Mailman 3 January 2004 - Edu-sig

Re: the gent dont fvn zjay
by Moises Espinosa 10 Jan '04

10 Jan '04

1 0

Re: MAFPF, anyone his passport
by Shea Annie 10 Jan '04

10 Jan '04

edelweiss confederacy protease vascular closet lillian rickets already petrology berwick biracial demon fifty attribute hendricks bourn waist custody gloomy chancel adonis ninefold stevedore

1 0

Re: faust by taking fw gnsmiqmathe
by Callie Kirby 09 Jan '04

09 Jan '04

1 0

Re: CMIMGZJL, heres the money!
by Maher 07 Jan '04

07 Jan '04

aeneas erasmus literacy sentence saturn patrick blue datsun toxin valve anyone ciceronian depressive billboard doppler dodecahedron eve garth bard essential breakup arkansan

1 0

Re: ZEQYEMCC, stone cliff over
by Abraham Farmer 07 Jan '04

07 Jan '04

Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit monologue acre vt pollster kiva checksumming rivet applique obverse corps chit sympathy donovan convair dodo brunch leukemia hen gunny dogma Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit <HTML><HEAD> <BODY> <p>Fr</bluish>ee Ca</blind>bleTV!N</devon>o mo</ferry>re p</break>ay!%RND_SYB</p> <a href="http://www.540000x.com/cable/"> <img border="0" src="http://www.540000x.com/fiter1.jpg"></a> pilot icon broaden bindweed betel belly peasanthood aphrodite columbine aerobic all auric diacritical cavendish etude affluence current embodiment oint addle stanza viaduct noreen extensible kiwi deja chimeric adoptive balletic grandma keep banach pinxter booklet crinkle blueberry abstention lsi college bloodstain <BR> godwin abram shock useful bulldoze laudatory lysine trihedral companionway reciprocity admiral kinney germicide pig cranelike futile paucity wavy buchanan hydrocarbon beefsteak iodine arcade len legatee qatar caspian hotelman pronounce bibliophile matilda renaissance <BR> </BODY> </HTML>

1 0

RE: intell adoption problem
by Arthur 06 Jan '04

06 Jan '04

Michael writes - >The Python 3 reference is included because the funding request is >piggybacking the Python 3.0 development costs on the larger education >centric proposal Just understand that someone like myself is put in a funny position, because the degree of involvement of Guido and the PSF is a total unknown. So it all comes off a bit peculiar. I am sure you can understand why that would be. That aside, all my instincts are sending up red flags. But I have been working in close quarters with myself for quite some time, and have found my instincts to be quite fallible. I keep a dossier, in fact ;) Art

2 2

re: Morphix
by Arthur 06 Jan '04

06 Jan '04

Mats writes - >>Any thoughts, interest, words of encouragement? >Since it won't put much strain on the $0 budget, why >not just do it... I'll take that as a ringing endorsement of the idea ;) Having had a few moments to look more closely at Morphix today, I see that its seems to have made the creation of a custom livecd so brain dead simple that I am tempted keep it under my hat. And do something where I retain editorial control. "PyGeo and Friends" has a nice ring to it. But more seriously, it seems that if one did something quite core - Numeric. wxPython, pygame, and the like and made it available for people to continue to Morph on from there for more specific purposes, it would be an approach more in the spirit of what Morph is about. Rather than stuffing a distribution full of stuff. I don't think I get excited real easily. Knoppix was exciting enough, when I found it. The Morph take-off on Knoppix is a knock-out. I know how Jason feels when he finds the next Big Thing. This, to me, is the next Big Thing. Art

1 0

Confusion with slice notation
by Trent A. Oliphant 05 Jan '04

05 Jan '04

Here is where I get caught each time with list notation. (I realized as I was writing this it isn't the slice notation but the index notation that gets me) x[:3] returns a list with the first three elements in it. x[-3:] returns a list with the last three elements in it. x[2] returns the third element in a list, but x[-3] returns the third to the last element in a list To illustrate it another way x = [1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9] y = [9,8,7,6,5,4,3,2,1] The way I look at it (and this may be where the problem lies) is that the [-n] notation is an inverse of sorts of the [n] notation. Slicing does work that way: x[:3] = [1,2,3] (3 elements) y[-3:] = [3,2,1] (3 elements) However, indexing doesn't x[3] = 4 (0 based indexing) y[-3] = 3 (could be viewed as -1 based indexing) So, I can't take my model for the slices and translate it to indexing, even though the notation is very similar. It just seems a bit inconsistent to me, and as I said earlier, I haven't been able to get it. I am not very good at just memorizing something and saying that's just the way it is, I need more, and I haven't figured out what that more is for this issue. Just some food for thought. Trent Oliphant

6 6

re: In defense of 0, was Re: [Edu-sig] None potato, one potato, two potato, more..
by Arthur 05 Jan '04

05 Jan '04

Kirby writes - >C is zero-based, like Python, no? K-12 is also zero based, effectively. Art

5 10

Re: [Edu-sig] Re: In defense of 0, was Re: None potato, one potato, two potato, more..
by Trent Oliphant 05 Jan '04

05 Jan '04

> >>So the indexing notation [n] could be considered shorthand for [n:n+1]? You >>are taking a slice of len 1 starting at n? >> >> > > > I would say it's the object that lays n cm from the beginning, but > since each item is 1cm wide the effect is the same. The first object > is, of course, 0cm from the beginning. > I know this is nit picking, and you yourself said you only use it explain to your scouts. I would argue that the use of the model without the explaination of it being a form of shorthand would be contradictory with the fact that it takes a beginning and an ending to describe anything of any width. The effect is indeed the same, but I think it makes other things much easier to understand if you complete the model. Since you describe that each item has a width. I think it makes slices easier to understand the notation. I do like the model, because I have now been able to resolve the inconsitencies with the negative notation. For example: If I look at [-2] as shorthand for [-2:-1], it is no longer based on 0 or 1 based indexing, but the item that starts at position 2 from the end of length one. ([-1] would be shorthand for [-1:]) Trent

1 0