Path: csiph.com!eternal-september.org!feeder.eternal-september.org!newsfeed.kamp.net!newsfeed.kamp.net!feeder1.cambriumusenet.nl!feed.tweak.nl!194.109.133.81.MISMATCH!newsfeed.xs4all.nl!newsfeed7.news.xs4all.nl!nzpost1.xs4all.net!not-for-mail Return-Path: X-Original-To: python-list@python.org Delivered-To: python-list@mail.python.org X-Spam-Status: OK 0.001 X-Spam-Evidence: '*H*': 1.00; '*S*': 0.00; 'subject:Python': 0.05; 'from:addr:yahoo.co.uk': 0.05; 'mrab': 0.05; 'that?': 0.05; 'bounds.': 0.09; 'indexes': 0.09; 'negative.': 0.09; 'received:80.91': 0.09; 'received:80.91.229': 0.09; 'received:gmane.org': 0.09; 'received:list': 0.09; 'bound,': 0.16; 'bounds': 0.16; 'reason.': 0.16; 'received:80.91.229.3': 0.16; 'received:plane.gmane.org': 0.16; 'wrote:': 0.16; 'language': 0.19; '>>>': 0.20; '2015': 0.20; 'lawrence': 0.22; 'pascal': 0.22; 'sep': 0.22; 'programming': 0.22; 'am,': 0.23; 'specified': 0.23; "haven't": 0.24; 'header:In-Reply-To:1': 0.24; 'header:User- Agent:1': 0.26; 'example': 0.26; 'header:X-Complaints-To:1': 0.26; 'rest': 0.26; 'question': 0.27; 'specify': 0.27; 'idea': 0.28; 'allows': 0.30; 'e.g.': 0.30; "i'd": 0.31; 'language.': 0.32; 'languages': 0.34; 'tue,': 0.34; 'could': 0.35; 'but': 0.36; 'there': 0.36; 'to:addr:python-list': 0.36; 'subject:: ': 0.37; 'say': 0.37; 'received:org': 0.37; 'why': 0.39; 'does': 0.39; 'to:addr:python.org': 0.40; 'mark': 0.40; 'some': 0.40; 'charset:windows-1252': 0.62; 'skip:n 10': 0.62; 'different': 0.63; 'our': 0.64; '>>>>>': 0.66; 'upper': 0.76; '99.9%': 0.84; 'pythonistas,': 0.84 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ To: python-list@python.org From: Mark Lawrence Subject: Re: Python handles globals badly. Date: Wed, 9 Sep 2015 00:32:37 +0100 References: <86fa425b-d660-45ba-b0f7-3beebdec8e14@googlegroups.com> <55EE9EEC.1060907@rece.vub.ac.be> <55EF1DD9.8080705@mrabarnett.plus.com> <55EF6D3B.6030106@mrabarnett.plus.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: 195.147.66.69 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.2.0 In-Reply-To: <55EF6D3B.6030106@mrabarnett.plus.com> X-BeenThere: python-list@python.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.20+ Precedence: list List-Id: General discussion list for the Python programming language List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Newsgroups: comp.lang.python Message-ID: Lines: 43 NNTP-Posting-Host: 2001:888:2000:d::a6 X-Trace: 1441755190 news.xs4all.nl 23804 [2001:888:2000:d::a6]:38002 X-Complaints-To: abuse@xs4all.nl Xref: csiph.com comp.lang.python:96150 On 09/09/2015 00:20, MRAB wrote: > On 2015-09-08 23:41, Mark Lawrence wrote: >> On 08/09/2015 18:41, MRAB wrote: >>> On 2015-09-08 15:31, Ian Kelly wrote: >>>> On Tue, Sep 8, 2015 at 5:55 AM, Vladimir Ignatov >>>> wrote: >>>>>>> I had some experience programming in Lua and I'd say - that language >>>>>>> is bad example to follow. >>>>>>> Indexes start with 1 (I am not kidding) >>>>>> >>>>>> What is so bad about that? >>>>> >>>>> It's different from the rest 99.9% of languages for no particular >>>>> reason. >>>> >>>> It's not "different from the rest 99.9% of languages". There are many >>>> languages that use 1-based indexing, e.g. Matlab, Pascal, Fortran. >>>> >>> In Pascal you specify both the lower and the upper bounds. >>> >> >> I vaguely recall that in CORAL66/250 you specified both bounds and the >> lower bound could be negative. Do other languages allow this or does >> the lower bound always have to be positive? >> > If you're allowed to specify both bounds, why would you be forbidden > from negative ones? I haven't the faintest idea :) > > A better question would be whether there's a language that allows you > to specify a lower bound, but insists that it's non-negative. > Ditto :) -- My fellow Pythonistas, ask not what our language can do for you, ask what you can do for our language. Mark Lawrence