Dr. Dobb's Python-URL! - weekly Python news and links (Dec 2)

C

Cameron Laird

QOTW: "Python makes it easy to implement algorithms." - casevh

"Most of the discussion of immutables here seems to be caused by
newcomers wanting to copy an idiom from another language which doesn't
have immutable variables. Their real problem is usually with binding,
not immutability." - Mike Meyer


Among the treasures available in The Wiki is the current
copy of "the Sorting min-howto":
http://www.amk.ca/python/howto/sorting/sorting.html

Dabo is way cool--at least as of release 0.5:
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.lang.python/browse_thread/thread/becf84a4f8b3d34/

Tim Golden illustrates that wmi is *not* the only way to
access win32 functionality, and in fact that Python can
mimic VisualBasicScript quite handily. It's only mimicry,
though; VBS remains better suited for this specific class
of tasks:
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.lang.python/browse_thread/thread/fa84850666488500/

Claudio Grondi explains ActiveX componentry--OCXs, the
registry, apartments, ...--for a Python audience:
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.lang.python/browse_thread/thread/471306f2d6f6927/

Dao is a novel high-level language which advertises strong
multi-threading, Unicode, and particularly comfortable C++
interfacing. Limin Fu provides details:
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.lang.python/browse_thread/thread/4418fac8dda696d9/

Donn Cave leads at least a score of others in comparing
lists and tuples:
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.lang.python/msg/dd6ba8df451d57e0?

========================================================================
Everything Python-related you want is probably one or two clicks away in
these pages:

Python.org's Python Language Website is the traditional
center of Pythonia
http://www.python.org
Notice especially the master FAQ
http://www.python.org/doc/FAQ.html

PythonWare complements the digest you're reading with the
marvelous daily python url
http://www.pythonware.com/daily
Mygale is a news-gathering webcrawler that specializes in (new)
World-Wide Web articles related to Python.
http://www.awaretek.com/nowak/mygale.html
While cosmetically similar, Mygale and the Daily Python-URL
are utterly different in their technologies and generally in
their results.

For far, FAR more Python reading than any one mind should
absorb, much of it quite interesting, several pages index
much of the universe of Pybloggers.
http://lowlife.jp/cgi-bin/moin.cgi/PythonProgrammersWeblog
http://www.planetpython.org/
http://mechanicalcat.net/pyblagg.html

comp.lang.python.announce announces new Python software. Be
sure to scan this newsgroup weekly.
http://groups.google.com/groups?oi=djq&as_ugroup=comp.lang.python.announce

Steve Bethard, Tim Lesher, and Tony Meyer continue the marvelous
tradition early borne by Andrew Kuchling, Michael Hudson and Brett
Cannon of intelligently summarizing action on the python-dev mailing
list once every other week.
http://www.python.org/dev/summary/

The Python Package Index catalogues packages.
http://www.python.org/pypi/

The somewhat older Vaults of Parnassus ambitiously collects references
to all sorts of Python resources.
http://www.vex.net/~x/parnassus/

Much of Python's real work takes place on Special-Interest Group
mailing lists
http://www.python.org/sigs/

Python Success Stories--from air-traffic control to on-line
match-making--can inspire you or decision-makers to whom you're
subject with a vision of what the language makes practical.
http://www.pythonology.com/success

The Python Software Foundation (PSF) has replaced the Python
Consortium as an independent nexus of activity. It has official
responsibility for Python's development and maintenance.
http://www.python.org/psf/
Among the ways you can support PSF is with a donation.
http://www.python.org/psf/donate.html

Kurt B. Kaiser publishes a weekly report on faults and patches.
http://www.google.com/groups?as_usubject=weekly python patch

Cetus collects Python hyperlinks.
http://www.cetus-links.org/oo_python.html

Python FAQTS
http://python.faqts.com/

The Cookbook is a collaborative effort to capture useful and
interesting recipes.
http://aspn.activestate.com/ASPN/Cookbook/Python

Among several Python-oriented RSS/RDF feeds available are
http://www.python.org/channews.rdf
http://bootleg-rss.g-blog.net/pythonware_com_daily.pcgi
http://python.de/backend.php
For more, see
http://www.syndic8.com/feedlist.php?ShowMatch=python&ShowStatus=all
The old Python "To-Do List" now lives principally in a
SourceForge reincarnation.
http://sourceforge.net/tracker/?atid=355470&group_id=5470&func=browse
http://python.sourceforge.net/peps/pep-0042.html

The online Python Journal is posted at pythonjournal.cognizor.com.
(e-mail address removed) and (e-mail address removed)
welcome submission of material that helps people's understanding
of Python use, and offer Web presentation of your work.

del.icio.us presents an intriguing approach to reference commentary.
It already aggregates quite a bit of Python intelligence.
http://del.icio.us/tag/python

*Py: the Journal of the Python Language*
http://www.pyzine.com

Archive probing tricks of the trade:
http://groups.google.com/groups?oi=djq&as_ugroup=comp.lang.python&num=100
http://groups.google.com/groups?meta=site=groups&group=comp.lang.python.*

Previous - (U)se the (R)esource, (L)uke! - messages are listed here:
http://www.ddj.com/topic/python/ (requires subscription)
http://groups-beta.google.com/groups?q=python-url+group:comp.lang.python*&start=0&scoring=d&
http://purl.org/thecliff/python/url.html (dormant)
or
http://groups.google.com/groups?oi=djq&as_q=+Python-URL!&as_ugroup=comp.lang.python
There is *not* an RSS for "Python-URL!"--at least not yet. Arguments
for and against are occasionally entertained.


Suggestions/corrections for next week's posting are always welcome.
E-mail to <[email protected]> should get through.

To receive a new issue of this posting in e-mail each Monday morning
(approximately), ask <[email protected]> to subscribe. Mention
"Python-URL!".


-- The Python-URL! Team--

Dr. Dobb's Journal (http://www.ddj.com) is pleased to participate in and
sponsor the "Python-URL!" project.
 
R

rurpy

Cameron Laird said:
Among the treasures available in The Wiki is the current
copy of "the Sorting min-howto":
http://www.amk.ca/python/howto/sorting/sorting.html
snip

Why is this a "treasure" when it is way out of date?

1. There is no mention of the key or reverse arguments.
2. Worse, it describes as normal practice, methods that the key
and reverse arguments makes obsolete.
3. There's no mention of sorted() or of the differences between sort()
and sorted().
 
R

rurpy

Tony said:
Note that the updated version of this is at: http://wiki.python.org/
moin/HowTo/Sorting

=Tony.Meyer

http://wiki.python.org/...
Hmmm, lets see, how about Libraries?
Nope, don't see anything that looks like it might be about sort
there...
How about Documentation?
Nope
Code?
Hmm, "sort lists of dicts" doesn't sound like it...
I see there a search box, let's try that for "sort"
WTF?, these all look like old maillist archives...
Maybe I should Goole python.org What was the google syntax to
limit the search to one site? I forgot.
Aww screw it.

Wikis suck. Update the damn docs.
 
T

Tony Meyer

Among the treasures available in The Wiki is the current

Read the message more carefully. Mail wrapped the URL - if you put
it back together, it'll be there. To make it easy, try:

<http://wiki.python.org/moin/HowTo/Sorting>

[...]
Maybe I should Goole python.org What was the google syntax to
limit the search to one site? I forgot.

It's "site:", but even if you just left that out and used
'wiki.python.org sorting "how to"', the first link is the one you're
after. Laziness is no excuse.
Wikis suck. Update the damn docs.

The documentation *has* been updated. If you read the Python 2.5
documentation (build it, or wait for Python 2.5 to be released),
you'll see that it points to the Wiki.

=Tony.Meyer
 
S

skip

rurpy> http://wiki.python.org/...
rurpy> Hmmm, lets see, how about Libraries?
rurpy> Nope, don't see anything that looks like it might be about sort
rurpy> there...
rurpy> How about Documentation?
rurpy> Nope
rurpy> Code?
rurpy> Hmm, "sort lists of dicts" doesn't sound like it...
rurpy> I see there a search box, let's try that for "sort"
rurpy> WTF?, these all look like old maillist archives...
rurpy> Maybe I should Goole python.org What was the google syntax to
rurpy> limit the search to one site? I forgot.
rurpy> Aww screw it.

rurpy> Wikis suck. Update the damn docs.

Gee, I wonder if I typed "sort" into the search box on the wiki it might
turn up something useful? Well, what do you know?

2 results of about 4571 pages. (0.19 seconds)

1. HowTo/Sorting
2. SortingListsOfDictionaries

Is it as good as Google ("site:wiki.python.org sort")? Unlikely, but it
works fairly well. Granted, wikis are a different way of organizing content
than static documentation with their nicely organized chapters, sections and
indexes, but most of us around here are software engineer types, not tech
writers, and since we're not paid to do any of this, we get to do anything
we want. Most of us choose not to write documentation in our spare time.
Go figure. If documentation's your thing, be my guest. Write new
documentation, submit patches for existing documentation, rewrite it in
Word. I don't care. Do whatever floats your boat. Just don't show up and
bitch about the documentation if you're not willing to help.

Oh, did I mention that there's an Edit link at the top of almost every page
on the wiki and that creating new pages is pretty simple? (Try searching
the wiki for "WikiCourse".) Contributing new content to the existing more
static documentation isn't all that hard either.

If you prefer the latest documentation, bookmark this page:

http://www.python.org/dev/doc/devel/index.html

That's updated every few months, more frequently as new releases approach.

Skip
 
R

rurpy

Gee, I wonder if I typed "sort" into the search box on the wiki it might
turn up something useful? Well, what do you know?

2 results of about 4571 pages. (0.19 seconds)

1. HowTo/Sorting
2. SortingListsOfDictionaries

Are we talking about the same Search box (at the top right of the
wiki page, and labeled "search"? Well, yes I did enter "sort" and
got (as I said) a long list of archived maillist postings.
Is it as good as Google ("site:wiki.python.org sort")? Unlikely, but it
works fairly well. Granted, wikis are a different way of organizing content
than static documentation with their nicely organized chapters, sections and
indexes, but most of us around here are software engineer types, not tech
writers, and since we're not paid to do any of this, we get to do anything
we want. Most of us choose not to write documentation in our spare time.
Go figure. If documentation's your thing, be my guest. Write new
documentation, submit patches for existing documentation, rewrite it in
Word. I don't care. Do whatever floats your boat. Just don't show up and
bitch about the documentation if you're not willing to help.

Well, I'm not totally sure but I think I would be willing to a least
try
contributing something. A large amount of the time I waste when
writing Python programs is directly attributable to poor documentation.
(To be fair Python is not the only software with this problem.)

But, the standard responce of "don't complain, fix it yourself" is
bogus
too. There are plenty of people on this list willing to sing python's
praises,
for balance, there should be people willing to openly point out
python's
flaws. Documentation is certainly one of them. And I was correcting a
posting that explicitly said there was exceptionaly good information in
that Howto. That was just plain wrong.
Oh, did I mention that there's an Edit link at the top of almost every page
on the wiki and that creating new pages is pretty simple? (Try searching
the wiki for "WikiCourse".) Contributing new content to the existing more
static documentation isn't all that hard either.

As I said, I think wiki's suck. On almost every one I find the
information
disorganised, very spotty in coverage, extremely variable is qualilty
of writing, and often seeming like a conversation walked into in the
middle of. I still haven't figured out how to get to the Python wiki's
howto's by navigating from the front page. IMO wikis are best used
to collect information for later editing and inclusion into more formal
documentation. (That's a little stronger than my actual opinion but
it's too late right now more me to express it any better.)
If you prefer the latest documentation, bookmark this page:

http://www.python.org/dev/doc/devel/index.html

Thanks I will keep that in mind. But the obvious risk is that it
will refer to language features and changes not in the current
version.
 
P

Peter Hansen

Are we talking about the same Search box (at the top right of the
wiki page, and labeled "search"? Well, yes I did enter "sort" and
got (as I said) a long list of archived maillist postings.

No, he's talking about the *wiki* search box, not the one in the extreme
upper right which is for the whole site. Scan down just a tad... it's
got a yellow background here (in Firefox).

Admittedly not at all obvious, especially sitting next to the "Login"
link and looking like maybe a text field for a user name or something,
though it does clearly have the word "Search" in it until you click
there...

-Peter
 
R

rurpy

Tony said:
Read the message more carefully. Mail wrapped the URL - if you put
it back together, it'll be there. To make it easy, try:

Mea culpa, I did miss that.
<http://wiki.python.org/moin/HowTo/Sorting>

[...]
Maybe I should Goole python.org What was the google syntax to
limit the search to one site? I forgot.

It's "site:", but even if you just left that out and used
'wiki.python.org sorting "how to"', the first link is the one you're
after. Laziness is no excuse.

You miss my point. Having outdated documentaion distributed
with Python is the problem. Have some newer stuff out on some
wiki is nice but does not fix the problem. I know people don't like
writing and updating docs. But that doesn't turn bad documentation
in good.
The documentation *has* been updated. If you read the Python 2.5
documentation (build it, or wait for Python 2.5 to be released),
you'll see that it points to the Wiki.

Hmm, not sure what I think about that (pointing to wiki).
 
R

rurpy

Peter said:
No, he's talking about the *wiki* search box, not the one in the extreme
upper right which is for the whole site. Scan down just a tad... it's
got a yellow background here (in Firefox).

Admittedly not at all obvious, especially sitting next to the "Login"
link and looking like maybe a text field for a user name or something,
though it does clearly have the word "Search" in it until you click
there...

It certainly did fool me. :-(
 
T

Tony Meyer

It's "site:", but even if you just left that out and used
You miss my point. Having outdated documentaion distributed
with Python is the problem. Have some newer stuff out on some
wiki is nice but does not fix the problem. I know people don't like
writing and updating docs. But that doesn't turn bad documentation
in good.

You're complaining about something that has been fixed. The
documentation was out of date, and that has been corrected. If you
really must complain about something (in the interests of a foolish
'balance'), then pick something that hasn't been fixed.

Note that having the core information in the documentation and
additional information like "how-to"s in a wiki means that keeping it
up-to-date isn't tied to a release.

=Tony.Meyer
 
T

Tony Meyer

But, the standard responce of "don't complain, fix it yourself" is
bogus too. There are plenty of people on this list willing to sing
python's
praises, for balance, there should be people willing to openly
point out
python's flaws.

This makes no sense. If you want to complain about Python, try a
Perl list. Why would a list dedicated to discussion about/help with
a language need complaints about the language?

You might want to consider the difference between complaining and
constructive criticism and suggestions, and which are likely to get
better responses.
Documentation is certainly one of them.

FWIW, I have found Python's documentation to generally be excellent.
And I was correcting a posting that explicitly said there was
exceptionaly
good information in that Howto. That was just plain wrong.

It is exceptionally good information. The version that was at that
link is somewhat dated (but still excellent for anyone using older
versions of Python, or for those that need to remain compatible with
older versions, and there are a lot of those people around), but the
updated version is also excellent. I'm sure amk will either update
his page to point to the new one or update the content at some point.

The point is that you're much more likely to improve things if you
politely point out a problem and suggest a solution than simply make
a complaint.

=Tony.Meyer
 
S

skip

rurpy> Are we talking about the same Search box (at the top right of the
rurpy> wiki page, and labeled "search"? Well, yes I did enter "sort"
rurpy> and got (as I said) a long list of archived maillist postings.

Probably. There are two search buttons, Title and Text. Always try the
Title search first, as it only searches page titles. If that is unhelpful,
then try the Text search. That searches the bodies of the pages. I
generally never use that search, preferring instead to use Google's
"site:wiki.python.org ..." restricted search which is going to apply their
page rank algorithms to the hits (and be faster to boot). I don't know how
hard it would be to modify the wiki's Text button so it executes the
appropriate Google search. Probably not too hard. I'll look.

rurpy> Well, I'm not totally sure but I think I would be willing to a
rurpy> least try contributing something. A large amount of the time I
rurpy> waste when writing Python programs is directly attributable to
rurpy> poor documentation. (To be fair Python is not the only software
rurpy> with this problem.)

rurpy> But, the standard responce of "don't complain, fix it yourself"
rurpy> is bogus too. There are plenty of people on this list willing to
rurpy> sing python's praises, for balance, there should be people
rurpy> willing to openly point out python's flaws. Documentation is
rurpy> certainly one of them. And I was correcting a posting that
rurpy> explicitly said there was exceptionaly good information in that
rurpy> Howto. That was just plain wrong.

Sure, feel free to point of flaws. Just don't let that be the only way you
contribute. Over time the value of your criticism (valid or not) will be
discounted.

The preferred way to correct problems with the documentation is to submit a
bug report to SourceForge. Many of the active developers (including those
who do write most of documentation) don't necessarily track c.l.py closely,
so postings here often will get lost because people can't attend to them
immediately.

The problem with marching in here and saying "fix the docs" is that you are
an unknown quantity (I certainly don't recognize your email address and as
far as I've seen you never sign your posts. I don't believe I've ever seen
contributions from you either. (Can't double-check right now because
SourceForget is basically unresponsive.) The combination makes you look
suspiciously like a troll. I doubt that's the case. Troll detectors are
notorious for generating false positives. Still, my threat assessment level
got raised.

Operating under the rurpy's-not-a-troll assumption, your posts suggest to me
that you don't understand how Python is developed. Behind the scenes lots
of documentation *does* get written. In my experience it hass generally not
been written by people who whine, "fix the docs". In short, there seems to
be no shortage of people willing to castigate the Python developers for
poor documentation. There does appear to be a shortage of people willing to
actually roll up their sleeves and help.

The other thing to remember is that most of the people who wind up writing
the documentation don't personally need most of the documentation they
write. After all, they are generally the authors of code itself and are
thus the experts in its use. It's tough to put yourself in the shoes of a
novice, so it's tough to write documentation that would be helpful for new
users. It's extremely helpful if new users submit documentation patches as
they figure things out. It's generally unnecessary to write large tomes.
Often all that's needed is a few sentences or an example or two.

Skip
 
B

bonono

Sure, feel free to point of flaws. Just don't let that be the only way you
contribute. Over time the value of your criticism (valid or not) will be
discounted.
That is quite interesting, if it is true.
 
S

skip

bonono> That is quite interesting, if it is true.

Let me rephrase. The discounting I referred to is largely subconcious.
When it is concious it's a roll of the eyes or a thought like, "Oh that
whiner again. I don't have time for this right now." And the 'd' key gets
hit. I didn't mean to imply some sort of smoke-filled backroom where the
developers decide whose inputs to listen to.

Everybody applies such filters whether they think about it or not. Here are
a couple of mine:

Xah Lee? Hit the 'd' key.

Tim Peters? Read it no matter what the subject says.

Skip
 
B

BartlebyScrivener

It's tough to put yourself in the shoes of a
novice, so it's tough to write documentation that would be helpful for
new
users. It's extremely helpful if new users submit documentation
patches as
they figure things out. It's generally unnecessary to write large
tomes.
Often all that's needed is a few sentences or an example or two. <<

Yes, well, regardless of your beef with the person who complained about
documentation, I respectfully submit that it is not so easy to help out
with documentation. I'm a professional writer and author with a keen
interest in open source, but the moment you look to contribute or try
to help with the documentation you are asked to learn LaTex or DocBook,
which, I'm sorry, I am not going to do. Authors and writers are
usually drawn to open source software by their love of plain text.
Even veteran Linux users have a lot of trouble with LaTex, so the
writers, who perhaps would be willing to help with writing in exchange
for help with programming, are unable to do so without learning yet
another arcane and foreign mark-up language, which frankly won't be
useful in any other writing endeavor. How about a compromise, like
having documents submitted in html or some other system that is more
cross platform than LaTex?

bs
 
A

Aahz

Yes, well, regardless of your beef with the person who complained about
documentation, I respectfully submit that it is not so easy to help out
with documentation. I'm a professional writer and author with a keen
interest in open source, but the moment you look to contribute or try
to help with the documentation you are asked to learn LaTex or DocBook,
which, I'm sorry, I am not going to do.

This is not true. You are welcome to submit plain text patches; reST
patches are even better. There has been a lot of confusion on this point
in the past (to which I responded by submitting a bug report and getting
the docs about submitting patches changed). Can you point out where
you're getting this impression from so we can make further improvements
to the process? Or do I (and others) simply need to keep repeating this
point endlessly?
 
B

BartlebyScrivener

Go to Python.org

Click on DEVELOPERS

The lead sentence says:

Contributors and potential contributors should read Documenting Python,
which describes in details the conventions and markup used in creating
and maintaining the Python documentation. The CVS trunk version is the
recommended version for contributors, regardless of which Python branch
is being modified.

The link takes you straight to a primer on LaTex.

Did I miss something?

bs
 

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments. After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.

Ask a Question

Members online

Forum statistics

Threads
473,770
Messages
2,569,584
Members
45,077
Latest member
SangMoor21

Latest Threads

Top