Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.lang.python > #68711 > unrolled thread
| Started by | vasudevram <vasudevram@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2014-03-21 13:42 -0700 |
| Last post | 2014-03-28 17:05 -0500 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 401 — 30 participants |
Back to article view | Back to comp.lang.python
Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) vasudevram <vasudevram@gmail.com> - 2014-03-21 13:42 -0700
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Rustom Mody <rustompmody@gmail.com> - 2014-03-21 13:54 -0700
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) vasudevram <vasudevram@gmail.com> - 2014-03-21 13:56 -0700
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Rustom Mody <rustompmody@gmail.com> - 2014-03-21 14:09 -0700
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Ian Kelly <ian.g.kelly@gmail.com> - 2014-03-21 15:30 -0600
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Rustom Mody <rustompmody@gmail.com> - 2014-03-21 19:06 -0700
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-03-22 13:41 +1100
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Rustom Mody <rustompmody@gmail.com> - 2014-03-21 21:39 -0700
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-03-22 15:51 +1100
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Rustom Mody <rustompmody@gmail.com> - 2014-03-21 22:26 -0700
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) "Rhodri James" <rhodri@wildebst.org.uk> - 2014-03-23 00:32 +0000
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Ian Kelly <ian.g.kelly@gmail.com> - 2014-03-22 20:46 -0600
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Rustom Mody <rustompmody@gmail.com> - 2014-03-22 20:16 -0700
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Ian Kelly <ian.g.kelly@gmail.com> - 2014-03-22 21:47 -0600
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) "Rhodri James" <rhodri@wildebst.org.uk> - 2014-03-24 02:35 +0000
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-03-24 14:27 +1100
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Rustom Mody <rustompmody@gmail.com> - 2014-03-23 21:14 -0700
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-03-24 16:04 +1100
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-03-24 14:32 +1100
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Rustom Mody <rustompmody@gmail.com> - 2014-03-21 22:48 -0700
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Mark H Harris <harrismh777@gmail.com> - 2014-03-21 23:51 -0500
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2014-03-22 09:46 +0000
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Mark H Harris <harrismh777@gmail.com> - 2014-03-24 00:52 -0500
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Ian Kelly <ian.g.kelly@gmail.com> - 2014-03-24 03:03 -0600
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Marko Rauhamaa <marko@pacujo.net> - 2014-03-24 11:55 +0200
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-03-24 22:49 +1100
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Marko Rauhamaa <marko@pacujo.net> - 2014-03-24 14:36 +0200
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-03-24 23:53 +1100
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2014-03-24 14:39 +0000
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Mark Lawrence <breamoreboy@yahoo.co.uk> - 2014-03-24 15:22 +0000
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Mark Lawrence <breamoreboy@yahoo.co.uk> - 2014-03-24 14:21 +0000
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2014-03-24 14:04 +0000
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Rustom Mody <rustompmody@gmail.com> - 2014-03-24 09:00 -0700
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-03-25 06:12 +1100
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Ian Kelly <ian.g.kelly@gmail.com> - 2014-03-24 13:42 -0600
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-03-25 06:57 +1100
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Steven D'Aprano <steve@pearwood.info> - 2014-03-25 05:28 +0000
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-03-25 16:43 +1100
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Ian Kelly <ian.g.kelly@gmail.com> - 2014-03-24 11:24 -0600
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Mark H Harris <harrismh777@gmail.com> - 2014-03-24 16:43 -0500
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Marko Rauhamaa <marko@pacujo.net> - 2014-03-25 00:43 +0200
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Mark H Harris <harrismh777@gmail.com> - 2014-03-24 18:56 -0500
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-03-25 11:11 +1100
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Mark H Harris <harrismh777@gmail.com> - 2014-03-24 19:16 -0500
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-03-25 11:28 +1100
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Mark Lawrence <breamoreboy@yahoo.co.uk> - 2014-03-25 00:32 +0000
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Mark H Harris <harrismh777@gmail.com> - 2014-03-24 19:50 -0500
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Terry Reedy <tjreedy@udel.edu> - 2014-03-24 21:31 -0400
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-03-25 12:41 +1100
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Steven D'Aprano <steve@pearwood.info> - 2014-03-25 06:28 +0000
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Terry Reedy <tjreedy@udel.edu> - 2014-03-24 21:20 -0400
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Mark H Harris <harrismh777@gmail.com> - 2014-03-24 21:39 -0500
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Steven D'Aprano <steve@pearwood.info> - 2014-03-25 06:52 +0000
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) alex23 <wuwei23@gmail.com> - 2014-03-26 16:35 +1000
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Mark H Harris <harrismh777@gmail.com> - 2014-03-27 10:44 -0500
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-03-28 03:10 +1100
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Mark H Harris <harrismh777@gmail.com> - 2014-03-27 11:37 -0500
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-03-28 03:48 +1100
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Mark H Harris <harrismh777@gmail.com> - 2014-03-27 15:54 -0500
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-03-28 08:42 +1100
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Mark H Harris <harrismh777@gmail.com> - 2014-03-27 17:14 -0500
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-03-28 13:24 +1100
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Rustom Mody <rustompmody@gmail.com> - 2014-03-27 19:46 -0700
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-03-28 14:06 +1100
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Rustom Mody <rustompmody@gmail.com> - 2014-03-27 20:20 -0700
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Mark H Harris <harrismh777@gmail.com> - 2014-03-27 17:14 -0500
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2014-03-28 04:45 +0000
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2014-03-28 00:34 +0000
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Mark H Harris <harrismh777@gmail.com> - 2014-03-28 16:18 -0500
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-03-29 13:45 +1100
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2014-03-29 03:08 +0000
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Mark H Harris <harrismh777@gmail.com> - 2014-03-28 22:18 -0500
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-03-29 14:45 +1100
Keyboard standards (was: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list)) Ben Finney <ben+python@benfinney.id.au> - 2014-03-29 15:18 +1100
Re: Keyboard standards Mark H Harris <harrismh777@gmail.com> - 2014-03-28 23:26 -0500
Re: Keyboard standards Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-03-29 16:13 +1100
Re: Keyboard standards Mark H Harris <harrismh777@gmail.com> - 2014-03-29 00:40 -0500
Re: Keyboard standards Ian Kelly <ian.g.kelly@gmail.com> - 2014-03-29 04:02 -0600
Re: Keyboard standards Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2014-03-29 16:03 +0000
Re: Keyboard standards Larry Hudson <orgnut@yahoo.com> - 2014-03-29 12:27 -0700
Re: Keyboard standards Michael Torrie <torriem@gmail.com> - 2014-03-29 13:41 -0600
Re: Keyboard standards Larry Hudson <orgnut@yahoo.com> - 2014-03-29 23:53 -0700
Re: Keyboard standards Dave Angel <davea@davea.name> - 2014-03-29 17:26 -0400
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2014-03-29 03:51 +0000
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Mark H Harris <harrismh777@gmail.com> - 2014-03-28 23:07 -0500
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Mark H Harris <harrismh777@gmail.com> - 2014-03-28 23:16 -0500
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Mark H Harris <harrismh777@gmail.com> - 2014-03-28 23:21 -0500
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-03-29 15:48 +1100
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Mark H Harris <harrismh777@gmail.com> - 2014-03-28 23:40 -0500
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-03-29 16:08 +1100
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Rustom Mody <rustompmody@gmail.com> - 2014-03-28 22:21 -0700
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Mark H Harris <harrismh777@gmail.com> - 2014-03-29 00:51 -0500
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-03-29 17:03 +1100
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Mark H Harris <harrismh777@gmail.com> - 2014-03-29 03:21 -0500
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Mark Lawrence <breamoreboy@yahoo.co.uk> - 2014-03-29 15:45 +0000
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Mark H Harris <harrismh777@gmail.com> - 2014-03-30 00:52 -0500
OFF TOPIC Spanish in the USA [was Re: Explanation of this Python language feature?] Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2014-03-30 06:31 +0000
Re: OFF TOPIC Spanish in the USA [was Re: Explanation of this Python language feature?] Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-03-30 17:43 +1100
Re: OFF TOPIC Spanish in the USA [was Re: Explanation of this Python language feature?] Mark H Harris <harrismh777@gmail.com> - 2014-03-30 01:48 -0500
Re: OFF TOPIC Spanish in the USA [was Re: Explanation of this Python language feature?] Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2014-03-30 10:35 +0000
Re: OFF TOPIC Spanish in the USA [was Re: Explanation of this Python language feature?] Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-03-30 23:03 +1100
Re: OFF TOPIC Spanish in the USA [was Re: Explanation of this Python language feature?] Mark H Harris <harrismh777@gmail.com> - 2014-03-30 23:29 -0500
Re: OFF TOPIC Spanish in the USA [was Re: Explanation of this Python language feature?] Mark H Harris <harrismh777@gmail.com> - 2014-03-30 23:57 -0500
Re: OFF TOPIC Spanish in the USA [was Re: Explanation of this Python language feature?] Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-03-31 16:05 +1100
Re: OFF TOPIC Spanish in the USA [was Re: Explanation of this Python language feature?] Mark H Harris <harrismh777@gmail.com> - 2014-03-31 00:33 -0500
Re: OFF TOPIC Spanish in the USA [was Re: Explanation of this Python language feature?] Mark Lawrence <breamoreboy@yahoo.co.uk> - 2014-03-31 09:31 +0100
Re: OFF TOPIC Spanish in the USA [was Re: Explanation of this Python language feature?] Mark H Harris <harrismh777@gmail.com> - 2014-03-31 00:23 -0500
Re: OFF TOPIC Spanish in the USA [was Re: Explanation of this Python language feature?] Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-03-31 16:44 +1100
Re: OFF TOPIC Spanish in the USA Marko Rauhamaa <marko@pacujo.net> - 2014-03-31 11:39 +0300
Re: OFF TOPIC Spanish in the USA Ned Batchelder <ned@nedbatchelder.com> - 2014-03-31 07:33 -0400
Re: OFF TOPIC Spanish in the USA [was Re: Explanation of this Python language feature?] Dennis Lee Bieber <wlfraed@ix.netcom.com> - 2014-03-31 08:41 -0400
Re: OFF TOPIC Spanish in the USA [was Re: Explanation of this Python language feature?] Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-04-01 00:04 +1100
Re: OFF TOPIC Spanish in the USA [was Re: Explanation of this Python language feature?] "Rhodri James" <rhodri@wildebst.org.uk> - 2014-03-31 21:47 +0100
Re: OFF TOPIC Spanish in the USA [was Re: Explanation of this Python language feature?] Terry Reedy <tjreedy@udel.edu> - 2014-03-31 18:06 -0400
Re: OFF TOPIC Spanish in the USA [was Re: Explanation of this Python language feature?] Dennis Lee Bieber <wlfraed@ix.netcom.com> - 2014-03-31 20:03 -0400
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Larry Hudson <orgnut@yahoo.com> - 2014-03-30 00:32 -0700
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2014-03-30 10:44 +0000
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) "Rhodri James" <rhodri@wildebst.org.uk> - 2014-03-30 23:57 +0100
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) MRAB <python@mrabarnett.plus.com> - 2014-03-31 00:20 +0100
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Grant Edwards <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2014-03-31 14:14 +0000
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Walter Hurry <walterhurry@gmail.com> - 2014-03-31 00:39 +0000
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Roy Smith <roy@panix.com> - 2014-03-30 08:08 -0400
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2014-03-30 15:22 +0000
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Ian Kelly <ian.g.kelly@gmail.com> - 2014-03-30 10:03 -0600
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Mark H Harris <harrismh777@gmail.com> - 2014-03-31 01:08 -0500
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-03-31 17:47 +1100
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Ben Finney <ben+python@benfinney.id.au> - 2014-03-31 17:53 +1100
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Rustom Mody <rustompmody@gmail.com> - 2014-03-31 00:36 -0700
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) wxjmfauth@gmail.com - 2014-03-31 01:32 -0700
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Roy Smith <roy@panix.com> - 2014-03-31 08:16 -0400
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) "Rhodri James" <rhodri@wildebst.org.uk> - 2014-03-31 21:46 +0100
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Mark H Harris <harrismh777@gmail.com> - 2014-04-01 16:26 -0500
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-04-02 08:49 +1100
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Mark H Harris <harrismh777@gmail.com> - 2014-04-01 18:18 -0500
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Terry Reedy <tjreedy@udel.edu> - 2014-04-01 18:33 -0400
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Mark H Harris <harrismh777@gmail.com> - 2014-04-03 11:38 -0500
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Marko Rauhamaa <marko@pacujo.net> - 2014-04-03 20:14 +0300
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Rustom Mody <rustompmody@gmail.com> - 2014-04-03 11:40 -0700
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Mark H Harris <harrismh777@gmail.com> - 2014-04-03 13:55 -0500
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Marko Rauhamaa <marko@pacujo.net> - 2014-04-03 22:43 +0300
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Mark H Harris <harrismh777@gmail.com> - 2014-04-03 22:12 -0500
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-04-04 09:43 +1100
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Mark H Harris <harrismh777@gmail.com> - 2014-04-03 21:09 -0500
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2014-04-04 07:52 +0000
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-04-04 19:11 +1100
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Ian Kelly <ian.g.kelly@gmail.com> - 2014-04-04 02:13 -0600
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2014-04-04 10:08 +0000
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Ian Kelly <ian.g.kelly@gmail.com> - 2014-04-04 11:01 -0600
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2014-04-05 00:20 +0000
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) alex23 <wuwei23@gmail.com> - 2014-04-04 12:07 +1000
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Mark H Harris <harrismh777@gmail.com> - 2014-04-03 21:29 -0500
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Mark Lawrence <breamoreboy@yahoo.co.uk> - 2014-04-04 09:20 +0100
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Mark H Harris <harrismh777@gmail.com> - 2014-04-04 15:58 -0500
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Ian Kelly <ian.g.kelly@gmail.com> - 2014-04-04 15:40 -0600
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Mark Lawrence <breamoreboy@yahoo.co.uk> - 2014-04-04 22:50 +0100
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Mark H Harris <harrismh777@gmail.com> - 2014-04-04 17:07 -0500
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-04-05 09:39 +1100
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Mark H Harris <harrismh777@gmail.com> - 2014-04-04 17:52 -0500
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-04-05 09:57 +1100
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Mark Lawrence <breamoreboy@yahoo.co.uk> - 2014-04-05 00:16 +0100
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Mark H Harris <harrismh777@gmail.com> - 2014-04-04 23:10 -0500
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-04-05 15:40 +1100
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Mark H Harris <harrismh777@gmail.com> - 2014-04-05 00:11 -0500
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Ian Kelly <ian.g.kelly@gmail.com> - 2014-04-04 23:02 -0600
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Mark H Harris <harrismh777@gmail.com> - 2014-04-05 00:37 -0500
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Ben Finney <ben+python@benfinney.id.au> - 2014-04-05 17:01 +1100
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Mark H Harris <harrismh777@gmail.com> - 2014-04-05 01:48 -0500
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-04-05 18:08 +1100
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Mark H Harris <harrismh777@gmail.com> - 2014-04-05 01:48 -0500
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Ian Kelly <ian.g.kelly@gmail.com> - 2014-04-04 23:07 -0600
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Mark H Harris <harrismh777@gmail.com> - 2014-04-04 17:52 -0500
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Terry Reedy <tjreedy@udel.edu> - 2014-04-04 23:04 -0400
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Mark H Harris <harrismh777@gmail.com> - 2014-04-04 23:18 -0500
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-04-05 14:22 +1100
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Terry Reedy <tjreedy@udel.edu> - 2014-04-05 00:10 -0400
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Mark H Harris <harrismh777@gmail.com> - 2014-04-04 17:07 -0500
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2014-04-05 00:00 +0000
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-04-05 12:51 +1100
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Mark H Harris <harrismh777@gmail.com> - 2014-04-04 23:31 -0500
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-04-05 15:49 +1100
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Mark H Harris <harrismh777@gmail.com> - 2014-04-05 00:23 -0500
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-04-05 16:55 +1100
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Mark H Harris <harrismh777@gmail.com> - 2014-04-05 00:23 -0500
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Rustom Mody <rustompmody@gmail.com> - 2014-04-04 20:42 -0700
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Mark H Harris <harrismh777@gmail.com> - 2014-04-05 00:02 -0500
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-04-05 16:24 +1100
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Ben Finney <ben+python@benfinney.id.au> - 2014-04-05 16:29 +1100
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-04-05 16:57 +1100
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Rustom Mody <rustompmody@gmail.com> - 2014-04-04 23:59 -0700
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-04-05 18:10 +1100
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2014-04-05 10:19 +0000
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Terry Reedy <tjreedy@udel.edu> - 2014-04-05 07:20 -0400
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Roy Smith <roy@panix.com> - 2014-04-05 10:28 -0400
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2014-04-04 09:53 +0000
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Rustom Mody <rustompmody@gmail.com> - 2014-04-04 03:24 -0700
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Terry Reedy <tjreedy@udel.edu> - 2014-04-04 06:43 -0400
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Mark H Harris <harrismh777@gmail.com> - 2014-04-05 22:59 -0500
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Mark H Harris <harrismh777@gmail.com> - 2014-04-05 23:59 -0500
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Marko Rauhamaa <marko@pacujo.net> - 2014-04-06 12:05 +0300
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2014-04-06 16:52 +0000
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Rustom Mody <rustompmody@gmail.com> - 2014-04-06 10:31 -0700
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-04-07 03:54 +1000
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Rustom Mody <rustompmody@gmail.com> - 2014-04-06 11:13 -0700
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-04-07 04:46 +1000
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Rustom Mody <rustompmody@gmail.com> - 2014-04-06 19:32 -0700
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Mark H Harris <harrismh777@gmail.com> - 2014-04-07 20:33 -0500
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) MRAB <python@mrabarnett.plus.com> - 2014-04-08 02:52 +0100
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-04-08 13:02 +1000
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Steven D'Aprano <steve@pearwood.info> - 2014-04-08 08:21 +0000
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) alex23 <wuwei23@gmail.com> - 2014-04-09 10:39 +1000
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-04-09 12:26 +1000
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Rustom Mody <rustompmody@gmail.com> - 2014-04-08 03:53 -0700
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-04-07 03:27 +1000
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Marko Rauhamaa <marko@pacujo.net> - 2014-04-06 23:23 +0300
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Mark Lawrence <breamoreboy@yahoo.co.uk> - 2014-04-06 19:09 +0100
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-04-07 04:14 +1000
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Marko Rauhamaa <marko@pacujo.net> - 2014-04-06 23:10 +0300
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Mark Lawrence <breamoreboy@yahoo.co.uk> - 2014-04-06 21:56 +0100
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2014-04-06 23:48 +0000
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Terry Reedy <tjreedy@udel.edu> - 2014-04-06 20:45 -0400
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Rustom Mody <rustompmody@gmail.com> - 2014-04-06 18:54 -0700
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Steven D'Aprano <steve@pearwood.info> - 2014-04-07 05:10 +0000
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Marko Rauhamaa <marko@pacujo.net> - 2014-04-07 08:14 +0300
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Antoon Pardon <antoon.pardon@rece.vub.ac.be> - 2014-04-08 09:03 +0200
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Marko Rauhamaa <marko@pacujo.net> - 2014-04-07 07:54 +0300
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2014-04-07 12:19 +0000
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Mark H Harris <harrismh777@gmail.com> - 2014-04-05 23:01 -0500
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Rustom Mody <rustompmody@gmail.com> - 2014-03-28 23:10 -0700
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Mark H Harris <harrismh777@gmail.com> - 2014-03-29 00:51 -0500
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2014-03-29 17:53 +0000
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Mark H Harris <harrismh777@gmail.com> - 2014-03-30 01:22 -0500
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2014-03-30 16:22 +0000
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Marko Rauhamaa <marko@pacujo.net> - 2014-03-29 13:39 +0200
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Roy Smith <roy@panix.com> - 2014-03-29 07:53 -0400
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Marko Rauhamaa <marko@pacujo.net> - 2014-03-29 13:59 +0200
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Gene Heskett <gheskett@wdtv.com> - 2014-03-29 13:48 -0400
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Mark H Harris <harrismh777@gmail.com> - 2014-03-30 00:57 -0500
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Gene Heskett <gheskett@wdtv.com> - 2014-03-29 13:46 -0400
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-03-25 10:01 +1100
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Mark H Harris <harrismh777@gmail.com> - 2014-03-24 18:44 -0500
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-03-25 10:57 +1100
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Steven D'Aprano <steve@pearwood.info> - 2014-03-25 06:16 +0000
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Ian Kelly <ian.g.kelly@gmail.com> - 2014-03-24 17:58 -0600
Time we switched to unicode? (was Explanation of this Python language feature?) Rustom Mody <rustompmody@gmail.com> - 2014-03-24 20:00 -0700
Re: Time we switched to unicode? (was Explanation of this Python language feature?) Mark H Harris <harrismh777@gmail.com> - 2014-03-24 22:15 -0500
Re: Time we switched to unicode? (was Explanation of this Python language feature?) Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-03-25 14:17 +1100
Re: Time we switched to unicode? (was Explanation of this Python language feature?) Mark H Harris <harrismh777@gmail.com> - 2014-03-24 22:25 -0500
Re: Time we switched to unicode? (was Explanation of this Python language feature?) Mark H Harris <harrismh777@gmail.com> - 2014-03-24 22:28 -0500
Re: Time we switched to unicode? (was Explanation of this Python language feature?) Roy Smith <roy@panix.com> - 2014-03-24 23:29 -0400
Re: Time we switched to unicode? (was Explanation of this Python language feature?) Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-03-25 14:51 +1100
Re: Time we switched to unicode? (was Explanation of this Python language feature?) Mark H Harris <harrismh777@gmail.com> - 2014-03-24 22:59 -0500
Re: Time we switched to unicode? (was Explanation of this Python language feature?) Rustom Mody <rustompmody@gmail.com> - 2014-03-24 21:08 -0700
Re: Time we switched to unicode? (was Explanation of this Python language feature?) Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-03-25 15:29 +1100
Re: Time we switched to unicode? (was Explanation of this Python language feature?) Rustom Mody <rustompmody@gmail.com> - 2014-03-24 22:00 -0700
Re: Time we switched to unicode? (was Explanation of this Python language feature?) Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-03-25 16:08 +1100
Re: Time we switched to unicode? (was Explanation of this Python language feature?) Mark H Harris <harrismh777@gmail.com> - 2014-03-25 00:14 -0500
Re: Time we switched to unicode? (was Explanation of this Python language feature?) Rustom Mody <rustompmody@gmail.com> - 2014-03-24 22:23 -0700
Re: Time we switched to unicode? (was Explanation of this Python language feature?) Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-03-25 16:31 +1100
Re: Time we switched to unicode? (was Explanation of this Python language feature?) Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-03-25 16:27 +1100
Re: Time we switched to unicode? (was Explanation of this Python language feature?) Mark H Harris <harrismh777@gmail.com> - 2014-03-25 00:34 -0500
Re: Time we switched to unicode? (was Explanation of this Python language feature?) Rustom Mody <rustompmody@gmail.com> - 2014-03-24 22:42 -0700
Re: Time we switched to unicode? (was Explanation of this Python language feature?) Mark H Harris <harrismh777@gmail.com> - 2014-03-25 00:47 -0500
Re: Time we switched to unicode? (was Explanation of this Python language feature?) Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-03-25 16:54 +1100
Re: Time we switched to unicode? (was Explanation of this Python language feature?) Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-03-25 16:48 +1100
Re: Time we switched to unicode? (was Explanation of this Python language feature?) Mark H Harris <harrismh777@gmail.com> - 2014-03-25 00:56 -0500
Re: Time we switched to unicode? (was Explanation of this Python language feature?) Roy Smith <roy@panix.com> - 2014-03-25 08:36 -0400
Re: Time we switched to unicode? (was Explanation of this Python language feature?) Rustom Mody <rustompmody@gmail.com> - 2014-03-25 05:53 -0700
Re: Time we switched to unicode? (was Explanation of this Python language feature?) Antoon Pardon <antoon.pardon@rece.vub.ac.be> - 2014-03-25 14:43 +0100
Re: Time we switched to unicode? (was Explanation of this Python language feature?) Rustom Mody <rustompmody@gmail.com> - 2014-03-25 06:52 -0700
Re: Time we switched to unicode? (was Explanation of this Python language feature?) Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-03-26 00:56 +1100
Re: Time we switched to unicode? (was Explanation of this Python language feature?) Rustom Mody <rustompmody@gmail.com> - 2014-03-25 07:08 -0700
Re: Time we switched to unicode? (was Explanation of this Python language feature?) Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2014-03-25 14:23 +0000
Re: Time we switched to unicode? (was Explanation of this Python language feature?) Rustom Mody <rustompmody@gmail.com> - 2014-03-25 08:19 -0700
Re: Time we switched to unicode? (was Explanation of this Python language feature?) Gregory Ewing <greg.ewing@canterbury.ac.nz> - 2014-03-26 09:33 +1300
Re: Time we switched to unicode? (was Explanation of this Python language feature?) Mark H Harris <harrismh777@gmail.com> - 2014-03-25 11:58 -0500
Re: Time we switched to unicode? (was Explanation of this Python language feature?) Dennis Lee Bieber <wlfraed@ix.netcom.com> - 2014-03-25 20:02 -0400
Re: Time we switched to unicode? (was Explanation of this Python language feature?) Mark H Harris <harrismh777@gmail.com> - 2014-03-25 01:01 -0500
Re: Time we switched to unicode? (was Explanation of this Python language feature?) Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-03-25 17:19 +1100
Re: Time we switched to unicode? (was Explanation of this Python language feature?) Steven D'Aprano <steve@pearwood.info> - 2014-03-25 07:03 +0000
Re: Time we switched to unicode? (was Explanation of this Python language feature?) Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-03-25 18:12 +1100
Re: Time we switched to unicode? (was Explanation of this Python language feature?) Dennis Lee Bieber <wlfraed@ix.netcom.com> - 2014-03-25 20:05 -0400
Re: Time we switched to unicode? Marko Rauhamaa <marko@pacujo.net> - 2014-03-25 10:05 +0200
Re: Time we switched to unicode? Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-03-25 19:23 +1100
Re: Time we switched to unicode? Steven D'Aprano <steve@pearwood.info> - 2014-03-25 08:59 +0000
Re: Time we switched to unicode? Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-03-25 20:03 +1100
Re: Time we switched to unicode? Chris “Kwpolska” Warrick <kwpolska@gmail.com> - 2014-03-25 18:24 +0100
Re: Time we switched to unicode? Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2014-03-26 01:01 +0000
Re: Time we switched to unicode? Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-03-26 06:40 +1100
Re: Time we switched to unicode? (was Explanation of this Python language feature?) Rustom Mody <rustompmody@gmail.com> - 2014-03-24 22:28 -0700
Re: Time we switched to unicode? (was Explanation of this Python language feature?) Mark H Harris <harrismh777@gmail.com> - 2014-03-25 00:36 -0500
Re: Time we switched to unicode? (was Explanation of this Python language feature?) Steven D'Aprano <steve@pearwood.info> - 2014-03-25 06:07 +0000
Re: Time we switched to unicode? (was Explanation of this Python language feature?) Mark H Harris <harrismh777@gmail.com> - 2014-03-25 01:48 -0500
Re: Time we switched to unicode? (was Explanation of this Python language feature?) Antoon Pardon <antoon.pardon@rece.vub.ac.be> - 2014-03-25 10:43 +0100
Re: Time we switched to unicode? (was Explanation of this Python language feature?) Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-03-25 20:54 +1100
Re: Time we switched to unicode? (was Explanation of this Python language feature?) Antoon Pardon <antoon.pardon@rece.vub.ac.be> - 2014-03-25 11:38 +0100
Re: Time we switched to unicode? (was Explanation of this Python language feature?) Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2014-03-25 11:14 +0000
Re: Time we switched to unicode? (was Explanation of this Python language feature?) Antoon Pardon <antoon.pardon@rece.vub.ac.be> - 2014-03-25 12:46 +0100
Re: Time we switched to unicode? (was Explanation of this Python language feature?) Rustom Mody <rustompmody@gmail.com> - 2014-03-25 05:09 -0700
Re: Time we switched to unicode? (was Explanation of this Python language feature?) Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2014-03-25 15:18 +0000
Re: Time we switched to unicode? (was Explanation of this Python language feature?) Terry Reedy <tjreedy@udel.edu> - 2014-03-25 19:55 -0400
Re: Time we switched to unicode? (was Explanation of this Python language feature?) Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2014-03-26 00:12 +0000
Re: Time we switched to unicode? (was Explanation of this Python language feature?) Terry Reedy <tjreedy@udel.edu> - 2014-03-26 00:30 -0400
Re: Time we switched to unicode? (was Explanation of this Python language feature?) Rustom Mody <rustompmody@gmail.com> - 2014-03-25 21:56 -0700
Delayed evaluation of expressions [was Re: Time we switched to unicode?] Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2014-03-26 16:05 +0000
Re: Delayed evaluation of expressions [was Re: Time we switched to unicode?] Rustom Mody <rustompmody@gmail.com> - 2014-03-26 10:32 -0700
Re: Delayed evaluation of expressions [was Re: Time we switched to unicode?] Rustom Mody <rustompmody@gmail.com> - 2014-03-26 10:57 -0700
Re: Delayed evaluation of expressions [was Re: Time we switched to unicode?] Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-03-27 09:24 +1100
Re: Delayed evaluation of expressions Marko Rauhamaa <marko@pacujo.net> - 2014-03-27 00:45 +0200
Re: Delayed evaluation of expressions Rustom Mody <rustompmody@gmail.com> - 2014-03-26 22:02 -0700
Re: Delayed evaluation of expressions [was Re: Time we switched to unicode?] Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2014-03-26 23:43 +0000
Re: Delayed evaluation of expressions [was Re: Time we switched to unicode?] Rustom Mody <rustompmody@gmail.com> - 2014-03-26 18:59 -0700
Re: Delayed evaluation of expressions [was Re: Time we switched to unicode?] Terry Reedy <tjreedy@udel.edu> - 2014-03-26 20:44 -0400
Re: Delayed evaluation of expressions [was Re: Time we switched to unicode?] Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2014-03-27 02:16 +0000
Re: Time we switched to unicode? (was Explanation of this Python language feature?) Roy Smith <roy@panix.com> - 2014-03-25 08:35 -0400
Re: Time we switched to unicode? (was Explanation of this Python language feature?) Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-03-26 00:13 +1100
Re: Time we switched to unicode? (was Explanation of this Python language feature?) Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2014-03-25 14:13 +0000
Re: Time we switched to unicode? (was Explanation of this Python language feature?) Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-03-26 01:37 +1100
Re: Time we switched to unicode? (was Explanation of this Python language feature?) Gregory Ewing <greg.ewing@canterbury.ac.nz> - 2014-03-26 09:58 +1300
Re: Time we switched to unicode? (was Explanation of this Python language feature?) Dennis Lee Bieber <wlfraed@ix.netcom.com> - 2014-03-25 20:10 -0400
Re: Time we switched to unicode? (was Explanation of this Python language feature?) Gregory Ewing <greg.ewing@canterbury.ac.nz> - 2014-03-26 09:21 +1300
Re: Time we switched to unicode? (was Explanation of this Python language feature?) Larry Martell <larry.martell@gmail.com> - 2014-03-25 16:31 -0400
Re: Time we switched to unicode? (was Explanation of this Python language feature?) Mark Lawrence <breamoreboy@yahoo.co.uk> - 2014-03-25 21:22 +0000
Re: Time we switched to unicode? (was Explanation of this Python language feature?) Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-03-25 15:19 +1100
Re: Time we switched to unicode? (was Explanation of this Python language feature?) Steven D'Aprano <steve@pearwood.info> - 2014-03-25 06:04 +0000
Re: Time we switched to unicode? (was Explanation of this Python language feature?) Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-03-25 17:26 +1100
Re: Time we switched to unicode? (was Explanation of this Python language feature?) Roy Smith <roy@panix.com> - 2014-03-25 08:24 -0400
Re: Time we switched to unicode? (was Explanation of this Python language feature?) Dennis Lee Bieber <wlfraed@ix.netcom.com> - 2014-03-25 19:44 -0400
Re: Time we switched to unicode? (was Explanation of this Python language feature?) Rustom Mody <rustompmody@gmail.com> - 2014-03-24 20:43 -0700
Re: Time we switched to unicode? (was Explanation of this Python language feature?) Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-03-25 14:57 +1100
Re: Time we switched to unicode? (was Explanation of this Python language feature?) Steven D'Aprano <steve@pearwood.info> - 2014-03-25 05:47 +0000
Re: Time we switched to unicode? (was Explanation of this Python language feature?) Rustom Mody <rustompmody@gmail.com> - 2014-03-24 23:10 -0700
Re: Time we switched to unicode? (was Explanation of this Python language feature?) Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-03-25 17:33 +1100
Re: Time we switched to unicode? (was Explanation of this Python language feature?) Rustom Mody <rustompmody@gmail.com> - 2014-03-24 23:41 -0700
Re: Time we switched to unicode? (was Explanation of this Python language feature?) Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-03-25 17:50 +1100
Re: Time we switched to unicode? (was Explanation of this Python language feature?) Terry Reedy <tjreedy@udel.edu> - 2014-03-25 18:39 -0400
Re: Time we switched to unicode? (was Explanation of this Python language feature?) Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-03-25 17:12 +1100
Re: Time we switched to unicode? (was Explanation of this Python language feature?) Rustom Mody <rustompmody@gmail.com> - 2014-03-24 23:35 -0700
Re: Time we switched to unicode? (was Explanation of this Python language feature?) Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-03-25 17:45 +1100
Re: Time we switched to unicode? (was Explanation of this Python language feature?) Rustom Mody <rustompmody@gmail.com> - 2014-03-24 23:52 -0700
Re: Time we switched to unicode? (was Explanation of this Python language feature?) "Rhodri James" <rhodri@wildebst.org.uk> - 2014-03-27 01:16 +0000
Re: Time we switched to unicode? (was Explanation of this Python language feature?) Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-03-27 12:26 +1100
Re: Time we switched to unicode? (was Explanation of this Python language feature?) Rustom Mody <rustompmody@gmail.com> - 2014-03-24 20:44 -0700
Re: Time we switched to unicode? (was Explanation of this Python language feature?) Rustom Mody <rustompmody@gmail.com> - 2014-03-24 20:56 -0700
Re: Time we switched to unicode? (was Explanation of this Python language feature?) Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-03-25 15:14 +1100
Re: Time we switched to unicode? (was Explanation of this Python language feature?) Steven D'Aprano <steve@pearwood.info> - 2014-03-25 07:03 +0000
Re: Time we switched to unicode? (was Explanation of this Python language feature?) Rustom Mody <rustompmody@gmail.com> - 2014-03-25 00:22 -0700
Re: Time we switched to unicode? (was Explanation of this Python language feature?) Antoon Pardon <antoon.pardon@rece.vub.ac.be> - 2014-03-25 11:24 +0100
Re: Time we switched to unicode? (was Explanation of this Python language feature?) Roy Smith <roy@panix.com> - 2014-03-25 08:21 -0400
Re: Time we switched to unicode? (was Explanation of this Python language feature?) Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2014-03-25 13:36 +0000
Re: Time we switched to unicode? (was Explanation of this Python language feature?) Antoon Pardon <antoon.pardon@rece.vub.ac.be> - 2014-03-25 15:01 +0100
Re: Time we switched to unicode? (was Explanation of this Python language feature?) Terry Reedy <tjreedy@udel.edu> - 2014-03-25 22:10 -0400
Re: Time we switched to unicode? (was Explanation of this Python language feature?) Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-03-26 13:39 +1100
Re: Time we switched to unicode? (was Explanation of this Python language feature?) Ian Kelly <ian.g.kelly@gmail.com> - 2014-03-27 01:32 -0600
Re: Time we switched to unicode? (was Explanation of this Python language feature?) Ian Kelly <ian.g.kelly@gmail.com> - 2014-03-27 01:43 -0600
Re: Time we switched to unicode? (was Explanation of this Python language feature?) Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-03-25 22:12 +1100
Re: Time we switched to unicode? (was Explanation of this Python language feature?) Antoon Pardon <antoon.pardon@rece.vub.ac.be> - 2014-03-25 13:07 +0100
Re: Time we switched to unicode? (was Explanation of this Python language feature?) Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-03-25 23:45 +1100
Re: Time we switched to unicode? (was Explanation of this Python language feature?) Rustom Mody <rustompmody@gmail.com> - 2014-03-25 06:07 -0700
Re: Time we switched to unicode? (was Explanation of this Python language feature?) Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-03-26 00:50 +1100
Re: Time we switched to unicode? (was Explanation of this Python language feature?) Gregory Ewing <greg.ewing@canterbury.ac.nz> - 2014-03-26 09:37 +1300
Re: Time we switched to unicode? (was Explanation of this Python language feature?) Antoon Pardon <antoon.pardon@rece.vub.ac.be> - 2014-03-25 14:07 +0100
Re: Time we switched to unicode? (was Explanation of this Python language feature?) Terry Reedy <tjreedy@udel.edu> - 2014-03-25 20:24 -0400
Re: Time we switched to unicode? (was Explanation of this Python language feature?) Antoon Pardon <antoon.pardon@rece.vub.ac.be> - 2014-03-26 10:22 +0100
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Steven D'Aprano <steve@pearwood.info> - 2014-03-25 06:20 +0000
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Steven D'Aprano <steve@pearwood.info> - 2014-03-24 09:49 +0000
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-03-24 22:21 +1100
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Mark H Harris <harrismh777@gmail.com> - 2014-03-24 14:47 -0500
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2014-03-25 01:45 +0000
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-03-25 13:17 +1100
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Mark Lawrence <breamoreboy@yahoo.co.uk> - 2014-03-25 02:06 +0000
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Mark H Harris <harrismh777@gmail.com> - 2014-03-24 22:48 -0500
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Mark Lawrence <breamoreboy@yahoo.co.uk> - 2014-03-24 09:58 +0000
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Mark H Harris <harrismh777@gmail.com> - 2014-03-24 13:58 -0500
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Mark Lawrence <breamoreboy@yahoo.co.uk> - 2014-03-24 19:13 +0000
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Ian Kelly <ian.g.kelly@gmail.com> - 2014-03-24 13:12 -0600
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-03-25 06:22 +1100
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2014-03-24 22:58 +0000
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-03-25 10:07 +1100
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Terry Reedy <tjreedy@udel.edu> - 2014-03-24 21:04 -0400
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-03-25 06:45 +1100
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2014-03-22 04:47 +0000
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-03-22 16:05 +1100
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Marko Rauhamaa <marko@pacujo.net> - 2014-03-22 12:24 +0200
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Ian Kelly <ian.g.kelly@gmail.com> - 2014-03-22 03:09 -0600
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Marko Rauhamaa <marko@pacujo.net> - 2014-03-22 12:30 +0200
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Rustom Mody <rustompmody@gmail.com> - 2014-03-22 10:16 -0700
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Mark Lawrence <breamoreboy@yahoo.co.uk> - 2014-03-22 10:40 +0000
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Mark Lawrence <breamoreboy@yahoo.co.uk> - 2014-03-22 17:57 +0000
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Marko Rauhamaa <marko@pacujo.net> - 2014-03-22 20:40 +0200
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Rustom Mody <rustompmody@gmail.com> - 2014-03-22 11:42 -0700
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) 88888 Dihedral <dihedral88888@gmail.com> - 2014-03-25 03:17 -0700
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Gregory Ewing <greg.ewing@canterbury.ac.nz> - 2014-03-22 10:34 +1300
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) vasudevram <vasudevram@gmail.com> - 2014-03-22 13:59 -0700
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Mark H Harris <harrismh777@gmail.com> - 2014-03-24 20:56 -0500
Re: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list) Dan Stromberg <drsalists@gmail.com> - 2014-03-27 16:45 -0700
How to flatten a list of lists was (Explanation of this Python language feature?) Mark H Harris <harrismh777@gmail.com> - 2014-03-28 17:00 -0500
How to flatten a list of lists was (Explanation of this Python language feature?) Mark H Harris <harrismh777@gmail.com> - 2014-03-28 17:00 -0500
To flatten a nested list was (Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] Mark H Harris <harrismh777@gmail.com> - 2014-03-28 17:05 -0500
Re: To flatten a nested list was (Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2014-03-29 02:31 +0000
Re: To flatten a nested list was (Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] Mark H Harris <harrismh777@gmail.com> - 2014-03-28 22:33 -0500
To flatten a nested list was (Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] Mark H Harris <harrismh777@gmail.com> - 2014-03-28 17:05 -0500
Page 4 of 21 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 … 21 Next page →
| From | Mark H Harris <harrismh777@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-03-27 17:14 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <5334A2B1.20006@gmail.com> |
| In reply to | #69221 |
On 3/27/14 4:42 PM, Chris Angelico wrote: > And this is the bit where, I think, we disagree. I think that > programming is for programmers, in the same way that music is for > musicians and the giving of legal advice is for lawyers. Yes, there > are armchair lawyers, and plenty of people can pick up a hymn book and > sing; ------------------------------------ > but laws and operas aren't designed with them in mind. Why > should programming languages be designed for the people who don't want > to learn them? Actually we agree quite a bit on this--I agree with everything above the line----- and some of the sentiment with everything below the line. Your question has a somewhat false premise. They *really do* want to learn them, and they are frustrated with the time and attention it takes. The argument is also from analogy, which in this case is almost similar but not quite. Now, there is no royal road to geometry, opera, the violin, and the piano (I'm a pianist, and flutist--and an amateur composer). All of these fine arts take time, there is just no getting around it. However, there are now "computer based" piano courses that speed the process (with 44 key keyboard) by factors of 10. In other words, its easier now because of computers, to learn to play the piano on ones own time than ever before. To be really good at it, you're going to need to get a good instructor and work. Opera, the violin, pole vaulting, are all in another category requiring talent! ... not just will, and brains. Here in the states we file a little thing on or around April 15 called a tax return. Well most of us these days file electronically, and most of us doing that use some kind of tax software that takes in all the data, organizes it, and gives it to the Internal Revenue Service in a format that is legal, is accurate, and leads to no audit; because its just right. That is more of what I'm talking about. I have no interest in becoming a tax accountant, nor making money doing taxes for others, but, I do want to submit my correct return on time with no errors, and from my own keyboard (fast, efficient, error free, and with no driving, stamping, mailing, &c). People want to use their computer. They want to solve problems with it... and frankly, they would like to know how to program it, if there where some royal road, or fast track, or short and easy tutorial. I know lots of people that will sit down and try (with a cup of Java) and hack it out if they have a good short book. Python IMHO is the perfect language to give this a shot with--- powerful, elegant, easy once initiated, fast, and most important extensible and flexible. "normal" people deserve this. Well, I'll know if nobody buys the book, nor downloads the package, nor submits bug reports. But, I've got an inkling that there is a need, all over the place. Just look on the list: Fred Sells meta language request. He proves my point entirely. I have not responded yet... thought I would wait a bit... but look what he is after. Go read it. But, I don't disagree with you Chris, and I have myself some of the same concerns really. I'm finding the path harder than I thought it would be. Well, its hard enough just getting other people who are experts to buy into it. Its going to be an uphill climb, for sure. marcus
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-03-28 13:24 +1100 |
| Message-ID | <mailman.8650.1395973465.18130.python-list@python.org> |
| In reply to | #69223 |
On Fri, Mar 28, 2014 at 9:14 AM, Mark H Harris <harrismh777@gmail.com> wrote: > Your question has a somewhat false premise. They *really do* want to learn > them, and they are frustrated with the time and attention it takes. The > argument is also from analogy, which in this case is almost similar but not > quite. > > Now, there is no royal road to geometry, opera, the violin, and the piano > (I'm a pianist, and flutist--and an amateur composer). All of these fine > arts take time, there is just no getting around it. How many hours of practice have you put into musical study? The usual estimate is ten thousand hours to achieve mastery. If you're an amateur composer, you've probably put in rather a lot of hours. (I am one also, and I'm pretty sure I've put in rather a lot more than 10K hours in various musical fields.) But if you just want to sing hymns in church, you don't need *or want* to put in that much practice. Why should that sort of person want to learn/master opera? I used opera as an example because I'm about to dive into another one - this Tuesday is bump-in (getting all our scenery into the theatre), and we open before a real audience on April 5th. [1] In that production are a number of really REALLY awesome people (Ron Pidcock, Jenny Wakefield, Lydia Kovesi, Andrea Tappe...) who've put in huge numbers of hours to master the singing, dancing, etc required for the roles. Me? I'm able to sing, but I don't have the time (or the money) to get *that* good, so I don't audition for roles. I'm content to work lighting instead. Conversely, I'm a master of networking. I've put in plenty of hours to achieve mastery, and continue to do so. One of our sopranos was having trouble with her home network, and I swung by and gave her a hand. She doesn't want or need to understand what's going on, yet she uses and appreciates her wireless network. She *really does not* want to learn networking, or programming, just as I do not want to learn operatic singing, or how to build a death ray. Python can come in handy for her, but she is NOT the "normal user" for Python - and yet she fits into your description, below. > People want to use their computer. They want to solve problems with it... > and frankly, they would like to know how to program it, if there where some > royal road, or fast track, or short and easy tutorial. I know lots of people > that will sit down and try (with a cup of Java) and hack it out if they have > a good short book. There might be a short and easy tutorial "Python for people who already know Pike" (except that there won't be much call for it). There could possibly be "Python for mathematicians", because maths requires a similar vigor. There might even be "Python for brain surgeons". But there won't be "Python for people who know nothing" as a simple tutorial. It takes skill and mastery to become a programmer, and that doesn't come from nowhere. Transferring that skill from another area is easier than conjuring it (and easier still if the two areas are similar), but if someone has a similar skill already, s/he's probably already a programmer, and so isn't part of your description. Most people want to *use* a computer, and most certainly do *not* want to *program* it. I know this from personal experience; plenty of people will use electronica that they can't fiddle with - just look at the popularity of the iphone. There might well be an app for that, but if there isn't, well, you're going to need to go through a lot of hoops to create it. There's no way a typical iphone user can program his/her phone. > Just look on the list: Fred Sells meta language request. He proves my > point entirely. I have not responded yet... thought I would wait a bit... > but look what he is after. Go read it. I've read it (although not Terry's response, yet). He wants to create a DSL. I didn't respond because I know someone else will do so better (also, it was 8AM and I'd been up most of the night learning about systemd - making the jump now that Debian's settling on it, so it's time to port my Upstart jobs and knowledge), but my guess would be that he's not really looking for a *programming* language, but a *page description* language. Something in the same field as HTML, not Python. > But, I don't disagree with you Chris, and I have myself some of the same > concerns really. I'm finding the path harder than I thought it would be. > Well, its hard enough just getting other people who are experts to buy into > it. Its going to be an uphill climb, for sure. Programming forces you to understand programming. Even if you just use Python as a super-calculator (which, incidentally, I often do), you're still going to end up running into edge cases that force you to comprehend what you're doing: >>> 1e16+3-1e16 4.0 Common sense says it ought to be 3.0, but it ain't. IEEE floating point explains why this happens, but that's getting technical. If you don't want to write code, get a calculator. If you want to write code, learn at least something of programming, and understand that Python's syntax is not aimed at the person who knows nothing. A car's engine usually isn't tuned for 10km/h running; you have to get up a bit of speed before it becomes more efficient. Why is it so wrong for Python to expect the same? ChrisA [1] http://gilbertandsullivan.org.au/ - come see us if you're in Melbourne!
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Rustom Mody <rustompmody@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-03-27 19:46 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <76663d88-45d7-49f1-a2a4-b35120e7f963@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #69239 |
On Friday, March 28, 2014 3:44:09 AM UTC+5:30, Mark H. Harris wrote: > On 3/27/14 4:42 PM, Chris Angelico wrote: > > And this is the bit where, I think, we disagree. I think that > > programming is for programmers, in the same way that music is for > > musicians and the giving of legal advice is for lawyers. Yes, there > > are armchair lawyers, and plenty of people can pick up a hymn book and > > sing; As for programming its just too much in-our-face (to most of us reading this at least) to discuss it from the pov of 'the* layman' for the same reason that if I try to show you something and stick it ½ inch from your nose, you wont be able to see it. Your other examples fire quite differently than you (perhaps) realize As for laws, I am reminded of the Tao te Ching: Therefore the Master says: I let go of the law, and people become honest. I let go of economics, and people become prosperous. I let go of religion, and people become serene. I let go of all desire for the common good, and the good becomes common as grass. http://acc6.its.brooklyn.cuny.edu/~phalsall/texts/taote-v3.html#57 As for music I find (as Mark does) that technology allows for a 10-fold leap in learning: When I learnt the piano, 10 years to perform anything reasonably and 10 months to make head-or-tail of staff notation were fair estimates. Today, spend 10 days browsing your favourite genre at http://musescore.com/ with a little guidance and staff notation stops being difficult. A couple of weeks more and one and start entering music into the computer (or phone) > ------------------------------------ > > but laws and operas aren't designed with them in mind. Why > > should programming languages be designed for the people who don't want > > to learn them? > Actually we agree quite a bit on this--I agree with everything above the > line----- and some of the sentiment with everything below the line. > Your question has a somewhat false premise. They *really do* want to > learn them, and they are frustrated with the time and attention it > takes. The argument is also from analogy, which in this case is almost > similar but not quite. Well if you see http://cultureandempire.com/cande.html there is this interesting insight: > Moore’s Law isn’t a mythical beast that magically materialized in 1965 > and threatens to unpredictably vanish at any moment. In fact, it’s > part of a broader ancient mechanism that has no intention of > stopping. This mechanism, which I call cost gravity, pulls down the > price of technology by about half every two years. Add to that the fact that cost=money ultimately comes from money=effort eg currencies like http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ithaca_Hours (maybe even dolour → dollar though thats not the official etymology) and its clear that there is a ripple effect of technology breaking down old castles. Pleasant to the* layman, unpleasant to those professionals whose fiefdoms are threatened. > A car's engine usually isn't tuned for 10km/h running; you have to get > up a bit of speed before it becomes more efficient. Why is it so wrong > for Python to expect the same? Lets (temporarily) invert your example: 100 years ago, cobbled streets and horse-carriages were not meant for 100 kmph speeds. Today's roads are. Likewise technology: Like the natural speed of roads has changed, the natural accessibility of technology has also. A big part of python's success was that 20 years ago it worked out way more accessible than C. This peaked around 10 years ago. Nowadays I am not so sure what its direction is... ------------ * And I'll leave it to Steven to cudgel the 'the' <wink>
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-03-28 14:06 +1100 |
| Message-ID | <mailman.8655.1395975990.18130.python-list@python.org> |
| In reply to | #69242 |
On Fri, Mar 28, 2014 at 1:46 PM, Rustom Mody <rustompmody@gmail.com> wrote: >> Moore’s Law isn’t a mythical beast that magically materialized in 1965 >> and threatens to unpredictably vanish at any moment. In fact, it’s >> part of a broader ancient mechanism that has no intention of >> stopping. This mechanism, which I call cost gravity, pulls down the >> price of technology by about half every two years. > > Add to that the fact that cost=money ultimately comes from money=effort > eg currencies like http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ithaca_Hours > (maybe even dolour → dollar though thats not the official etymology) > and its clear that there is a ripple effect of technology breaking down > old castles. Pleasant to the* layman, unpleasant to those professionals whose > fiefdoms are threatened. The price of technology to the end user, yes. Anyone can go out and buy a computer that's powerful enough to do everything the typical person needs, and it's cheap enough to fit inside the typical person's budget. (Compare early IBM estimates of maybe half a dozen computer sales worldwide.) That has nothing to do with whether or not that person can create that computer. Same goes for software. ChrisA
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Rustom Mody <rustompmody@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-03-27 20:20 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <69b6b39a-d76b-42ee-85bd-1084559cffc0@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #69245 |
On Friday, March 28, 2014 8:36:26 AM UTC+5:30, Chris Angelico wrote: > On Fri, Mar 28, 2014 at 1:46 PM, Rustom Mody wrote: > >> Moore’s Law isn’t a mythical beast that magically materialized in 1965 > >> and threatens to unpredictably vanish at any moment. In fact, it’s > >> part of a broader ancient mechanism that has no intention of > >> stopping. This mechanism, which I call cost gravity, pulls down the > >> price of technology by about half every two years. > > Add to that the fact that cost=money ultimately comes from money=effort > > eg currencies like http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ithaca_Hours > > (maybe even dolour → dollar though thats not the official etymology) > > and its clear that there is a ripple effect of technology breaking down > > old castles. Pleasant to the* layman, unpleasant to those professionals whose > > fiefdoms are threatened. > The price of technology to the end user, yes. Anyone can go out and > buy a computer that's powerful enough to do everything the typical > person needs, and it's cheap enough to fit inside the typical person's > budget. (Compare early IBM estimates of maybe half a dozen computer > sales worldwide.) That has nothing to do with whether or not that > person can create that computer. Same goes for software. This is the continuum fallacy: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Continuum_fallacy The Aunt Tillies (or your soprano)dont need to master networking as good as you do but they need to be better at it than they are. To continue the example of music: I said that using something like musescore a layman learns faster with a little guidance. And heres the catch -- most musicians who can guide in the traditional way are frightened of technology.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Mark H Harris <harrismh777@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-03-27 17:14 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <mailman.8640.1395960068.18130.python-list@python.org> |
| In reply to | #69221 |
On 3/27/14 4:42 PM, Chris Angelico wrote: > And this is the bit where, I think, we disagree. I think that > programming is for programmers, in the same way that music is for > musicians and the giving of legal advice is for lawyers. Yes, there > are armchair lawyers, and plenty of people can pick up a hymn book and > sing; ------------------------------------ > but laws and operas aren't designed with them in mind. Why > should programming languages be designed for the people who don't want > to learn them? Actually we agree quite a bit on this--I agree with everything above the line----- and some of the sentiment with everything below the line. Your question has a somewhat false premise. They *really do* want to learn them, and they are frustrated with the time and attention it takes. The argument is also from analogy, which in this case is almost similar but not quite. Now, there is no royal road to geometry, opera, the violin, and the piano (I'm a pianist, and flutist--and an amateur composer). All of these fine arts take time, there is just no getting around it. However, there are now "computer based" piano courses that speed the process (with 44 key keyboard) by factors of 10. In other words, its easier now because of computers, to learn to play the piano on ones own time than ever before. To be really good at it, you're going to need to get a good instructor and work. Opera, the violin, pole vaulting, are all in another category requiring talent! ... not just will, and brains. Here in the states we file a little thing on or around April 15 called a tax return. Well most of us these days file electronically, and most of us doing that use some kind of tax software that takes in all the data, organizes it, and gives it to the Internal Revenue Service in a format that is legal, is accurate, and leads to no audit; because its just right. That is more of what I'm talking about. I have no interest in becoming a tax accountant, nor making money doing taxes for others, but, I do want to submit my correct return on time with no errors, and from my own keyboard (fast, efficient, error free, and with no driving, stamping, mailing, &c). People want to use their computer. They want to solve problems with it... and frankly, they would like to know how to program it, if there where some royal road, or fast track, or short and easy tutorial. I know lots of people that will sit down and try (with a cup of Java) and hack it out if they have a good short book. Python IMHO is the perfect language to give this a shot with--- powerful, elegant, easy once initiated, fast, and most important extensible and flexible. "normal" people deserve this. Well, I'll know if nobody buys the book, nor downloads the package, nor submits bug reports. But, I've got an inkling that there is a need, all over the place. Just look on the list: Fred Sells meta language request. He proves my point entirely. I have not responded yet... thought I would wait a bit... but look what he is after. Go read it. But, I don't disagree with you Chris, and I have myself some of the same concerns really. I'm finding the path harder than I thought it would be. Well, its hard enough just getting other people who are experts to buy into it. Its going to be an uphill climb, for sure. marcus
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-03-28 04:45 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <5334fe71$0$29994$c3e8da3$5496439d@news.astraweb.com> |
| In reply to | #69224 |
On Thu, 27 Mar 2014 17:14:09 -0500, Mark H Harris wrote: > People want to use their computer. They want to solve problems with > it... and frankly, they would like to know how to program it, if there > where some royal road, or fast track, or short and easy tutorial. Most people want to program their computer in the same way they want to crawl around under their car changing the grease and oil. People want to use their computer, but they would prefer the computer already have an app to solve their problem. Some will program only if that is the only way to get the computer to do what they want. Most won't even do that. If you ask the average Python-using biologist if they want to be a programmer, they will say something like "If I wanted to be a programmer, I would have done a comp sci degree. I want to be a biologist, and unfortunately having to program comes with the territory, like the other tedious jobs I have to do. I didn't do six years of college to wash test tubes or write code, but that's part of the job." > I know > lots of people that will sit down and try (with a cup of Java) and hack > it out if they have a good short book. There are seven billion people on planet Earth. If only one in ten thousand wants to program, that's still "lots of people". But in any case, we're not talking about people who want to program and are willing to read a book to learn. We are talking about this subset of people who want to program without learning to program, and in particular your insistence that they count for more than programmers who want to learn to program. [...] > Just look on the list: Fred Sells meta language request. He proves my > point entirely. If I were Fred, I'd probably be insulted by that. He clearly knows programming jargon, and can use it correctly, and he is talking about being pressed for time and short on management support, which most programmers can relate to. What reason do you have to conclude from *one* post that he's one of your non-expert non-programmer programmers? Apart from wishful thinking, of course. -- Steven D'Aprano http://import-that.dreamwidth.org/
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-03-28 00:34 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <5334c38e$0$29994$c3e8da3$5496439d@news.astraweb.com> |
| In reply to | #69198 |
On Thu, 27 Mar 2014 10:44:49 -0500, Mark H Harris wrote: > On 3/26/14 1:35 AM, alex23 wrote: >> On 25/03/2014 12:39 PM, Mark H Harris wrote: >>> my version semantically is "how it is perceived" by the user >> >> Could you please stop claiming to have insight into the comprehension >> of anyone other than yourself? Hasty generalisations don't help your >> argument. > > hi alex23, please don't be silly. > > Who is being hasty? How do you know its a generalization? When you claim to speak for "the user" (your words, not mine), as in the quote above, what else could it be than a generalisation? Unless you believe that there actually is *one single person* using Python, you are generalising the millions of users (note plural) into one idealised user who speaks for all. > My comments here are not in the least hasty, nor are they > generalizations. Of course they are. Unless you claim that there is literally only one person using Python -- which is obviously absurd -- you are making a statement about the huge variety of Python users as if they all agreed on this matter. That is a generalisation. It might even be a valid generalisation, although I doubt it. You have a pattern of discounting or rejecting the needs and desires of *most* programmers in favour of what you perceive as the needs and wants of a *tiny* subset of inexperienced programmers -- those who aren't interested in becoming experienced, but want to continue programming -- as if they were all users of Python. They are not. Not even close. And they are certainly not the people who keep Python alive and well -- if anything, they are users in the sense that they *use* Python and the resources of the Python community, but they will never, ever give back. Maybe your generalisation about *users* is more apt than either of us realised. Your generalisation doesn't even apply to *all* inexperienced beginners. If you wanted to turn Python into a teaching language, that would be an interesting proposal, but you don't. Consider your recent comments that √ should be allowed as an identifier, and that it should be a built-in. Screw the people who know and understand Unicode rules, your suggestion would break their expectations, but those users don't count for you. Presumably, anyone who knows Unicode must be an expert, and experts don't matter to you. Screw the people who have no interest in mathematics, and wouldn't know a square root symbol from a kick to the head. Those users don't count either. As for enormous number of users who will have difficulty typing √ in their source code, they certainly don't count! It's good enough that *you* have a solution to that problem, you can type alt-v, and anyone who can't simply doesn't matter. -- Steven D'Aprano http://import-that.dreamwidth.org/
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Mark H Harris <harrismh777@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-03-28 16:18 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <lh4ouu$n8l$1@speranza.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #69230 |
On 3/27/14 7:34 PM, Steven D'Aprano wrote: > As for enormous number of users who will have > difficulty typing √ in their source code, they certainly don't count! > It's good enough that *you* have a solution to that problem, you can type > alt-v, and anyone who can't simply doesn't matter. You have an interesting point here; more interesting perhaps than you know. We have a unicode system [1] capable of zillions of characters, and most of [us] have some qwerty system keyboard [104 keys?] with meta key mappings for a few more. Talk about the cart before the horse. We need a standard input system not controlled by Microsoft where-by everyone in the entire world can enter unicode (with customization) easily and inexpensively. A unicode keyboard would be nice. Why must everyone in the world be stuck with a U.S. Royal typewriter keyboard for two or three hundred years? Dvorak had the right idea; but it didn't stick (although I have a Dvorak key mapping I use (with emacs) just for fun). I do care, Steven. You'll never ever hear me say "screw" somebody, not because I'm holier than thou, but because everyone counts--everyone. Your point about the biologist is fabulous (my point as well), "I didn't study biology for six years to wash test tubes and program computers, but it comes with the territory". Steven, dude, you proved my point with that. Most biologists (academics particularly) are studying systems that require computers these days--- and the scientists in that field DO want to program computers (I didn't say love) and the "want" is powerful. I didn't say that they "liked it" either. Somehow a biologist needs to be able to talk to that goofy machine (which they hate) and be able to do so efficiently and I dare say rapidly. There needs to be a system for them; general, easy, elegant yet comprehensible, flexible yet unified, discrete, simplified (without being oversimplified). wow. Talk development requirements. marcus [1] http://www.unicode.org/standard/where/
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-03-29 13:45 +1100 |
| Message-ID | <mailman.8678.1396061122.18130.python-list@python.org> |
| In reply to | #69284 |
On Sat, Mar 29, 2014 at 8:18 AM, Mark H Harris <harrismh777@gmail.com> wrote: > We have a unicode system [1] capable of zillions of characters, and most of > [us] have some qwerty system keyboard [104 keys?] with meta key mappings for > a few more. Talk about the cart before the horse. > > We need a standard input system not controlled by Microsoft... ... uhh... how does the QWERTY system demonstrate Microsoft's control?? There's more than a hundred years of gap between them, and in the wrong order. By the way, thanks for telling me what a zillion is. It must be 65536, because that's the biggest thing Unicode gives us plural of in number of characters. :) Considering that we have ten fingers, having 1114112 keys would be quite impractical. The smallest number of keys to render that many characters would probably be 21, but it'd be toggling data into a computer, rather than typing; *every* character would require holding down a good number of keys. (Or you could go the other way and have exactly two keys: 1 and 0. Press either 21 times to enter a single character.) You'd probably need a minimum of several hundred keys to get something reasonably logical. Do you really want a keyboard that takes up that much space? Most people can't efficiently use F1 through F12, much less another hundred or two hundred keys. ChrisA
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-03-29 03:08 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <5336391f$0$29994$c3e8da3$5496439d@news.astraweb.com> |
| In reply to | #69295 |
On Sat, 29 Mar 2014 13:45:12 +1100, Chris Angelico wrote: > Considering that we have ten fingers, having 1114112 keys would be quite > impractical. The smallest number of keys to render that many characters > would probably be 21, but it'd be toggling data into a computer, rather > than typing; *every* character would require holding down a good number > of keys. (Or you could go the other way and have exactly two keys: 1 and > 0. Press either 21 times to enter a single character.) http://like-a-boss.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/10/supercoder.jpg -- Steven D'Aprano http://import-that.dreamwidth.org/
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Mark H Harris <harrismh777@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-03-28 22:18 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <lh5e27$b73$1@speranza.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #69295 |
On 3/28/14 9:45 PM, Chris Angelico wrote:
> On Sat, Mar 29, 2014 at 8:18 AM, Mark H Harris <harrismh777@gmail.com> wrote:
>> We have a unicode system [1] capable of zillions of characters, and most of
>> [us] have some qwerty system keyboard [104 keys?] with meta key mappings for
>> a few more. Talk about the cart before the horse.
>>
>> We need a standard input system not controlled by Microsoft...
>
> ... uhh... how does the QWERTY system demonstrate Microsoft's
> control?? There's more than a hundred years of gap between them, and
> in the wrong order.
You know the answer to this question. Does your keyboard have the
"Windows" emblem|logo on the meta key(s) on lower right, lower left? On
a standard keyboard its the meta key between ctrl and alt. Microsoft
has controlled that meta section of the keyboard for years, effectively
preventing those keys from being used for unicode meta control keys
(ironical considering the fact the Microsoft is a major player at the
unicode consortium). The meta keyboard on the mac is much more of what
I have in mind, but that's mac only for now.
> By the way, thanks for telling me what a zillion is. It must be 65536,
> because that's the biggest thing Unicode gives us plural of in number
> of characters. :)
ha! :-)) A zillion is 65536 x(several thousand languages).
Actually I used a zillion because the consortium doesn't even put a
number on it... because there is a difference between script and
language, and there are many languages that use Latin. The point is its
a huge number greater than 128 or 256. (or 104)
>
> Considering that we have ten fingers, having 1114112 keys would be
> quite impractical.
don't be literal, think meta pages (key mappings) over the actual
keyboard, but think "standards".
> Do you really want a keyboard that takes up that much space? Most
> people can't efficiently use F1 through F12, much less another hundred
> or two hundred keys.
No, I want a standard unicode keyboard (a standard specification for
a unicode keyboard) that facilitates unicode typing with minimal actual
keys and standard key maps for alternate sets that may be easily
selected without a mouse and without moving the hands from the home row.
The mac does a pretty good job of this now, but the mapping editor
is not built-in; otherwise, the key mappings are very good, quite easy,
and very fast. But, like Steven pointed out, everyone needs to be on the
same unicode input device (as standard) before language specs could
relay on certain code points for tokens | identifiers.
marcus
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-03-29 14:45 +1100 |
| Message-ID | <mailman.8680.1396064738.18130.python-list@python.org> |
| In reply to | #69298 |
On Sat, Mar 29, 2014 at 2:18 PM, Mark H Harris <harrismh777@gmail.com> wrote: > On 3/28/14 9:45 PM, Chris Angelico wrote: >> ... uhh... how does the QWERTY system demonstrate Microsoft's >> control?? There's more than a hundred years of gap between them, and >> in the wrong order. > > > You know the answer to this question. Does your keyboard have the > "Windows" emblem|logo on the meta key(s) on lower right, lower left? On a > standard keyboard its the meta key between ctrl and alt. Microsoft has > controlled that meta section of the keyboard for years, effectively > preventing those keys from being used for unicode meta control keys > (ironical considering the fact the Microsoft is a major player at the > unicode consortium). The meta keyboard on the mac is much more of what I > have in mind, but that's mac only for now. No, actually. A lot of my keyboards don't have those, and even those that do aren't controlled by Microsoft. We've been using those for other purposes since they first came out. To claim that they indicate MS control is just as ridiculous as claiming that the Backspace key indicates control from the Remington Typewriter Company. >> By the way, thanks for telling me what a zillion is. It must be 65536, >> because that's the biggest thing Unicode gives us plural of in number >> of characters. :) > > > ha! :-)) A zillion is 65536 x(several thousand languages). Actually I > used a zillion because the consortium doesn't even put a number on it... > because there is a difference between script and language, and there are > many languages that use Latin. The point is its a huge number greater than > 128 or 256. (or 104) > >> >> Considering that we have ten fingers, having 1114112 keys would be >> quite impractical. > > > don't be literal, think meta pages (key mappings) over the actual > keyboard, but think "standards". The Unicode standard specifies only 1114112 possible codepoints, of which only roughly 200K are currently allocated. (And those figures include non-character codepoints, like the U+D800 to U+DFFF range used to encode non-BMP codepoints into UTF-16.) So you can't possibly need any more than that - just over a million - for full Unicode support. That's standards for you. >> Do you really want a keyboard that takes up that much space? Most >> people can't efficiently use F1 through F12, much less another hundred >> or two hundred keys. > > No, I want a standard unicode keyboard (a standard specification for a > unicode keyboard) that facilitates unicode typing with minimal actual keys > and standard key maps for alternate sets that may be easily selected without > a mouse and without moving the hands from the home row. Minimal actual keys. Steven almost got it with the link he posted above, but I can cut one more key off it: if you always press exactly 21 keys to enter one codepoint, you don't need a "Done" key. (But the "Done" key would allow you to type some characters much more quickly. You can send a spew of U+0000 just by holding Done, for instance; and what an accomplishment THAT is in a family man! [1]) > The mac does a pretty good job of this now, but the mapping editor is not > built-in; otherwise, the key mappings are very good, quite easy, and very > fast. But, like Steven pointed out, everyone needs to be on the same unicode > input device (as standard) before language specs could relay on certain code > points for tokens | identifiers. If that idealized Unicode keyboard were worth doing, it would have been done by now. There are myriad keyboard designs to choose from, like these: http://www.thinkgeek.com/brain/whereisit.cgi?t=keyboard None has the hundreds of keys needed for rapid entry of arbitrary Unicode codepoints or characters (in theory you could have a key that creates a full CCS). Why? Because there's no demand for it. ChrisA [1] Look up Gilbert & Sullivan's "Ruddigore" for a very similar line of argument regarding a sailor.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Ben Finney <ben+python@benfinney.id.au> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-03-29 15:18 +1100 |
| Subject | Keyboard standards (was: Explanation of this Python language feature? [x for x in x for x in x] (to flatten a nested list)) |
| Message-ID | <mailman.8681.1396066726.18130.python-list@python.org> |
| In reply to | #69298 |
Mark H Harris <harrismh777@gmail.com> writes: > > On Sat, Mar 29, 2014 at 8:18 AM, Mark H Harris <harrismh777@gmail.com> wrote: > >> We need a standard input system not controlled by Microsoft... > > […] Does your keyboard have the "Windows" emblem|logo on the meta > key(s) on lower right, lower left? No, mine has a Tux logo, because it was shipped that way from Think Penguin <URL:https://www.thinkpenguin.com/> and the key you're referring to operates as the “Super” key in GNU+Linux. Quite useful. My desktop keyboard is constructed from the Model M buckling-spring design <URL:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IBM_Model_M_keyboard>. That means, among other advantages, that the key caps are designed to be easily replaceable with parts from different manufacturers. Model M keyboards are now manufactured in Lexington, USA by Unicomp <URL:http://pckeyboard.com/page/category/UKBD>. They ship internationally, which is how I got mine. Unicomp will happily sell you one in various layouts without the Windows logo. They can even do a key set with the Ctrl and Caps Lock keys swapped to where they should be, and the Super key printed with a “Tux” logo <URL:http://pckeyboard.com/page/product/LinTuxSet>. On the inexpensive end, Think Penguin will also happily ship Tux logo stickers to go on top of the Super key <URL:https://www.thinkpenguin.com/gnu-linux/tux-super-key-keyboard-sticker>. (I have no affiliation with Think Penguin nor Unicomp, except as a happy repeat customer.) > No, I want a standard unicode keyboard (a standard specification > for a unicode keyboard) that facilitates unicode typing with minimal > actual keys and standard key maps for alternate sets that may be > easily selected without a mouse and without moving the hands from the > home row. I can't help you with that, exactly. However, I type unicode characters with an Input Method engine called IBus <URL:https://code.google.com/p/ibus/>, which is now in Gnome <URL:https://help.gnome.org/misc/release-notes/3.6/i18n-ibus.html.en> as a standard part of the interface. I can select various IBus input methods depending on the purpose or language for which I'm writing, and they make it predictable and memorable to get the right characters. -- \ “I have yet to see any problem, however complicated, which, | `\ when you looked at it in the right way, did not become still | _o__) more complicated.” —Paul Anderson | Ben Finney
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Mark H Harris <harrismh777@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-03-28 23:26 -0500 |
| Subject | Re: Keyboard standards |
| Message-ID | <lh5i1c$ht7$1@speranza.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #69307 |
On 3/28/14 11:18 PM, Ben Finney wrote: > On the inexpensive end, Think Penguin will also happily ship Tux logo > stickers to go on top of the Super key > <URL:https://www.thinkpenguin.com/gnu-linux/tux-super-key-keyboard-sticker>. That's ~cool. I can now remove that nasty M$ meta key. Actually, I got so sick of looking at that goofy little warped window that I grabbed myself a magic marker and blacked it out. :) marcus PS Thunderbird puts *both* the list and the news group addys in the to: header field on reply-to-list. ~nice, huh.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-03-29 16:13 +1100 |
| Subject | Re: Keyboard standards |
| Message-ID | <mailman.8685.1396070024.18130.python-list@python.org> |
| In reply to | #69309 |
On Sat, Mar 29, 2014 at 3:26 PM, Mark H Harris <harrismh777@gmail.com> wrote: > On 3/28/14 11:18 PM, Ben Finney wrote: > >> On the inexpensive end, Think Penguin will also happily ship Tux logo >> stickers to go on top of the Super key >> >> <URL:https://www.thinkpenguin.com/gnu-linux/tux-super-key-keyboard-sticker>. > > > That's ~cool. I can now remove that nasty M$ meta key. Actually, I got so > sick of looking at that goofy little warped window that I grabbed myself a > magic marker and blacked it out. :) If Sharpie can oust Microsoft's dominance over your keyboard, it can't have been very strong dominance to start with... When I first met Windows keys, I just popped 'em off and left a gap. Worked fine. ChrisA
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Mark H Harris <harrismh777@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-03-29 00:40 -0500 |
| Subject | Re: Keyboard standards |
| Message-ID | <lh5mcm$osv$1@speranza.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #69315 |
On 3/29/14 12:13 AM, Chris Angelico wrote: > > When I first met Windows keys, I just popped 'em off and left a gap. > Worked fine. ha! see.. it popped you off too! :-)) I found it arrogant to the max to place their stupid logo on (my) keyboard. What if every company out there wanted "their" own keytop too? geeze :)
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Ian Kelly <ian.g.kelly@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-03-29 04:02 -0600 |
| Subject | Re: Keyboard standards |
| Message-ID | <mailman.8689.1396087373.18130.python-list@python.org> |
| In reply to | #69318 |
On Fri, Mar 28, 2014 at 11:40 PM, Mark H Harris <harrismh777@gmail.com> wrote: > On 3/29/14 12:13 AM, Chris Angelico wrote: >> >> When I first met Windows keys, I just popped 'em off and left a gap. >> Worked fine. > > ha! see.. it popped you off too! :-)) I found it arrogant to the max to > place their stupid logo on (my) keyboard. What if every company out there > wanted "their" own keytop too? geeze It's interesting to note that the Command key on Apple keyboards was originally designed with the Apple logo, but Steve Jobs felt that the logo was overused by having it plastered all over menu shortcuts, so they replaced it prior to release with the cloverleaf symbol it now bears.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-03-29 16:03 +0000 |
| Subject | Re: Keyboard standards |
| Message-ID | <5336eebe$0$29994$c3e8da3$5496439d@news.astraweb.com> |
| In reply to | #69318 |
On Sat, 29 Mar 2014 00:40:43 -0500, Mark H Harris wrote: > On 3/29/14 12:13 AM, Chris Angelico wrote: >> >> When I first met Windows keys, I just popped 'em off and left a gap. >> Worked fine. > > ha! see.. it popped you off too! :-)) I found it arrogant to the > max to place their stupid logo on (my) keyboard. My keyboard has IBM's logo on it. My keyboard at work has Dell's logo on it. In the cupboard, I have a Mac with Apple's logo on it. Do you have a problem with that? > What if every company > out there wanted "their" own keytop too? geeze They're welcome to try. Without support from the operating system, what good do you think it will do? Apple used to have an Apple key. Later they changed it to ⌘ (Command), but everyone knows that ⌘ is only available on Apple keyboards. -- Steven D'Aprano http://import-that.dreamwidth.org/
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Larry Hudson <orgnut@yahoo.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-03-29 12:27 -0700 |
| Subject | Re: Keyboard standards |
| Message-ID | <zLydnTn3Y7oMg6rOnZ2dnUVZ_rWdnZ2d@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #69309 |
On 03/28/2014 09:26 PM, Mark H Harris wrote:
>
> PS Thunderbird puts *both* the list and the news group addys in the to: header field on
> reply-to-list. ~nice, huh.
Must be the way YOU set it up. MY Thunderbird (currently version 24.4.0 on Mint Linux 16)
doesn't do any such thing. Besides, "Reply" sends private e-mail to the poster -- "Followup"
sends to the newsgroup.
-=- Larry -=-
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 4 of 21 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 … 21 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | comp.lang.python
csiph-web