🌐 Mailman 3 August 2007 - Python-list - python.org

Re: Emacs + python
by Hadron Aug. 2, 2007

Aug. 2, 2007

Edward O'Connor <hober0(a)gmail.com> writes: >> Could anyone put me on the right track to developing Python with emacs >> please : modes to consider, debugging etc hopefully all within emacs. > > Personally, I prefer the python.el that ships with Emacs 22 to the > python-mode.el from python.org. It seems more like other Emacs major > modes. > > > Ted Could you extrapolate a little more on what you see as the differences? I addition, I run pdb under emacs and the GUD menu appears but I cant set break points by clicking in the left column of the source display. Is there a way to get this working?

1 0

DBUtil with modepython
by cpmishra Aug. 2, 2007

Aug. 2, 2007

Hi all I have used DBUtil in mysql databse. when we run to program in dos command ,successfully run but when we run in apache server (locally)with modepython then given error.Pls give me suggation error: No module named DBUtils.PooledDB cp mishra

2 1

Wing IDE for Python v. 3.0 beta1 released
by Wingware Aug. 2, 2007

Aug. 2, 2007

Hi, I'm happy to announce the first beta release of Wing IDE 3.0. It is available from http://wingware.com/wingide/beta Wing IDE is a commercial IDE designed specifically for Python programmers. More information about the product and free trials are available at http://wingware.com/ The major new features introduced in Wing 3.0 are: * Multi-threaded debugger * Debug value tooltips in editor, debug probe, and interactive shell * Autocompletion in debug probe and interactive shell * Automatically updating project directories * Testing tool, currently supporting unittest derived tests (*) * OS Commands tool for executing and interacting with external commands (*) * Rewritten indentation analysis and conversion (*)'d items are available in Wing IDE Professional only. The CHANGELOG.txt file in the installation provides additional details. System requirements are Windows 2000 or later, OS X 10.3.9 or later for PPC or Intel (requires X11 Server), or a recent Linux system (either 32 or 64 bit). Reporting Bugs -------------- Please report bugs using the Submit Bug Report item in the Help menu or by emailing support at wingware dot com. This is beta quality software that installs side-by-side with Wing 2.x or 1.x. We advise you to make frequent backups of your work when using any pre-release version of Wing IDE. Upgrading --------- To upgrade a 2.x license or purchase a new 3.x license: Upgrade https://wingware.com/store/upgrade Purchase https://wingware.com/store/purchase Any 2.x license sold after May 2nd 2006 is free to upgrade; others cost 1/2 normal price to upgrade. Thanks! The Wingware Team Wingware | Python IDE Advancing Software Development www.wingware.com

8 13

Re: a dict trick
by james_027 Aug. 2, 2007

Aug. 2, 2007

Hi, what if we're not dealing with dict? is there a pythonic way of doing ternary? the bool ? x:y Thanks james

2 1

No module named DBUtils.PooledDB
by cpmishra Aug. 2, 2007

Aug. 2, 2007

Hi all I have used DBUtil with python2.4. when we run to program in dos command ,successfully run but when we run in apache server (locally)with modepython then given error.Pls help me error: No module named DBUtils.PooledDB cp mishra

1 1

Re: Pythonic way for missing dict keys
by Steven D'Aprano Aug. 2, 2007

Aug. 2, 2007

On Sat, 28 Jul 2007 11:52:48 +0000, Alex Popescu wrote: > jjl(a)pobox.com (John J. Lee) wrote in news:87lkd0eprj.fsf@pobox.com: > >> Alex Popescu <nospam.themindstorm(a)gmail.com> writes: >> >>> Zentrader <zentraders(a)gmail.com> wrote in >>> news:1185041243.323915.161230 @x40g2000prg.googlegroups.com: >>> >>>> On Jul 21, 7:48 am, Duncan Booth <duncan.bo...(a)invalid.invalid> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>> [snip...] >>>> >>>> >>>>>From the 2.6 PEP #361 (looks like dict.has_key is deprecated) >>>> Python 3.0 compatability: ['compatibility'-->someone should use a >>>> spell-checker for 'official' releases] >>>> - warnings were added for the following builtins which no >>>> longer exist in 3.0: >>>> apply, callable, coerce, dict.has_key, execfile, >>>> reduce, >>>> reload >>>> >>> >>> I see... what that document doesn't describe is the alternatives to >>> be used. And I see in that list a couple of functions that are >>> probably used a lot nowadays (callable, reduce, etc.). >> >> callable and reduce are rarely used, at least in code I've seen. > > I thought G would be using that function a lot. Who or what is G? Guido? And which of the two functions mentioned is "that function"? callable()? Instead of doing: if callable(function): function() you should do: try: function() except TypeError: pass That should work for most uses of callable(), but isn't quite the same. (What if function() has side-effects, or is expensive, and you want to determine if it is callable, but not actually call it _now_?) > Also, what is the replacement of reduce? I think I remember seeing > somewhere that lists comprehension would be (but also remember the > advise that reduce will be quicker). No, a list comprehension isn't equivalent to reduce(). There is no replacement for reduce(). Guido has essentially done the functional equivalent of deciding that because he personally doesn't like for loops, they can and should be written out as: counter = 0 while counter < len(sequence): item = sequence[counter] do_something_with_item counter += 1 because it is "easier to read" than a for loop. And yes, if you think my example is extreme because nobody would be that stupid, that's the point: removing reduce() _is_ that stupid (and it is not often I say that about a language design decision by Guido!). Python can, and probably will, get away with it only because reducing an iterable to a single value is an uncommon operation, and the most common uses of it (summing a sequence, finding the minimum and maximum) already have workable replacements. It's especially stupid because map() and filter(), both of which do have simple, easy to understand, completely functional replacements, are going to stay. reduce() doesn't, and it is going. That's nuts. It's a shame really. Oh well, maybe it will sneak back in via a functional module, or itertools, or something. What a waste, what a waste. >> Certainly has_key will be >> the most common of those listed above (but trivial to fix). > > dict.has_key(key) becomes key in dict (correct?) Yes. >> apply >> will be common in old code from the time of Python 1.5.2. > > I think there were some advises to not use apply. help(apply) already tells you how to replace apply(): Deprecated since release 2.3. Instead, use the extended call syntax: function(*args, **keywords). >> execfile is >> perhaps more common that callable (?) but again is really a "maybe 1 >> call in a big program" sort of thing. > > What is the replacement for this one? Slurp the file into a string, execute the string. But the thing that makes my brain melt is reload(). No, reload() probably isn't good enough to use in production code, but for interactive use it is Good Enough. I'm boggled that it is going away! -- Steven.

5 5

Re: Where do they tech Python officialy ?
by aleax＠mac.com Aug. 2, 2007

Aug. 2, 2007

Alex Popescu <nospam.themindstorm(a)gmail.com> wrote: ... > Have you seen/heard of Jim lately? Cause I haven't. By the time he was > the lead of the AspectJ team his charismatic presence was everywhere (at > least around that project). He wasn't at OSCON this year, but I hope to see him at Pycon next year. I don't see this as a deep dark M$ plot to kidnap and hide the best and brightest Open Sourcers, because I know what it means to get a wonderful challenging new job and pour all you have into it (I've had to skip a couple Pycons, myself, though I hope to be back next year). > However I do agree with you. The only remark is that US trends are not > hitting my part of Eu so quickly ;-) (things are indeed changing). About 3 years ago I was also getting sick and tired about my own part of the EU, which is part of why I emigrated:-). I do see things getting better in Southern Europe, albeit from a distance. > > These are the ones you don't wan't to work for anyway !-) > > Well... this is sometimes debatable :-). A totally clueless employer may still be a way to make some quick and dirty money right now, but it will barely be enough to pay for the extra Maalox and Zantac you'll need. Looking back on your life when you're closer to retirement than to when you started working, you'll see what a mistake it was to accept clueless-employers' offers, and how much happier your life would have been if you'd known that up front:-). Alex

2 1

Floats as keys in dict
by Brian Elmegaard Aug. 2, 2007

Aug. 2, 2007

Hi I am making a script to optimiza by dynamic programming. I do not know the vertices and nodes before the calculation, so I have decided to store the nodes I have in play as keys in a dict. However, the dict keys are then floats and I have to round the values of new possible nodes in each step. When profiling I see that the most time consuming part of my script is rounding. Is there a faster way than round() or is there a better way to test than 'in' or should I store the keys in another way than a dict? tia, -- Brian (remove the sport for mail) http://www.et.web.mek.dtu.dk/Staff/be/be.html http://www.rugbyklubben-speed.dk

4 4

Re: Emacs + python
by Bruno Desthuilliers Aug. 2, 2007

Aug. 2, 2007

Edward O'Connor a écrit : >> Could anyone put me on the right track to developing Python with emacs >> please : modes to consider, debugging etc hopefully all within emacs. > > Personally, I prefer the python.el that ships with Emacs 22 to the > python-mode.el from python.org. It seems more like other Emacs major > modes. Would you mind giving us a quick summary of the differences between these 2 modes ? As far as I'm concerned, I've been mostly happy with python-mode so far... > > Ted >

1 0

Re: Awkward format string
by Gerard Flanagan Aug. 2, 2007

Aug. 2, 2007

On Aug 1, 11:52 pm, Ian Clark <icl...(a)mail.ewu.edu> wrote: > Gerard Flanagan wrote: > > (snip) > > > def tostring(data): > > return tuple(strftime(x) for x in data[:2]) + data[2:] > > Hrmm, not sure that having a function named tostring() that returns a > tuple is the best idea. ;) > oops! SAD (Solipsistic API Design)... ;-) Gerard

1 0