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

Groups > comp.lang.python > #78726 > unrolled thread

Practice question

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

Contents

  Practice question Seymore4Head <Seymore4Head@Hotmail.invalid> - 2014-10-05 19:02 -0400
    Re: Practice question Roy Smith <roy@panix.com> - 2014-10-05 19:06 -0400
    Re: Practice question Ned Batchelder <ned@nedbatchelder.com> - 2014-10-05 19:14 -0400
      Re: Practice question Seymore4Head <Seymore4Head@Hotmail.invalid> - 2014-10-05 20:07 -0400
        Re: Practice question Ned Batchelder <ned@nedbatchelder.com> - 2014-10-05 21:25 -0400
        Re: Practice question Steven D'Aprano <steve@pearwood.info> - 2014-10-07 08:41 +0000
    Re: Practice question Skip Montanaro <skip.montanaro@gmail.com> - 2014-10-05 18:33 -0500
      Re: Practice question Rustom Mody <rustompmody@gmail.com> - 2014-10-05 19:47 -0700
        Re: Practice question Skip Montanaro <skip.montanaro@gmail.com> - 2014-10-06 08:04 -0500
          Re: Practice question Rustom Mody <rustompmody@gmail.com> - 2014-10-06 09:23 -0700
            Re: Practice question Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-10-07 03:52 +1100
              Re: Practice question Rustom Mody <rustompmody@gmail.com> - 2014-10-06 10:05 -0700
                Re: Practice question Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-10-07 04:13 +1100
                Re: Practice question Steven D'Aprano <steve@pearwood.info> - 2014-10-06 20:49 +0000
                  Re: Practice question "Redge @ Versalytics.com" <versalytics@gmail.com> - 2014-10-06 20:54 -0400
                  Re: Practice question Rustom Mody <rustompmody@gmail.com> - 2014-10-08 09:14 -0700
                    Re: Practice question Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-10-09 03:23 +1100
                    Re: Practice question Skip Montanaro <skip.montanaro@gmail.com> - 2014-10-08 11:27 -0500
                      Re: Practice question Rustom Mody <rustompmody@gmail.com> - 2014-10-08 09:41 -0700
    Re: Practice question Terry Reedy <tjreedy@udel.edu> - 2014-10-05 19:47 -0400
      Re: Practice question Seymore4Head <Seymore4Head@Hotmail.invalid> - 2014-10-05 20:18 -0400
        Re: Practice question Steven D'Aprano <steve@pearwood.info> - 2014-10-07 08:48 +0000
          Re: Practice question C Smith <illusiontechniques@gmail.com> - 2014-10-07 05:43 -0700
    Re: Practice question C Smith <illusiontechniques@gmail.com> - 2014-10-05 16:24 -0700
    Re: Practice question Denis McMahon <denismfmcmahon@gmail.com> - 2014-10-07 01:46 +0000
      Re: Practice question Seymore4Head <Seymore4Head@Hotmail.invalid> - 2014-10-06 22:06 -0400
        Re: Practice question alister <alister.nospam.ware@ntlworld.com> - 2014-10-09 15:28 +0000

Page 1 of 2  [1] 2  Next page →

#78726 — Practice question

For the record, I don't want a hint.  I want the answer.
I see a practice question is similar to this.
15 <= x < 30  And it wants a similar expression that is equivalent.
So the right answer is 15<= x or x <30
but one of the other answers is 
not (15<= x and x <30)

But it says.....remember you can try this out in the Python shell.
How?

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#78727

In article <h2j33adothf9uctcdp5psqk2cclr01961r@4ax.com>,
 Seymore4Head <Seymore4Head@Hotmail.invalid> wrote:

> For the record, I don't want a hint.  I want the answer.

42.

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

#78728

On 10/5/14 7:02 PM, Seymore4Head wrote:
> For the record, I don't want a hint.  I want the answer.
> I see a practice question is similar to this.
> 15 <= x < 30  And it wants a similar expression that is equivalent.
> So the right answer is 15<= x or x <30

No, "15 <= x < 30" is equivalent to "15 <= x and x < 30".

> but one of the other answers is
> not (15<= x and x <30)

You are speaking ambiguously.  Which did you mean:
a) one of the other answers isn't "15 <= x and x < 30", or:
b) one of the other answers is "not (15 <= x and x < 30)" ?

-- 
Ned Batchelder, http://nedbatchelder.com

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

#78731

On Sun, 05 Oct 2014 19:14:27 -0400, Ned Batchelder
<ned@nedbatchelder.com> wrote:

>On 10/5/14 7:02 PM, Seymore4Head wrote:
>> For the record, I don't want a hint.  I want the answer.
>> I see a practice question is similar to this.
>> 15 <= x < 30  And it wants a similar expression that is equivalent.
>> So the right answer is 15<= x or x <30
>
>No, "15 <= x < 30" is equivalent to "15 <= x and x < 30".
>
>> but one of the other answers is
>> not (15<= x and x <30)
>
>You are speaking ambiguously.  Which did you mean:
>a) one of the other answers isn't "15 <= x and x < 30", or:
>b) one of the other answers is "not (15 <= x and x < 30)" ?

Here is the exact question, I was trying to post something similar.  I
failed.

http://i.imgur.com/iUGh4xf.jpg

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

#78734

On 10/5/14 8:07 PM, Seymore4Head wrote:
> On Sun, 05 Oct 2014 19:14:27 -0400, Ned Batchelder
> <ned@nedbatchelder.com> wrote:
>
>> On 10/5/14 7:02 PM, Seymore4Head wrote:
>>> For the record, I don't want a hint.  I want the answer.
>>> I see a practice question is similar to this.
>>> 15 <= x < 30  And it wants a similar expression that is equivalent.
>>> So the right answer is 15<= x or x <30
>>
>> No, "15 <= x < 30" is equivalent to "15 <= x and x < 30".
>>
>>> but one of the other answers is
>>> not (15<= x and x <30)
>>
>> You are speaking ambiguously.  Which did you mean:
>> a) one of the other answers isn't "15 <= x and x < 30", or:
>> b) one of the other answers is "not (15 <= x and x < 30)" ?
>
> Here is the exact question, I was trying to post something similar.  I
> failed.
>
> http://i.imgur.com/iUGh4xf.jpg
>

Why isn't the fourth one correct?

-- 
Ned Batchelder, http://nedbatchelder.com

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

#78794

On Sun, 05 Oct 2014 20:07:50 -0400, Seymore4Head wrote:

> Here is the exact question, I was trying to post something similar.  I
> failed.
> 
> http://i.imgur.com/iUGh4xf.jpg

Please don't post screen shots if you can avoid it. You almost certainly 
can copy and paste the text from the web page. And if you can't, you can 
usually re-type the question. It's good practice to strength your typing 
skills.

Screen shots cannot be read by people using a screen reader, or who don't 
have access to the web (but are reading their mail), or if the host site 
(in this case, imgur) is down or blocked.



-- 
Steven

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

#78729

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

On Oct 5, 2014 6:07 PM, "Seymore4Head" <Seymore4Head@hotmail.invalid> wrote:
>
> For the record, I don't want a hint.  I want the answer.
> I see a practice question is similar to this.
> 15 <= x < 30  And it wants a similar expression that is equivalent.

Maybe

    30 > x >= 15

? Seems more "similar" to the original expression than the other
possibilities.

As to how to try it out, bring up the Python prompt, assign various values
to x, and keep evaluating the possibilities. To simplify evaluation off a
bunch of alternatives, consider defining a function which takes x add a
parameter and print out the various expression values. I'd give a concrete
example, but don't has a prompt available on my phone...

Just my 2¢...

Skip

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

#78736

On Monday, October 6, 2014 5:04:11 AM UTC+5:30, Skip Montanaro wrote:
> On Oct 5, 2014 6:07 PM, Seymore4Head wrote:
> > For the record, I don't want a hint.  I want the answer.
> > I see a practice question is similar to this.
> > 15 <= x < 30  And it wants a similar expression that is equivalent.
> Maybe
>     30 > x >= 15
> ? Seems more "similar" to the original expression than the other possibilities.

> As to how to try it out, bring up the Python prompt, assign various
> values to x, and keep evaluating the possibilities. To simplify
> evaluation off a bunch of alternatives, consider defining a function
> which takes x add a parameter and print out the various expression
> values. I'd give a concrete example, but don't has a prompt
> available on my phone...


An interesting data-point.
We have a here a poster who's asked some 20 or so python questions
and still seems not to know how to use the interpreter interactively.

Sorry Seymore if this sounds condescending -- its not a complaint
against you but against those who treat the print statement/expression as
kosher for newbies. Imagine someone who has driven a car for a month but has
no clue about the basic rule of keep-left (or right).

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

#78755

On Sun, Oct 5, 2014 at 9:47 PM, Rustom Mody <rustompmody@gmail.com> wrote:
> Sorry Seymore if this sounds condescending -- its not a complaint
> against you but against those who treat the print statement/expression as
> kosher for newbies.

So if you're not griping about Seymore's original post, are you
griping about my response? It was the one you quoted. And what's with
the comparison between use of the print statement and driving on the
wrong side of the road?

Skip

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

#78769

On Monday, October 6, 2014 6:34:27 PM UTC+5:30, Skip Montanaro wrote:
> On Sun, Oct 5, 2014 at 9:47 PM, Rustom Mody  wrote:
> > Sorry Seymore if this sounds condescending -- its not a complaint
> > against you but against those who treat the print statement/expression as
> > kosher for newbies.

> So if you're not griping about Seymore's original post, are you
> griping about my response? It was the one you quoted.

It so happened you were the person to note that here was a question(er)
needing instruction about using the interpreter. Nothing wrong with the 
answer (or the question). Something wrong with the point at which it emerges.

> And what's with the comparison between use of the print statement
> and driving on the wrong side of the road?

Consider the sequence:

1. Drives on the wrong side of the road
2. Has no clue that there's such a concept as 'wrong side of road'
3. Teaches people to drive without conveying anything about 'wrong side of road'

Hopefully you will agree that 1 < 2 < 3??

My gripe is with 3

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

#78772

On Tue, Oct 7, 2014 at 3:23 AM, Rustom Mody <rustompmody@gmail.com> wrote:
> Consider the sequence:
>
> 1. Drives on the wrong side of the road
> 2. Has no clue that there's such a concept as 'wrong side of road'
> 3. Teaches people to drive without conveying anything about 'wrong side of road'
>
> Hopefully you will agree that 1 < 2 < 3??
>
> My gripe is with 3

No, I don't agree. Teaching people to drive is separate from teaching
road rules, which vary by legislature. I can draw the exact same
analogy:

1. Fails to follow proper protocol at a hook turn intersection
2. Has no clue that there's such a concept as a hook turn
3. Teaches people to drive without conveying anything about hook turns.

Most of you are probably in state 2, and your instructors were
probably in state 3. Neither's a problem, because hook turns don't
matter until you come to an intersection where they're used. (And even
then, there's often signage.)

The complaints you're making are about something that does not matter.
There are multiple usage patterns for Python; one is to eschew the
interactive interpreter and run everything from scripts. That's fine,
there's nothing wrong with it. And then, the nuances of interactive
Python are completely insignificant.

I don't see that your complaints about print and interactive mode have
anything at all to do with this thread.

ChrisA

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

#78773

On Monday, October 6, 2014 10:22:27 PM UTC+5:30, Chris Angelico wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 7, 2014 at 3:23 AM, Rustom Mody wrote:
> > Consider the sequence:
> > 1. Drives on the wrong side of the road
> > 2. Has no clue that there's such a concept as 'wrong side of road'
> > 3. Teaches people to drive without conveying anything about 'wrong side of road'
> > Hopefully you will agree that 1 < 2 < 3??
> > My gripe is with 3

> No, I don't agree.

Interesting

So you dont agree with: "1<2<3" ?

Or with "My gripe is 3"  ?

The second would be quite bizarre:

"I have a headache..."

"Sorry. But I dont agree with that"

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

#78775

On Tue, Oct 7, 2014 at 4:05 AM, Rustom Mody <rustompmody@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Monday, October 6, 2014 10:22:27 PM UTC+5:30, Chris Angelico wrote:
>> On Tue, Oct 7, 2014 at 3:23 AM, Rustom Mody wrote:
>> > Consider the sequence:
>> > 1. Drives on the wrong side of the road
>> > 2. Has no clue that there's such a concept as 'wrong side of road'
>> > 3. Teaches people to drive without conveying anything about 'wrong side of road'
>> > Hopefully you will agree that 1 < 2 < 3??
>> > My gripe is with 3
>
>> No, I don't agree.
>
> Interesting
>
> So you dont agree with: "1<2<3" ?
>
> Or with "My gripe is 3"  ?
>
> The second would be quite bizarre:
>
> "I have a headache..."
>
> "Sorry. But I dont agree with that"

Well, hey, I've eaten things that disagreed with me. You'd think that
would be purely factual. "I ate you!" "I disagree!".

But no, it was the "1 < 2 < 3" part that I disagreed with... as I'm
sure you were aware. Never let the obvious truth of something get in
the way of a good joke :)

ChrisA

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

#78783

On Mon, 06 Oct 2014 10:05:40 -0700, Rustom Mody wrote:

> On Monday, October 6, 2014 10:22:27 PM UTC+5:30, Chris Angelico wrote:
>> On Tue, Oct 7, 2014 at 3:23 AM, Rustom Mody wrote:
>> > Consider the sequence:
>> > 1. Drives on the wrong side of the road 2. Has no clue that there's
>> > such a concept as 'wrong side of road' 3. Teaches people to drive
>> > without conveying anything about 'wrong side of road' Hopefully you
>> > will agree that 1 < 2 < 3?? My gripe is with 3
> 
>> No, I don't agree.
> 
> Interesting
> 
> So you dont agree with: "1<2<3" ?

I can't speak for Chris, by my answer is neither Yes nor No, but Mu.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mu_%28negative%29#In_popular_culture


I don't understand what semantics you are giving the < symbol. It's not 
"less than", since statements 1, 2 and 3 above don't have a total order 
or even a partial order. What does it mean to say that "Drives on the 
wrong side of the road" is less than "Teaches people to drive without 
conveying anything about 'wrong side of road'"? Less than in what sense? 
Alphabetical order? Less dangerous? Less competent? Less annoying? Less 
expensive?

So, no, I don't agree. Nor do I disagree.

I have fewer issues with your conclusion and analogy than I do with the 
basic premise that there is a connection between Seymore's problem here 
and the use, or non-use, of print in the interactive interpreter. I don't 
see how replacing interactive use and/or the use of print with functions 
containing return statements would help Seymore.



> Or with "My gripe is 3"  ?
> 
> The second would be quite bizarre:

If it's bizarre, why do you consider that Chris may mean that? The 
reasonable thing would be to reject it from contention.


> "I have a headache..."
> 
> "Sorry. But I dont agree with that"


"I don't agree that you have a headache. You're obviously lying, acting, 
delusional, an insentient robot programmed to repeat the words 'I have a 
headache', a zombie (not the brain eating kind, the philosophical kind), 
a sophisticated bot (but not sophisticated enough to pass the Turing 
test), or otherwise faking it."

I'm just sayin'...



-- 
Steven

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

#78785

> On Oct 6, 2014, at 4:49 PM, Steven D'Aprano <steve@pearwood.info> wrote:
> 
>> On Mon, 06 Oct 2014 10:05:40 -0700, Rustom Mody wrote:
>> 
>>> On Monday, October 6, 2014 10:22:27 PM UTC+5:30, Chris Angelico wrote:
>>>> On Tue, Oct 7, 2014 at 3:23 AM, Rustom Mody wrote:
>>>> Consider the sequence:
>>>> 1. Drives on the wrong side of the road 2. Has no clue that there's
>>>> such a concept as 'wrong side of road' 3. Teaches people to drive
>>>> without conveying anything about 'wrong side of road' Hopefully you
>>>> will agree that 1 < 2 < 3?? My gripe is with 3
>> 
>>> No, I don't agree.
>> 
>> Interesting
>> 
>> So you dont agree with: "1<2<3" ?
> 
> I can't speak for Chris, by my answer is neither Yes nor No, but Mu.
> 
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mu_%28negative%29#In_popular_culture
> 
> 
> I don't understand what semantics you are giving the < symbol. It's not 
> "less than", since statements 1, 2 and 3 above don't have a total order 
> or even a partial order. What does it mean to say that "Drives on the 
> wrong side of the road" is less than "Teaches people to drive without 
> conveying anything about 'wrong side of road'"? Less than in what sense? 
> Alphabetical order? Less dangerous? Less competent? Less annoying? Less 
> expensive?
> 
> So, no, I don't agree. Nor do I disagree.
> 
> I have fewer issues with your conclusion and analogy than I do with the 
> basic premise that there is a connection between Seymore's problem here 
> and the use, or non-use, of print in the interactive interpreter. I don't 
> see how replacing interactive use and/or the use of print with functions 
> containing return statements would help Seymore.
> 
> 
> 
>> Or with "My gripe is 3"  ?
>> 
>> The second would be quite bizarre:
> 
> If it's bizarre, why do you consider that Chris may mean that? The 
> reasonable thing would be to reject it from contention.
> 
> 
>> "I have a headache..."
>> 
>> "Sorry. But I dont agree with that"
> 
> 
> "I don't agree that you have a headache. You're obviously lying, acting, 
> delusional, an insentient robot programmed to repeat the words 'I have a 
> headache', a zombie (not the brain eating kind, the philosophical kind), 
> a sophisticated bot (but not sophisticated enough to pass the Turing 
> test), or otherwise faking it."
> 
> I'm just sayin'...
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> Steven
> -- 
> I agree that 1<2<3.  From a numerical point of view this is correct.  The distraction here is the inference that the numbers somehow relate to the statements preceding this conclusion.

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

#78840

On Tuesday, October 7, 2014 2:19:39 AM UTC+5:30, Steven D'Aprano wrote:

> I have fewer issues with your conclusion and analogy than I do with the 
> basic premise that there is a connection between Seymore's problem here 
> and the use, or non-use, of print in the interactive interpreter. I don't 
> see how replacing interactive use and/or the use of print with functions 
> containing return statements would help Seymore.

The issue is not only that print is bad but that the interpreter is
good for learning and trying out.

Are these two really unconnected. Lets see... One can

- use print without the interpreter
- use the interpreter without print
- use both

But can one use neither? [Assuming telepathy/ESP etc is disallowed]

So pushing beginners away from print can push them up the learning 
curve more quickly

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

#78841

On Thu, Oct 9, 2014 at 3:14 AM, Rustom Mody <rustompmody@gmail.com> wrote:
> The issue is not only that print is bad but that the interpreter is
> good for learning and trying out.
>
> Are these two really unconnected. Lets see... One can
>
> - use print without the interpreter
> - use the interpreter without print
> - use both
>
> But can one use neither? [Assuming telepathy/ESP etc is disallowed]
>
> So pushing beginners away from print can push them up the learning
> curve more quickly

(Please be more clear with your terminology; running Python scripts is
still using the interpreter, it's just not using *interactive* Python.
What you're saying above is all about Python's interactive mode.)

Your conclusion doesn't obviously follow from your preceding
statements. How does pushing people away from print push them up?
Which way is "up"? Is it "up" to move from interactive Python to
scripts run from the command line? Or is that down? How does the
avoidance of print push anyone anywhere, anyway?

ChrisA

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

#78842

On Wed, Oct 8, 2014 at 11:14 AM, Rustom Mody <rustompmody@gmail.com> wrote:
> So pushing beginners away from print can push them up the learning
> curve more quickly

Or more quickly discourage them. I still use print for all sorts of
things. In my opinion, there is often no need for fancy loggers,
str.format, or the write method of file-like objects. Print will often
get you a "good enough" result faster than the other means.

Skip

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

#78843

On Wednesday, October 8, 2014 9:58:11 PM UTC+5:30, Skip Montanaro wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 8, 2014 at 11:14 AM, Rustom Mody  wrote:
> > So pushing beginners away from print can push them up the learning
> > curve more quickly

> Or more quickly discourage them. I still use print for all sorts of
> things. In my opinion, there is often no need for fancy loggers,
> str.format, or the write method of file-like objects. Print will often
> get you a "good enough" result faster than the other means.

Well I'm not talking of people like you!!
Nor of more sophisticated tools than print.

I am talking of the fact that an absolute basic sine qua non for
beginners is to be able to structure programs:

- breaking up a complex expression into sub-expressions
- abstracting out a sub-expression into a function with an appropriate
  parameterization
- inverses of the above when the current cut is sub-optimal

etc etc... what is nowadays fashionably called 'refactoring'

And for that the noob needs to learn to write return-ing function
where he currently writes a print-ing function.

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

#78730

On 10/5/2014 7:02 PM, Seymore4Head wrote:
> For the record, I don't want a hint.  I want the answer.
> I see a practice question is similar to this.
> 15 <= x < 30  And it wants a similar expression that is equivalent.
> So the right answer is 15<= x or x <30
> but one of the other answers is
> not (15<= x and x <30)
>
> But it says.....remember you can try this out in the Python shell.
> How?

For instance,
for x in (10, 20, 30, 40):
     print((15 <= x < 30) == (15<= x and x <30))



-- 
Terry Jan Reedy

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

Page 1 of 2  [1] 2  Next page →

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

csiph-web