Slashdot Mirror


The Python Cookbook

Nice2Cats writes "Python is something of a programmer's dream and an author's nightmare. What started life as a scripting tool for the Amoeba operating system has matured into a full-blown programming language with such speed that every book seems to be outdated in a year or two. To make matters worse for publishers, the crew around Python's creator Guido van Rossum keeps adding higher-level constructs such as iterators with every new release, reducing reams of code to single-line idioms at half-year intervals. Because not everybody has been able to keep up -- RedHat 7.3 infamously still ships with version 1.5.2 as the default, while SuSE 8.0 is hanging in there with version 2.2 -- authors are forced to cover stone age variants as well as modern forms. Python is cross-platform (Unix/Linux, Mac, Microsoft), has two underlying languages (C for Python, Java for Jython) and works with various GUIs (Tkinter, wxWindows, Qt, GTK, curses, Swing). Given this breadth of material, the idea of writing that most fragmented form of a programming book, a 'Cookbook,' seems as crazy as, say, nailing a dead parrot to its perch." Read Nice2Cats's review below of The Python Cookbook to see how well O'Reilly deals with dead parrots. The Python Cookbook author Alex Martelli and David Ascher pages 574 publisher O'Reilly rating 8 reviewer Nice2Cats ISBN 0596001673 summary A recommended book for the language with no Slashdot icon.

Beautiful plumage. O'Reilly, fortunately, has all kinds of experience with animals.

The Python Cookbook consists of seventeen chapters that contain between eight and twenty-six individual recipes. Chapters and recipes are roughly ordered by increasing complexity, length, and required background knowledge, starting with the simple "Swapping Values Without Using a Temporary Variable" and ending with the complete module "Parsing a String into a Date/Time Object Portably." The chapters are mostly organized by subject -- "Text," "Files," "Object-Orientated Programming," "User Interfaces" -- but also include "Python Shortcuts" and "System Administration." The background required varies: Whereas the chapter on "Text" starts off with Fred L. Drake reviewing the most basic string operations such as slicing and concatenation, Paul F. Dubois can only sketch the core concepts of lexing and parsing in "Programs About Programs."

This of course is a hallmark of all cookbooks, programming- or food-wise: Nobody will like everything, but everybody will like something. The worst fragmentation occurs, as expected, between examples of Python 1.5.2 and Python 2.2. Most recipes give preference to one version, and then point out how the problem could have been solved in the other version. This is more useful than the code that was written for all versions, because it gives a deeper insight into the changes that Python has gone through. The result is that after a few chapters, you start wondering why anybody in their right mind would keep using Python 1.5.2 instead of 2.2.* with its iterators, list comprehensions, new classes, and expanded module library.

Martelli and Ascher have done a good job balancing the different forms. Only one chapter struck me as lopsided: "System Administration", where ten of the sixteen recipes are Windows-only. Even though there is a good reason for this -- Microsoft's native administration tools just aren't like those provided with Unix -- the editors might want to rethink the selection of recipes in this chapter for future editions.

Generally helpful. The "Python Cookbook" has helped me in three ways. First, I found quite a lot of the examples themselves, especially those in the chapters "Python Shortcuts" and "Object-Orientated Programming" useful for everyday work. Second, reading more than 500 pages of peer-reviewed and well-commented code gave me a greater feeling for common idioms and constructs that are rare in this clarity in wild-type code. However, the book is strongest when more general principles of "Pythonic" programming are discussed, for example when Martelli demonstrates the merits of the "Look Before You Leap," "Easier to Ask Forgiveness than Permission," and "Homogenize Different Cases" methods.

My favorite recipe is Sebastien Keim's "Implementing a Ring Buffer," where an object carries a class deep in its bowels, and changes into this class in a rather cool Dr.-Jekyll-to-Mr.-Hyde transformation on the fly. The one recipe I found downright evil was "Sending HTML Mail," which should have been implemented as "Turning HTML Mail into Plain Text" with a note on how people who send HTML mail are going to be the first against the wall when the revolution comes. The best quote in the book comes from Tim Peters: "We read Knuth so you don't have to" -- Python's promise of programming power for the people, expressed in (dare I say it) a nutshell.

Conclusion:

I can recommend the "Python Cookbook" wholeheartedly to anyone who has passed into the advanced stage of language learning and is willing to actually sit down and work through the code. Anybody who is looking for a deeper understanding of Python, solutions to common coding problems, or starting points for their own projects will also profit. This book should have RedHat customers hammering at the gates of Raleigh, demanding the power of iterators and list comprehensions that their SuSE counterparts already enjoy by default; it demonstrates the superiority of Python 2.2.* over 1.5.2 in great detail.

Because of this, however, my guess is that 2.2.* will quickly replace 1.5.2, turning large parts of this book into historical footnotes in two years at the latest. This is no fault of O'Reilly's, but rather a current fact of Python life. The editors have done a good job of nailing the parrot, and until this Pythonic Norwegian Blue does the inevitable backflip, it should give its owner much pleasure.

You can purchase The Python Cookbook from bn.com. Slashdot welcomes readers' book reviews -- to see your own review here, read the book review guidelines, then visit the submission page.

17 of 221 comments (clear)

  1. They don't eat pythons, do they? by Darth+RadaR · · Score: 5, Funny

    The title "Python Cookbook" has gotta look weird to people bopping around Barnes & Noble who aren't in the know. :)

    --
    /*drunk.. fix later*/
    1. Re:They don't eat pythons, do they? by wirefarm · · Score: 5, Funny

      I was at a bookstore years ago and this old preacher-type guy came up to me and started saying how pleased he was to see a young guy like me interested in religion -

      I didn't have the heart to tell the guy exactly what "Linux Bible, the Gnu Testament" was about...

      (Then again, I probably do as much preaching about Linux as he does about God - maybe we should get it declared a religion and get tax-free status...)

      Cheers,
      Jim in Tokyo

      --
      -- My Weblog.
  2. Alternative Cookbooks by WIAKywbfatw · · Score: 4, Funny

    And for those of you that can't get your hands on a python, the adder, asp, boa, cobra, diamondback, etc cookbooks are just as well packed with tasty recipes.

    --

    "Accept that some days you are the pigeon, and some days you are the statue." - David Brent, Wernham Hogg
    1. Re:Alternative Cookbooks by sielwolf · · Score: 5, Funny

      Huh, I looked on O'Reilly's website and I couldn't find the ASP or Corba Cookbooks any- oh wait...

      --
      What is music when you despise all sound?
  3. Not sure about cooking up a Python, but... by qurob · · Score: 5, Funny


    Cornmeal Crusted Rattle Snake with Cactus-Corn Succotash

    Recipe courtesy Joey Altman, Copyright 2001

    2 1/2 pounds rattle snake, dead
    1 cup buttermilk
    1 cup cornmeal
    1 cup flour
    1 tablespoon salt
    1 tablespoon chile powder
    1 tablespoon garlic powder
    1 tablespoon paprika
    1 teaspoon cayenne pepper
    1 teaspoon ground cumin
    1 cup vegetable oil
    Cactus-Corn Succotash, recipe follows
    Using a sharp boning knife remove the meat from the snake by cutting down the back, just slightly to 1 side of the spine from the head to the rattle. Using the tip of the knife peel the meat from the ?rib cage?. Once you removed the 2 long strips of meat, lightly pound them with the back of the knife to tenderize them. Cut the strips of meat into 1-inch pieces and place in a bowl with the buttermilk. Mix to coat well. In a large bowl combine the cornmeal with the flour and the spices. Heat the oil in a large skillet on medium high heat. Dredge the snake pieces in the flour mixture and fry for 2 minutes or until golden brown and then transfer to a paper towel lined plate. Repeat until all the snake pieces are cooked. Serve with Cactus-Corn Succotash.

    Cactus-corn succotash:

    2 tablespoons olive oil
    1 cactus pad, thorns scraped off, cut into small dice
    2 ears corn, shucked
    1 red onion, peeled, sliced in rings, grilled with olive oil and chopped in small dice
    1 bunch scallions, grilled and chopped
    1 chayote squash, sliced 1/4-inch thick, grilled with olive oil and chopped in small dice
    1 tablespoon minced garlic
    2 tablespoons minced jalape?o
    1/2 cup diced red bell pepper
    4 tablespoons butter
    1 cup chicken stock
    1 cup diced, peeled and seeded tomatoes
    1/2 cup chopped cilantro
    Salt and pepper

    Grilling the vegetables first gives another great layer of flavor, however, it is not absolutely necessary. Just omit that step and cook the vegetable right in the pan. In a skillet on high heat saute the vegetables except the tomatoes in the olive oil for 2 minutes. Add the stock and butter and cook until mixture reduces by half. Add tomatoes and seasoning and serve with the warm snake ?nuggets? on top.

    Yield: 4 servings
    Prep Time: 30 minutes
    Cook Time: 10 minutes
    Difficulty: Medium

  4. No Slashdot icon! by wiredog · · Score: 5, Interesting
    Something must be done! I request, nay, demand, that the Fearsome Slashdot Cabal develop a Python Icon immediately!

    Some sort of snake, perhaps...

    1. Re:No Slashdot icon! by Sloppy · · Score: 4, Interesting
      It's not just a Slashdot thing, either. Even outside the scope of Slashdot, Python surprisingly doesn't seem to have a logo or mascot or anything. You would think that over the years, some artisitic person would have drawn a cute (Tux-like cute, if you know what I mean) snake or something, and everyone would have latched onto it. But it hasn't happened. Oh sure, I have seen some snakes here and there, but none of them have been widely adopted.

      If someone pulls it off, they might become famous. ;-)

      --
      As copyright owner of this comment, I authorize everyone to defeat any technological measure which limits access to it.
  5. Re:Swapping Values Without Using a Temporary Varia by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    a,b = b,a

  6. Re:asdf by Phoukka · · Score: 4, Informative

    Much more to the point, Red Hat 7.3 has 1.5.2 as "python", but has 2.1 (IIRC) as "python2". And Red Hat 8 has 2.2.1 as its "python". And, as you said, it is eminently possible to download and compile the latest version, though you do have to be careful that you link in 2.2.x as "python2" rather than "python" on Red Hat 7.3, or many of the system apps break (up2date comes to mind...).

  7. 2.2 for RedHat by redfenix · · Score: 5, Informative

    This book should have RedHat customers hammering at the gates of Raleigh, demanding the power of iterators and list comprehensions that their SuSE counterparts already enjoy by default; it demonstrates the superiority of Python 2.2.* over 1.5.2 in great detail.

    Of course, installing a new version of Python in RedHat is pretty painless, download the rpm and install it. You can find them here.

    --
    "It's a very tangled subsystem." --Windows kernel guru
  8. Try Ruby! by Hornsby · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I used to code in Python, and now I use Ruby in it's place. I've found it to be just as readable but more terse. It's also extremely consistent in the way that everything is an object. You can say things like

    5.times {|n| puts n}

    and all kinds of other crazy things. I'm not saying it's better than Python(not trying to start a flame war). I'm just saying to try it and see if you like it.

    --
    A musician without the RIAA, is like a fish without a bicycle.
    1. Re:Try Ruby! by Hornsby · · Score: 4, Informative

      The "." is needed because 5 is an object of type Fixnum. times is a method available to Fixnum objects. I used that example to demonstrate that EVERYTHING in Ruby is an object. For instance, you can do the following:

      "hello world".upcase
      "HELLO WORLD"

      Not to mention method cascading

      "hello world".upcase.reverse
      "DLROW OLLEH"

      Once you get used to having these features, it's hard to go back(to Perl that is...). There are a number of other very nice features as well. Iterators for example(which Perl 6 is going to include).

      list = ["foo", "bar", "car"]
      list.each do |elem|
      # do something with elem
      end

      For a quick walkthrough of the languages features, go here: http://rubycentral.com/book/intro.html

      I do know when I see a language which does not have an intuitive syntax or grammar.

      And what language does? Any new language requires an adjustment period. The important thing is consistency once you get over the initial learning curve. Lisp doesn't necessarily have an intuitive syntax either; however, few would argue that it's not a powerful language. The consistency of having everything represented as a list makes it's syntax extremely simple.

      --
      A musician without the RIAA, is like a fish without a bicycle.
  9. perl/python phrasebook by mcc · · Score: 5, Informative

    Try this site.. it's basically a "phrasebook" that shows common tasks being done in both perl and python. It's a great introduction to the language, and it helps a lot in terms of getting the python-idiom-y ways to do lots of commonthings embedded into your head.

    It isn't *very* long, and doesn't go too deep, and the formatting's not great, but it's a quick read, and if it doesn't fit your needs there's always that book Snowbike recommended.

    At present I think my python programming is too formal

    The catch about the funkiness of python's syntax is not that it demands formalism; it's just that it demands you will do only one thing per line. It's kind of hard to get yourself thinking this way, and it's really irritating to write code this way (i never write python without pining for a ?: construct, a single-line version of "except", or a less-crippled lambda construct).

    The thing is, though, that obeying python's rule basically comes down to seperating each expression into unnecessary variables, and mercilessly abstracting all those potentially-repeated 'common tasks' that somehow always seem to wind up taking five lines in python into functions. However, i find when i write perl, most of the time i spend revising code is spent going back and doing the above two things-- splitting overly-complex expressions into subvariables, pulling out bits of code and making them subexpressions. Python just forces you to do these things ahead of time, and you benefit greatly in the long run. (Whether that's worth all the irritation, though, i don't know :))

  10. Language Development Speed by Bouncings · · Score: 4, Informative
    Actually, the rapid change in the language is pretty new. For the longest time, 1.5.x was stable, and years before 1.4.x was mostly the same. Then, 1.6 happened. Python hit some kind of critical mass where Guido decided to more or less open the flood gates of third party suggestions (called PEP's in Pythonlore). Another key factor was the rapid increase of XML libraries and concerns, as well as other quickly changing technologies.

    The author of this article doesn't mention it, but many Python programmers are upset with the rapid changes in the language, and it is very contrary to Python's history and philosophy. It looks like for now though, Python is slowing back down after implementing a new system of object orientation that really implements each variable/function/whatnot as an object. 2.2, hopefully, is here to stay for a while.

    --
    -- Ken Kinder ken@_nospam_kenkinder.com http://kenkinder.com/
  11. Re:Python icon by TeknoHog · · Score: 5, Funny
    > If someone pulls it off, they might become famous. ;-)

    Yeah, like the guy who drew Tux, whatshisname..

    --
    Escher was the first MC and Giger invented the HR department.
  12. Slashdot topics by fm6 · · Score: 5, Insightful
    Slashdot icons are just designators for Slashdot topics, and these desperately need an overhaul. There are topics for companies that no longer exist (Digital, Compaq, LinuxCare; Be should probably be renamed "BeOS"); topics that are extremely low volume and should really be folded into other topics (Comdex, E+, Englightenment), topics that are just plain redundant (Bugs, Linux Business), topics that we need only because they're part of a more general topic we don't have (we have America Online, but no ISP topic; topics for various Desktops, but no general Desktop topic; topics for specific Linux distros, but no Distro topic). And why on earth do we have ten specialized Apple topics?

    Rather than a new topic for Python, I'd rather see a Scripting topic. So, yeah, that means no cute Python icon, but it does put all the scripting issues in one place for people to select or ignore.

  13. Re:An indictment of the Python programming languag by Da+VinMan · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Aside from the point about lack of declaration of variables, you're points against Python all reduce down to syntax issues.

    It's a good thing you posted AC. I wouldn't want to take credit for that dreck either.

    Oh, and if Python were only two years old, then I wouldn't have been able to do the Python project I did for a client when I did.

    Have you even used Python? I didn't think so. I guess that if you want to be cynical and condescending about a language just because you're a self-appointed language guru, then please go ahead. But I think we would all prefer that you keep your opinion under wraps until it is informed and rational.

    --
    Please mod this post only if you think others should/n't read this. I have enough ego^H^H^Hkarma. Thanks!