Extract lines from file, add to new files

[dn]

On 15/01/24 11:47, Chris Angelico via Python-list wrote:
> On Mon, 15 Jan 2024 at 09:40, dn via Python-list <python-list at python.org> wrote:
>> The basic challenge came from my earlier (and blasé) repetition of the
>> Python refrain "everything in Python is an object". Which led to:
...

>> So, no, there's an "everything" which (might be) an object but which
>> cannot be used in that scenario.
> 
> More accurately, every VALUE in Python is an object. This does not
> mean that syntax is an object. Very few languages would say that every
> single grammatical element is a value.

+1

Thank you. This old-dog will try to re-learn that term...


> Yes, it's sloppy to say "everything" is an object, but it's also
> rather nonintuitive to claim that, therefore, syntax elements are all
> objects. It's like claiming that everything that this dealership sells
> is a car (or "everything in this dealership is a car"), and therefore
> the dealership's name must itself be a car.

To say nothing of 'extended warranties'!
(and their dubious rationale)


>> That said, does anyone think that something like:
>>
>>       for a_function( etc ) in iterable/iterator:
>>
>> is acceptable?
>> - see both Python definition and (full-)quotation.
>>
>> I've not come-across a language which does allow such - YMMV/mea culpa;
>> and am struggling to see how it could possibly be useful.
> 
> You could do something close to that:
> 
> for a_function(etc)[0] in iterable: ...
> 
> because an assignment target can contain an arbitrary expression
> followed by the subscript.

Here's another witticism I'll often toss at trainees (in many languages, 
and especially in UX): just because we can do it, doesn't make it a good 
idea!


>> * Looking at the correspondent's email-address (cf 'handle') - and as an
>> unfair stereotype, raises the question of issues related to (English)
>> language-skills - which, arrogantly implies/assumes that native
>> English-speakers are all highly-capable. (?) A negative-interpretation
>> is to note his apparent intelligence, but wonder if failing to represent
>> others' comments fairly is deliberate, or carelessness. Is there an
>> irony in behaving/failing in such, whilst attempting to hold Python's
>> structure to some golden-ideal?
> 
> Seems likely.


-- 
Regards,
=dn