, performance and specific
unicode tasks, I should say, it is a little bit
beyond my understanding.

Please do not contradict me, it's a child play
to *illustrate* that.
(The theoretical explanation is something else).

jmf

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#82952

Le lundi 22 décembre 2014 16:56:11 UTC+1, ryguy7272 a écrit :
> On Saturday, December 20, 2014 10:46:40 AM UTC-5, ryguy7272 wrote:
> > I downloaded pandas and put it in my python directory, then, at the C-prompt, I ran this:
> > "pip install pandas"
> > 
> > It looks like everything downloaded and installed fine.  Great.
> > 
> > Now, in Python Shell, I enter this:
> > import pandas as pd
> > 
> > I get this error.  
> > Traceback (most recent call last):
> >   File "<pyshell#19>", line 1, in <module>
> >     import pandas as pd
> > ImportError: No module named pandas
> > 
> > 
> > Any idea what I'm doing wrong?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Thanks Rustom.  That is insightful advice, indeed.  I will cherish your wisdom.
> 
> 
> To everyone else, I'm going back to VBA, VB, C#, Java, SQL, SSIS, R, & Matlab, simply because all of those work perfectly fine.  I have countless ways to do everything in the world.  For me, Python was just another way to do, what I already do now.  
> 
> I don't have time to screw around with all kind of nonsense that doesn't do anything, other than tell me 1+1=2.  That pretty much the only thing that works in Python.  To do anything more complex, seems impossible.  Rather than make the impossible become possible, I'd rather focus on things that help me do stuff (like process 100,000 man-hours of work in less than 1 hour).  Learning Python was both fun & frustrating.  If you need to waste time, work with Python.  If you need to do real work, use any on the following: VBA, VB, C#, Java, SQL, R, & Matlab.  I just uninstalled Python and deleted 15 Python books that I found online.  AHHHHHhhhhhhhhhhhh!  I feel great!!!!!!!!!!!!
> 
> That's all.

Downloading n tutorials and studying none is certainly
not the best approach.

I tend to agree with you. Now, you can add LibreOffice
to the list and stick with MS Office.
Why keeping an office suite that does not work because
it embeds a scripting language that does not work
on the side of "characters"?

jmf

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Page 2 of 2 — ← Prev page 1 [2]

Back to top | Article view | comp.lang.python

csiph-web