wmsky33 (1) [Avatar] Offline
#1
So far enjoying the book. Haven't gotten too far but noticed a few mistakes. Are you still on schedule for a Dec 09 release?


The #A, #B, etc annotation style is used inconsistently. Sometimes, it is used for both command and result, sometimes only result, sometimes it's bold sometimes not.

p18:

Python’s four number types are: integers, floats, and complex numbers:
-- only 3 types are listed, although previously you also mentioned long integers

#B Integer division with // results in turncation.
-- truncation

#C Integers are of unlimited precision.
-- aren't only long integers of unlimited precision?


p19:

>>> x[2] #A
'third' <<< missing #A here >>>

>>> x[1:-1] #B <<< should be #C >>>

>>> x[-2:] #D
['third', 'fourth'] <<< #D supposed to be here is below the table >>>

#C Obtain a "slice" using [m:n], where m is the starting point and n is the ending point (see table below). <<< table is above, not below >>>


I would like to see a better explanation of addressing elements in a sequence. The table depicting a list and it's indices hints at it, by showing that the address is not the element, but doesn't really explain it - why does x[-1] return ['fourth'], but x[2:-1] only return ['third'] and not ['third', 'fourth']. Elements are always retrieved from left to right and slices stop at the 2nd address, which is before the element at that address. Maybe just explain it, as someone previously mentioned, that the first address is inclusive, but the 2nd is not. I think this could be a point of confusion to some people new to programming.
naomi.ceder (134) [Avatar] Offline
#2
Re: Errata
Thanks for the feedback and sorry I took so long to respond - the automatic watches on this forum aren't working correctly.

Anyway, yes, we are still on schedule for a Dec 09 or Jan 10 release. I'm told things are moving along, but I personally don't know enough to be more specific.

As to the points you mention, I think the points on p18 have all been addressed - basically Python 3 only has an integer type, no long, and that integer type (like the old long) has unlimited precision (or size). So we've removed reference to 'long'.

The proof-readers have fixed the #A, #B, etc according to Manning's current style guide. Those inconsistencies were in the original edition, which was one of the first to use that style of annotation.

The p19 issues have also been fixed.

As to the list explanation, I did tinker with it a bit, in response to comments like yours.

Thanks again for the note,

Cheers,
Vern

Message was edited by:
vernon.ceder