comp.lang.python - 26 new messages in 3 topics - digest

comp.lang.python
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.lang.python?hl=en

comp.lang.python@googlegroups.com

Today's topics:

* "More About Unicode in Python 2 and 3" - 24 messages, 9 authors
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.lang.python/t/fc13dd8f17f64a45?hl=en
* class inheritance python2.7 vs python3.3 - 1 messages, 1 author
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.lang.python/t/7c04a061db2c40f6?hl=en
* python finance - 1 messages, 1 author
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.lang.python/t/4989f2e4028c1e20?hl=en

==============================================================================
TOPIC: "More About Unicode in Python 2 and 3"
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.lang.python/t/fc13dd8f17f64a45?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 24 ==
Date: Mon, Jan 6 2014 12:21 pm
From: Serhiy Storchaka


06.01.14 06:41, Tim Chase написав(ла):
>>>> from codecs import getencoder
>>>> getencoder("rot-13")(s2.decode('utf-8'))[0]
> 'Python'

codecs.decode('rot13', s2.decode())






== 2 of 24 ==
Date: Mon, Jan 6 2014 12:31 pm
From: Serhiy Storchaka


06.01.14 15:44, Mark Lawrence написав(ла):
> Simply scrap PEP 404 and the currently unhappy customers will be happy
> as they'll be free to do all the work they want on Python 2.8, as my
> understanding is that the vast majority of the Python core developers
> won't do it for them.

It's not necessary. You are free to make a fork and call it Qython 2.8.





== 3 of 24 ==
Date: Mon, Jan 6 2014 12:32 pm
From: Antoine Pitrou


Chris Angelico <rosuav <at> gmail.com> writes:
>
> On Tue, Jan 7, 2014 at 3:29 AM, Antoine Pitrou <solipsis <at> pitrou.net>
wrote:
> > People don't use? According to available figures, there are more
downloads of
> > Python 3 than downloads of Python 2 (Windows installers, mostly):
> > http://www.python.org/webstats/
> >
>
> Unfortunately, that has a massive inherent bias, because there are
> Python builds available in most Linux distributions - and stats from
> those (like Debian's popcon) will be nearly as useless, because a lot
> of them will install one or the other (probably 2.x) without waiting
> for the user (so either they'll skew in favour of the one installed,
> or in favour of the one NOT installed, because that's the only one
> that'll be explicitly requested). It's probably fairly accurate for
> Windows stats, though, since most people who want Python on Windows
> are going to come to python.org for an installer.

Agreed, but it's enough to rebut the claim that "people don't use
Python 3". More than one million Python 3.3 downloads per month under
Windows is a very respectable number (no 2.x release seems to reach
that level).

Regards

Antoine.






== 4 of 24 ==
Date: Mon, Jan 6 2014 12:42 pm
From: Tim Chase


On 2014-01-06 22:20, Serhiy Storchaka wrote:
> >>>> data = b"\x43\x6c\x67\x75\x62\x61" # is there an easier way to
> >>>> turn a hex dump into a bytes literal?
>
> >>> bytes.fromhex('43 6c 67 75 62 61')
> b'Clguba'

Very nice new functionality in Py3k, but 2.x doesn't seem to have such
a method. :-(

-tkc







== 5 of 24 ==
Date: Mon, Jan 6 2014 12:41 pm
From: Mark Lawrence



On 06/01/2014 20:31, Serhiy Storchaka wrote:
> 06.01.14 15:44, Mark Lawrence написав(ла):
>> Simply scrap PEP 404 and the currently unhappy customers will be happy
>> as they'll be free to do all the work they want on Python 2.8, as my
>> understanding is that the vast majority of the Python core developers
>> won't do it for them.
>
> It's not necessary. You are free to make a fork and call it Qython 2.8.
>

You plural is fine, you singular simply doesn't apply, it'll stop
raining in the UK first :)

--
My fellow Pythonistas, ask not what our language can do for you, ask
what you can do for our language.

Mark Lawrence





== 6 of 24 ==
Date: Mon, Jan 6 2014 12:47 pm
From: Mark Lawrence



On 06/01/2014 20:42, Tim Chase wrote:
> On 2014-01-06 22:20, Serhiy Storchaka wrote:
>>>>>> data = b"\x43\x6c\x67\x75\x62\x61" # is there an easier way to
>>>>>> turn a hex dump into a bytes literal?
>>
>> >>> bytes.fromhex('43 6c 67 75 62 61')
>> b'Clguba'
>
> Very nice new functionality in Py3k, but 2.x doesn't seem to have such
> a method. :-(
>
> -tkc
>

Seems like another mistake, that'll have to be regressed to make sure
there is Python 2 and Python 3 compatibility, which can then be
reintroduced into Python 2.8 so that it gets back into Python 3.

--
My fellow Pythonistas, ask not what our language can do for you, ask
what you can do for our language.

Mark Lawrence





== 7 of 24 ==
Date: Mon, Jan 6 2014 12:49 pm
From: Terry Reedy


On 1/6/2014 8:44 AM, Mark Lawrence wrote:
> On 06/01/2014 12:39, Ned Batchelder wrote:
>>
>> I'm not talking about the technical details of bytes and Unicode. I'm
>> talking about making customers happy.
>>
>
> Simply scrap PEP 404

Not necessary.

> and the currently unhappy customers will be happy
> as they'll be free to do all the work they want on Python 2.8,

They are already free to do so, as long as they do not call the result
'Python 2.8'.

> as my
> understanding is that the vast majority of the Python core developers
> won't do it for them.

Which is what some of them want and why they will never be happy.



--
Terry Jan Reedy





== 8 of 24 ==
Date: Mon, Jan 6 2014 12:53 pm
From: Terry Reedy


On 1/6/2014 10:10 AM, Ethan Furman wrote:

> The argument is that a very important, if small, subset a data
> manipulation become very painful in Py3. Not impossible, and not
> difficult, but painful because the mental model and the contortions
> needed to get things to work don't sync up anymore.

Thank you for a succinct summary. I presume you are referring in part by
bytes manipulations that would be easier with bytes.format. In
http://bugs.python.org/issue3982
Guido gave approval in principle to a minimal new method a year ago. The
proponents failed to build on that to get anything in 3.4. Finally,
however, Viktor Stinner has written a PEP
http://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0460/
so something might happen for 3.5.

--
Terry Jan Reedy





== 9 of 24 ==
Date: Mon, Jan 6 2014 1:02 pm
From: Mark Lawrence



On 06/01/2014 20:49, Terry Reedy wrote:
> On 1/6/2014 8:44 AM, Mark Lawrence wrote:
>> On 06/01/2014 12:39, Ned Batchelder wrote:
>>>
>>> I'm not talking about the technical details of bytes and Unicode. I'm
>>> talking about making customers happy.
>>>
>>
>> Simply scrap PEP 404
>
> Not necessary.
>
>> and the currently unhappy customers will be happy
>> as they'll be free to do all the work they want on Python 2.8,
>
> They are already free to do so, as long as they do not call the result
> 'Python 2.8'.
>
> > as my
>> understanding is that the vast majority of the Python core developers
>> won't do it for them.
>
> Which is what some of them want and why they will never be happy.
>

I find all this intriguing. People haven't found time to migrate from
Python 2 to Python 3, but now intend finding time to produce a fork of
Python 2 which will ease the migration to Python 3. Have I got that
correct?

--
My fellow Pythonistas, ask not what our language can do for you, ask
what you can do for our language.

Mark Lawrence





== 10 of 24 ==
Date: Mon, Jan 6 2014 1:14 pm
From: Ned Batchelder


On 1/6/14 2:30 PM, Mark Janssen wrote:
>>> Chris didn't say "bytes and ascii data", he said "bytes and TEXT".
>>> Text != "ascii data", and the fact that some people apparently think it
>>> does is pretty much the heart of the problem.
>>
>> The heart of a different problem, not this one. The problem I refer to is
>> that many binary formats have well-defined ascii-encoded text tidbits.
>
> Really? If people are using binary with "well-defined ascii-encoded
> tidbits", they're doing something wrong. Perhaps you think escape
> characters "\n" are "well defined tidbits", but YOU WOULD BE WRONG.
> The purpose of binary is to keep things raw. WTF? You guys are so
> strange.
>
>>
>>> If you (generic you) don't get that, you'll have a bad time. I mean
>>> *really*
>>> get it, deep down in the bone. The long, bad habit of thinking as
>>> ASCII-encoded bytes as text is the problem here.
>
> I think the whole forking community is confused at because of your own
> arrogance. Foo(l)s.
>
> markj
>

If you want to participate in this discussion, do so. Calling people
strange, arrogant, and fools with no technical content is just rude.
Typing "YOU WOULD BE WRONG" in all caps doesn't count as technical content.

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





== 11 of 24 ==
Date: Mon, Jan 6 2014 1:17 pm
From: Gene Heskett


On Monday 06 January 2014 16:16:13 Terry Reedy did opine:

> On 1/6/2014 9:32 AM, Gene Heskett wrote:
> > And from my lurking here, its quite plain to me that 3.x python has a
> > problem with everyday dealing with strings.
>
> Strings of what? And what specific 'everyday' problem are you referring
> to?

Strings start a new thread here at nominally weekly intervals. Seems to me
that might be usable info.

Cheers, Gene
--
"There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty:
soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order."
-Ed Howdershelt (Author)
Genes Web page <http://geneslinuxbox.net:6309/gene>

Tip the world over on its side and everything loose will land in Los
Angeles.
-- Frank Lloyd Wright
A pen in the hand of this president is far more
dangerous than 200 million guns in the hands of
law-abiding citizens.




== 12 of 24 ==
Date: Mon, Jan 6 2014 1:23 pm
From: Mark Janssen


>> Really? If people are using binary with "well-defined ascii-encoded
>> tidbits", they're doing something wrong. Perhaps you think escape
>> characters "\n" are "well defined tidbits", but YOU WOULD BE WRONG.
>> The purpose of binary is to keep things raw. WTF?

> If you want to participate in this discussion, do so. Calling people
> strange, arrogant, and fools with no technical content is just rude. Typing
> "YOU WOULD BE WRONG" in all caps doesn't count as technical content.

Ned -- IF




== 13 of 24 ==
Date: Mon, Jan 6 2014 1:32 pm
From: Ned Batchelder


On 1/6/14 12:50 PM, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
> Ned Batchelder wrote:
>
>> You are still talking about whether Armin is right, and whether he
>> writes well, about flaws in his statistics, etc. I'm talking about the
>> fact that an organization (Python core development) has a product
>> (Python 3) that is getting bad press. Popular and vocal customers
>> (Armin, Kenneth, and others) are unhappy. What is being done to make
>> them happy? Who is working with them? They are not unique, and their
>> viewpoints are not outliers.
>>
>> I'm not talking about the technical details of bytes and Unicode. I'm
>> talking about making customers happy.
>
> Oh? How much did Armin pay for his Python support? If he didn't pay, he's
> not a customer. He's a user.

I use the term "customer" in the larger sense of, "someone using your
product that you are trying to please." I'd like to think that an open
source project with only users would treat them as customers. Not in
the sense of a legal obligation in exchange for money, but in the sense
that the point of the work is to please them.

>
> When something gets bad press, the normal process is to first determine just
> how justified that bad press is. (Unless, of course, you're more interested
> in just *covering it up* than fixing the problem.) The best solutions are:
>
> - if the bad press is justified, admit it, and fix the problems;
>
> - if the bad press is not justified, try to educate Armin (and others) so
> they stop blaming Python for their own errors; try to counter their bad
> press with good press; or ignore it, knowing that the internet is
> notoriously fickle and in a week people will be hating on Go, or Ruby
> instead.
>
> But I get the idea from your post that you don't want to talk about the
> technical details of bytes and Unicode, and by extension, whether Python 3
> is better or worse than Python 2. That makes it impossible to determine how
> valid the bad press is, which leaves us hamstrung. Our only responses are:
>
> - Patronise him. "Yes yes, you poor little thing, we feel your pain. But
> what can we do about it?"
>
> - Abuse him and hope he shuts up.
>
> - Give in to his (and by extension, everyone elses) complaints, whether
> justified or not, and make Python worse.
>
> - Counter his bad press with good press, and come across as arrogant idiots
> by denying actual real problems (if any).
>
> - Wait for the Internet to move on.
>

I was only avoiding talking about Unicode vs bytes because I'm not the
one who needs a better way to do it, Armin and Kenneth are. You seem to
be arguing from the standpoint of, "I've never had problems, so there
are no problems."

I suspect an undercurrent here is also the difference between writing
Python 3 code, and writing code that can run on both Python 2 and 3.

In my original post, I provided two possible responses, one of which
you've omitted: work with Armin to explain the easier way that he has
missed. It sounds like you think there isn't an easier way, and that's
OK? I would love to see a Python 3 advocate work with Armin or Kenneth
on the code that's caused them such pain, and find a way to make it good.

It's clear from other discussions happening elsewhere that there is the
possibility of improving the situation, for example PEP 460 proposing
"bytes % args" and "bytes.format(args)". That's good.

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





== 14 of 24 ==
Date: Mon, Jan 6 2014 1:32 pm
From: Mark Janssen


>> Really? If people are using binary with "well-defined ascii-encoded
>> tidbits", they're doing something wrong. Perhaps you think escape
>> characters "\n" are "well defined tidbits", but YOU WOULD BE WRONG.
>> The purpose of binary is to keep things raw. WTF?
>
> If you want to participate in this discussion, do so. Calling people
> strange, arrogant, and fools with no technical content is just rude. Typing
> "YOU WOULD BE WRONG" in all caps doesn't count as technical content.

Ned -- IF YOU'RE A REAL PERSON -- you will see that several words
prior to that declaration, you'll find (or be able to arrange) the
proposition: "Escape characters are well-defined tidbits of binary
data is FALSE".

Now that is a technical point that i'm saying is simply the "way
things are" coming from the mass of experience held by the OS
community and the C programming community which is responsible for
much of the world's computer systems. Do you have an argument against
it, or do you piss off and argue against anything I say?? Perhaps I
said it too loudly, and I take responsibility for that, but don't
claim I'm not making a technical point which seems to be at the heart
of all the confusion regarding python/python3 and str/unicode/bytes.

mark




== 15 of 24 ==
Date: Mon, Jan 6 2014 1:33 pm
From: Mark Lawrence



On 06/01/2014 21:17, Gene Heskett wrote:
> On Monday 06 January 2014 16:16:13 Terry Reedy did opine:
>
>> On 1/6/2014 9:32 AM, Gene Heskett wrote:
>>> And from my lurking here, its quite plain to me that 3.x python has a
>>> problem with everyday dealing with strings.
>>
>> Strings of what? And what specific 'everyday' problem are you referring
>> to?
>
> Strings start a new thread here at nominally weekly intervals. Seems to me
> that might be usable info.
>
> Cheers, Gene
>

That strikes me as being as useful as "The PEP 393 FSR is completely
wrong but I'm not going to tell you why" approach.

--
My fellow Pythonistas, ask not what our language can do for you, ask
what you can do for our language.

Mark Lawrence





== 16 of 24 ==
Date: Mon, Jan 6 2014 1:40 pm
From: Ned Batchelder


On 1/6/14 11:29 AM, Antoine Pitrou wrote:
> Ned Batchelder <ned <at> nedbatchelder.com> writes:
>>
>> You can look through his problems and decide that he's "wrong," or that
>> he's "ranting," but that doesn't change the fact that Python 3 is
>> encountering friction. What happens when a significant fraction of your
>> customers are "wrong"?
>
> Well, yes, there is some friction and this is quite expectable, when
> shipping incompatible changes. Other pieces of software have undergone a
> similar process (e.g. Apache 1.x -> Apache 2.x).
>
> (the alternative is to maintain a piece of software that sticks with obsolete
> conventions, e.g. emacs)
>
>> Core developers: I thank you for the countless hours you have devoted to
>> building all of the versions of Python. I'm sure in many ways it's a
>> thankless task. But you have a problem. What's the point in being
>> right if you end up with a product that people don't use?
>
> People don't use? According to available figures, there are more downloads of
> Python 3 than downloads of Python 2 (Windows installers, mostly):
> http://www.python.org/webstats/
>
> The number of Python 3-compatible packages has been showing a constant and
> healthy increase for years:
> http://dev.pocoo.org/~gbrandl/py3.html
>
> And Dan's survey shows 77% of respondents think Python 3 wasn't a mistake:
> https://wiki.python.org/moin/2.x-vs-3.x-survey
>
>> Maybe there are core developers who are trying hard to solve the
>> problems Kenneth and Armin are facing. It would be great if that work
>> was more visible. I don't see it, and apparently Armin doesn't either.
>
> While this is being discussed:
> https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2014-January/130923.html
>
> I would still point out that "Kenneth and Armin" are not the whole Python
> community.

I never said they were the whole community, of course. But they are not
outliers either. By your own statistics above, 23% of respondents think
Python 3 was a mistake. Armin and Kenneth are just two very visible people.

> Your whole argument seems to be that a couple "revered" (!!)
> individuals should see their complaints taken for granted. I am opposed to
> rockstarizing the community.

I'm not creating rock stars. I'm acknowledging that these two people
are listened to by many others. It sounds like part of your effort to
avoid rockstars is to ignore any one person's specific feedback? I must
be misunderstanding what you mean.

>
> Their contribution is always welcome, of course.
>
> (as for network programming, the people working on and with asyncio don't
> seem to find Python 3 terrible)

Some people don't have problems. That doesn't mean that other people
don't have problems.

You are being given detailed specific feedback from intelligent
dedicated customers that many people listen to, and who are building
important components of the ecosystem, and your response is, "sorry, you
are wrong, it will be fine if I ignore you." That's disheartening.

>
> Regards
>
> Antoine.

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





== 17 of 24 ==
Date: Mon, Jan 6 2014 1:43 pm
From: Devin Jeanpierre


On Mon, Jan 6, 2014 at 1:02 PM, Mark Lawrence <breamoreboy@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
> I find all this intriguing. People haven't found time to migrate from
> Python 2 to Python 3, but now intend finding time to produce a fork of
> Python 2 which will ease the migration to Python 3. Have I got that
> correct?

Keeping old, unsupported (by upstream) things up-to-date is a common
operation (e.g. this is what Red Hat does for an entire operating
system). It might take a few hours to backport a module or bugfix you
want, but updating an entire million-LOC codebase would take
significantly longer. Plus, if a benefit of backporting things is an
easier eventual migration to 3.x, it's killing two birds with one
stone.

At any rate it's not a possibility to sneer at and suggest is
improbable or a waste of time. It is a rational outcome for a codebase
of a large enough size.

-- Devin




== 18 of 24 ==
Date: Mon, Jan 6 2014 1:42 pm
From: Ned Batchelder


On 1/6/14 4:33 PM, Mark Lawrence wrote:
> On 06/01/2014 21:17, Gene Heskett wrote:
>> On Monday 06 January 2014 16:16:13 Terry Reedy did opine:
>>
>>> On 1/6/2014 9:32 AM, Gene Heskett wrote:
>>>> And from my lurking here, its quite plain to me that 3.x python has a
>>>> problem with everyday dealing with strings.
>>>
>>> Strings of what? And what specific 'everyday' problem are you referring
>>> to?
>>
>> Strings start a new thread here at nominally weekly intervals. Seems
>> to me
>> that might be usable info.
>>
>> Cheers, Gene
>>
>
> That strikes me as being as useful as "The PEP 393 FSR is completely
> wrong but I'm not going to tell you why" approach.
>

Please stop baiting people.

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





== 19 of 24 ==
Date: Mon, Jan 6 2014 2:07 pm
From: Terry Reedy


On 1/6/2014 7:39 AM, Ned Batchelder wrote:

> You are still talking about whether Armin is right, and whether he
> writes well, about flaws in his statistics, etc.

That is how *I* decide whether someone is worth attending to. He failed.

> I'm talking about the fact that an organization

of volunteers

> (Python core development) has a product

given away for free, with a liberal license that allows derivative products

> (Python 3) that is getting bad press.

Inevitable and nothing new.

> (Armin, Kenneth, and others) are unhappy.

There are many unhappy people in the world. Some will be unhappy no
matter what.

> What is being done to make them happy?

Huh? What are they doing to make core developers happy?

>Who is working with them?

You? Really the wrong question. Which of 'them' is working with us -- in
a respectful manner -- through established means? (See my response to
Ethan about what 'unhappy customers' failed to do for a year.)

> I'm talking about making customers happy.

Python has 'customers' around the world. I am more am more concerned
with helping poor kids in Asia, Africa, and Latin America than with
well-off professional developers in Latin-alphabet regions.

A certain person is unhappy with a feature of 3.3+. When we fixed the
first ostensible problem he identified, without his help, he found other
reasons to be unhappy with the feature. When we voluntarily fix more of
the ostensible problems with Python 3, which we will, without help from
most of the 'unhappy customers', I expect that some of them will also
continue to be unhappy customers. Some of them are opposed to the
fundamental changes in Python 3 and will never be happy with it.

--
Terry Jan Reedy





== 20 of 24 ==
Date: Mon, Jan 6 2014 2:08 pm
From: Mark Lawrence



On 06/01/2014 21:42, Ned Batchelder wrote:
> On 1/6/14 4:33 PM, Mark Lawrence wrote:
>> On 06/01/2014 21:17, Gene Heskett wrote:
>>> On Monday 06 January 2014 16:16:13 Terry Reedy did opine:
>>>
>>>> On 1/6/2014 9:32 AM, Gene Heskett wrote:
>>>>> And from my lurking here, its quite plain to me that 3.x python has a
>>>>> problem with everyday dealing with strings.
>>>>
>>>> Strings of what? And what specific 'everyday' problem are you referring
>>>> to?
>>>
>>> Strings start a new thread here at nominally weekly intervals. Seems
>>> to me
>>> that might be usable info.
>>>
>>> Cheers, Gene
>>>
>>
>> That strikes me as being as useful as "The PEP 393 FSR is completely
>> wrong but I'm not going to tell you why" approach.
>>
>
> Please stop baiting people.
>

What are you on about? The comment has been made that "its quite plain
to me that 3.x python has a problem with everyday dealing with strings".
Myself, Terry Reedy and Steven D'Aprano have all commented on this,
asking for more data. We've been given nothing, which is precisely what
our resident unicode expert has given us.

--
My fellow Pythonistas, ask not what our language can do for you, ask
what you can do for our language.

Mark Lawrence





== 21 of 24 ==
Date: Mon, Jan 6 2014 2:16 pm
From: Antoine Pitrou


Ned Batchelder <ned <at> nedbatchelder.com> writes:
>
>
> I never said they were the whole community, of course. But they are not
> outliers either. By your own statistics above, 23% of respondents think
> Python 3 was a mistake. Armin and Kenneth are just two very visible
> people.

Indeed, they are two very visible people.

> I'm not creating rock stars. I'm acknowledging that these two people
> are listened to by many others. It sounds like part of your effort to
> avoid rockstars is to ignore any one person's specific feedback? I must
> be misunderstanding what you mean.

I am not trying to ignore "any one person's specific feedback". I am
ignoring your claim that we should give Armin's blog posts an
extraordinary importance because he is "revered".

Speaking of which, posting blog articles is not the preferred way to
give feedback. There are ample community resources for that. I am
irritated that we are apparently supposed to be monitoring blog posts,
Twitter feeds and whatnot for any sign of dissent, and immediately react
to a criticism that wasn't even voiced directly to us.

> You are being given detailed specific feedback from intelligent
> dedicated customers that many people listen to,

Could you please stop talking about customers? We are not selling
Python to anyone (*). Writing open source software as a volunteer is
not supposed to be a sacrificial activity where we will bow with
extreme diligence to the community's every outburst. Please try to
respect us.

((*) Wikipedia: "A customer (sometimes known as a client, buyer, or
purchaser) is the recipient of a good, service, product, or idea,
obtained from a seller, vendor, or supplier for a monetary or other
valuable consideration")

Regards

Antoine.






== 22 of 24 ==
Date: Mon, Jan 6 2014 2:22 pm
From: Ned Batchelder


On 1/6/14 5:08 PM, Mark Lawrence wrote:
> On 06/01/2014 21:42, Ned Batchelder wrote:
>> On 1/6/14 4:33 PM, Mark Lawrence wrote:
>>> On 06/01/2014 21:17, Gene Heskett wrote:
>>>> On Monday 06 January 2014 16:16:13 Terry Reedy did opine:
>>>>
>>>>> On 1/6/2014 9:32 AM, Gene Heskett wrote:
>>>>>> And from my lurking here, its quite plain to me that 3.x python has a
>>>>>> problem with everyday dealing with strings.
>>>>>
>>>>> Strings of what? And what specific 'everyday' problem are you
>>>>> referring
>>>>> to?
>>>>
>>>> Strings start a new thread here at nominally weekly intervals. Seems
>>>> to me
>>>> that might be usable info.
>>>>
>>>> Cheers, Gene
>>>>
>>>
>>> That strikes me as being as useful as "The PEP 393 FSR is completely
>>> wrong but I'm not going to tell you why" approach.
>>>
>>
>> Please stop baiting people.
>>
>
> What are you on about? The comment has been made that "its quite plain
> to me that 3.x python has a problem with everyday dealing with strings".
> Myself, Terry Reedy and Steven D'Aprano have all commented on this,
> asking for more data. We've been given nothing, which is precisely what
> our resident unicode expert has given us.
>

I'm on about your comment being a gratuitous jab at someone who isn't
even participating in the thread. Stop it.

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





== 23 of 24 ==
Date: Mon, Jan 6 2014 2:25 pm
From: Ned Batchelder


On 1/6/14 5:16 PM, Antoine Pitrou wrote:
> Ned Batchelder <ned <at> nedbatchelder.com> writes:
>>
>>
>> I never said they were the whole community, of course. But they are not
>> outliers either. By your own statistics above, 23% of respondents think
>> Python 3 was a mistake. Armin and Kenneth are just two very visible
>> people.
>
> Indeed, they are two very visible people.
>
>> I'm not creating rock stars. I'm acknowledging that these two people
>> are listened to by many others. It sounds like part of your effort to
>> avoid rockstars is to ignore any one person's specific feedback? I must
>> be misunderstanding what you mean.
>
> I am not trying to ignore "any one person's specific feedback". I am
> ignoring your claim that we should give Armin's blog posts an
> extraordinary importance because he is "revered".
>
> Speaking of which, posting blog articles is not the preferred way to
> give feedback. There are ample community resources for that. I am
> irritated that we are apparently supposed to be monitoring blog posts,
> Twitter feeds and whatnot for any sign of dissent, and immediately react
> to a criticism that wasn't even voiced directly to us.
>
>> You are being given detailed specific feedback from intelligent
>> dedicated customers that many people listen to,
>
> Could you please stop talking about customers? We are not selling
> Python to anyone (*). Writing open source software as a volunteer is
> not supposed to be a sacrificial activity where we will bow with
> extreme diligence to the community's every outburst. Please try to
> respect us.

I do respect you, and all the core developers. As I've said elsewhere
in the thread, I greatly appreciate everything you do. I dedicate a
great deal of time and energy to the Python community, primarily because
of the amazing product that you have all built.

I've made my point as best as I can, I'll stop now.

>
> ((*) Wikipedia: "A customer (sometimes known as a client, buyer, or
> purchaser) is the recipient of a good, service, product, or idea,
> obtained from a seller, vendor, or supplier for a monetary or other
> valuable consideration")
>
> Regards
>
> Antoine.
>
>


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





== 24 of 24 ==
Date: Mon, Jan 6 2014 2:30 pm
From: Mark Lawrence



On 06/01/2014 22:22, Ned Batchelder wrote:
> On 1/6/14 5:08 PM, Mark Lawrence wrote:
>> On 06/01/2014 21:42, Ned Batchelder wrote:
>>> On 1/6/14 4:33 PM, Mark Lawrence wrote:
>>>> On 06/01/2014 21:17, Gene Heskett wrote:
>>>>> On Monday 06 January 2014 16:16:13 Terry Reedy did opine:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On 1/6/2014 9:32 AM, Gene Heskett wrote:
>>>>>>> And from my lurking here, its quite plain to me that 3.x python
>>>>>>> has a
>>>>>>> problem with everyday dealing with strings.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Strings of what? And what specific 'everyday' problem are you
>>>>>> referring
>>>>>> to?
>>>>>
>>>>> Strings start a new thread here at nominally weekly intervals. Seems
>>>>> to me
>>>>> that might be usable info.
>>>>>
>>>>> Cheers, Gene
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> That strikes me as being as useful as "The PEP 393 FSR is completely
>>>> wrong but I'm not going to tell you why" approach.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Please stop baiting people.
>>>
>>
>> What are you on about? The comment has been made that "its quite plain
>> to me that 3.x python has a problem with everyday dealing with strings".
>> Myself, Terry Reedy and Steven D'Aprano have all commented on this,
>> asking for more data. We've been given nothing, which is precisely what
>> our resident unicode expert has given us.
>>
>
> I'm on about your comment being a gratuitous jab at someone who isn't
> even participating in the thread. Stop it.
>

You arrogance really has no bounds. If you'd have done the job that you
should have done in the first place and stopped that blithering idiot 16
months ago, we wouldn't still be putting up with him now. To top that,
you're now defending "customers" when you should be saying quite clearly
that PEP 404 stands as is and THERE WILL BE NO PYTHON 2.8. Have I made
my message perfectly clear?

And as I started this thread, I'll say what I please, throwing my toys
out of my pram in just the same way that your pal Armin is currently doing.

--
My fellow Pythonistas, ask not what our language can do for you, ask
what you can do for our language.

Mark Lawrence






==============================================================================
TOPIC: class inheritance python2.7 vs python3.3
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.lang.python/t/7c04a061db2c40f6?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Mon, Jan 6 2014 12:57 pm
From: jwe.van.dijk@gmail.com


On Monday, 6 January 2014 18:14:08 UTC+1, jwe.va...@gmail.com wrote:
> I have problems with these two classes:
>
>
>
> class LPU1():
>
> def __init__(self, formula):
>
> """
>
> formula is a string that is parsed into a SymPy function
>
> and several derived functions
>
> """
>
> self.formula = formula
>
> ... ...
>
>
>
> class LPU3(LPU1):
>
> def __new__(self):
>
> """
>
> the same functions as LPU1 but some added functions
>
> and some functions redefined
>
> """
>
> ... ...
>
>
>
> if __name__ == '__main__:
>
> y = y = 'x_0 * x_1 + x_2'
>
> stats1 = LPU1(y)
>
> stats3 = LPU3(y)
>
>
>
> Worked perfectly on Python 2.7.5+ but on Python 3.3.2+ I get on instantiatiating stat3:
>
> TypeError: __new__() takes 1 positional argument but 2 were given
>
>
>
> What am I doing wrong?
>
> I must confess I am a bit out of my depth here so any explanation will be a learning experience.
>
>
>
> Many thanks, Janwillem

Thanks for all the contributions. I now have:
class LPU1(object):
def __init__(self, formula):
... ...
and
class LPU3(LPU1):
def __init__(self, y):
LPU1.__init__(self, y)
... ...

which gives the correct results both on 2.7 and 3.3.
Is that more or less good practice?
Now I stumble on a SymPy problem under 3.3 but that obviously is an other topic
Cheers, janwillem





==============================================================================
TOPIC: python finance
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.lang.python/t/4989f2e4028c1e20?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Mon, Jan 6 2014 1:11 pm
From: d ss


On Monday, January 6, 2014 12:06:45 PM UTC-5, Chris Angelico wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 7, 2014 at 3:58 AM, d ss <dss.leb@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > what the heck!
>
> > who told you this is a spam!
>
> > this is a call for cooperation and collaboration
>
> > how retarded!
>
>
>
> It is, at best, misdirected. There is a Python job board [1] where
>
> these sorts of things can be posted, but the main mailing list isn't
>
> the place for it.
>
>
>
> However, if you want your posts to be seen as legitimate, I would
>
> recommend putting a little more content into them, and putting some
>
> effort into the quality of English. Most of us will just skip over
>
> something that looks like unsolicited commercial email, if we even see
>
> it at all (spam filtering is getting pretty effective these days).
>
>
>
> ChrisA
>
>
>
> [1] http://www.python.org/community/jobs/

thanks Chris, i am checking the link
i wrote just 2 words with a clear indicative title: "Python, Finance" which summarizes the following "if you are good in python and interested in applying your python knowledge to the field of finance then we may have a common interest in talking together" :D
that s it!




==============================================================================

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "comp.lang.python"
group.

To post to this group, visit http://groups.google.com/group/comp.lang.python?hl=en

To unsubscribe from this group, send email to comp.lang.python+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com

To change the way you get mail from this group, visit:
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.lang.python/subscribe?hl=en

To report abuse, send email explaining the problem to abuse@googlegroups.com

==============================================================================
Google Groups: http://groups.google.com/?hl=en