Path: csiph.com!usenet.pasdenom.info!dedibox.gegeweb.org!gegeweb.eu!nntpfeed.proxad.net!proxad.net!feeder1-2.proxad.net!usenet-fr.net!de-l.enfer-du-nord.net!feeder1.enfer-du-nord.net!feeds.phibee-telecom.net!newsfeed.xs4all.nl!newsfeed5.news.xs4all.nl!xs4all!post.news.xs4all.nl!not-for-mail
Return-Path: <jamie@kode5.net>
X-Original-To: python-list@python.org
Delivered-To: python-list@mail.python.org
X-Spam-Status: OK 0.029
X-Spam-Evidence: '*H*': 0.94; '*S*': 0.00; 'things.': 0.05; '21,': 0.07; 'semantics': 0.09; 'sep': 0.09; 'thread,': 0.09; 'illusion': 0.16; 'record,': 0.16; 'spotted': 0.16; 'subject:compare': 0.16; 'wrote:': 0.17; '>>>': 0.18; 'appears': 0.18; 'posts': 0.23; "haven't": 0.23; 'idea': 0.24; 'non': 0.24; 'header:In-Reply- To:1': 0.25; 'header:User-Agent:1': 0.26; 'wrote': 0.26; 'subject:list': 0.28; 'post': 0.28; "d'aprano": 0.29; 'steven': 0.29; 'them?': 0.29; 'probably': 0.29; "i'm": 0.29; 'maybe': 0.29; 'fri,': 0.30; 'lists': 0.31; 'code': 0.31; 'point': 0.31; 'not.': 0.32; 'sat': 0.33; 'to:addr:python-list': 0.33; 'that,': 0.34; 'programming.': 0.35; 'especially': 0.35; 'pm,': 0.35; 'sometimes': 0.35; 'but': 0.36; 'functional': 0.36; 'charset:us- ascii': 0.36; 'enough': 0.36; 'two': 0.37; 'ones': 0.37; 'quite': 0.37; 'subject:: ': 0.38; 'to:addr:python.org': 0.39; 'where': 0.40; 'header:Received:5': 0.40; 'think': 0.40; 'content- disposition:inline': 0.60; 'different': 0.63; 'making': 0.64; 'here': 0.65; 'reply': 0.66; 'obvious': 0.71; '7:25': 0.84; 'coherent': 0.84; 'mistakes,': 0.84; 'received:80.229': 0.84
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at osx.kode5.net
Date: Sat, 22 Sep 2012 08:08:17 +0100
From: Jamie Paul Griffin <jamie@kode5.net>
To: python-list@python.org
Subject: Re: Functional way to compare things inside a list
References: <mailman.990.1348213606.27098.python-list@python.org> <ffmti9-elv.ln1@satorlaser.homedns.org> <48191878-3a0e-4733-a426-55b6981c471d@googlegroups.com> <mailman.1040.1348260628.27098.python-list@python.org> <505d138e$0$29981$c3e8da3$5496439d@news.astraweb.com> <CALwzid=fUCg7F1PKJdCnx4OCRW1WzeQ+pHPmJ8AnNcgL=x72FA@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <CALwzid=fUCg7F1PKJdCnx4OCRW1WzeQ+pHPmJ8AnNcgL=x72FA@mail.gmail.com>
x-operating-system: Darwin 11.4.0 x86_64
x-pgp-fingerprint: A4B9 E875 A18C 6E11 F46D  B788 BEE6 1251 1D31 DC38
x-pgp-key: 1D31DC38
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15)
X-BeenThere: python-list@python.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: General discussion list for the Python programming language <python-list.python.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-list>, <mailto:python-list-request@python.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-list/>
List-Post: <mailto:python-list@python.org>
List-Help: <mailto:python-list-request@python.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list>, <mailto:python-list-request@python.org?subject=subscribe>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.python
Message-ID: <mailman.1065.1348297709.27098.python-list@python.org>
Lines: 28
NNTP-Posting-Host: 2001:888:2000:d::a6
X-Trace: 1348297709 news.xs4all.nl 6906 [2001:888:2000:d::a6]:51989
X-Complaints-To: abuse@xs4all.nl
Xref: csiph.com comp.lang.python:29724

[ Ian Kelly wrote on Sat 22.Sep'12 at  0:22:43 -0600 ]

> On Fri, Sep 21, 2012 at 7:25 PM, Steven D'Aprano
> <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> wrote:
> > On Fri, 21 Sep 2012 14:49:55 -0600, Ian Kelly wrote:
> >
> >> On Fri, Sep 21, 2012 at 1:54 PM, 88888 Dihedral
> >> <dihedral88888@googlemail.com> wrote:
> >>> I don't think functional aspects are only marked as lazy programming.
> >>
> >> He wrote "lazy evaluation", not "lazy programming".  Two entirely
> >> different things.
> >
> >
> > For the record, the consensus here is that 88888 Dihedral is probably a
> > bot. It appears to be a pretty good bot, I haven't spotted it making any
> > egregious or obvious grammatical mistakes, but the semantics of its posts
> > don't seem quite human.
> 
> I'm aware of that, although sometimes the posts seem coherent enough
> that I think maybe it's not.  Especially the ones where it posts
> almost-working code snippets, complete with obvious typos.
> 
> Then it posts a complete non sequitur like the reply to my reply in
> this thread, and the illusion is shattered.

I find this intriguing, I had no idea bots existed to post to mailing
lists in this way. What's the point of them?