Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.lang.python > #106328
| From | Mark Lawrence <breamoreboy@yahoo.co.uk> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | comp.lang.python |
| Subject | Re: [beginner] What's wrong? |
| Date | 2016-04-03 00:58 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <mailman.381.1459641552.28225.python-list@python.org> (permalink) |
| References | (3 earlier) <ndmuc4$k4l$1@ger.gmane.org> <CAGgTfkPmCqQ4cC1o1Ov5W4GaZYJLXhREfDq+NdWL9r1Ef50QDA@mail.gmail.com> <1459571270.714249.566352882.6ADCD0CC@webmail.messagingengine.com> <CAPTjJmqtp=uhTE7FE=3mN7xZr40RCPNgxx3Zm5eLZ-7iWugDMQ@mail.gmail.com> <d2svfblmherpqkg4ffkcr3pd25im9uvtc3@4ax.com> |
On 02/04/2016 17:31, Dennis Lee Bieber wrote: > On Sat, 2 Apr 2016 19:15:36 +1100, Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> > declaimed the following: > >> On Sat, Apr 2, 2016 at 3:27 PM, Random832 <random832@fastmail.com> wrote: >>> On Fri, Apr 1, 2016, at 19:29, Michael Selik wrote: >>>> Humans have always had trouble with this, in many contexts. I remember >>>> being annoyed at folks saying the year 2000 was the first year of the new >>>> millennium, rather than 2001. They'd forgotten the Gregorian calendar >>>> starts from AD 1. >>> >>> Naturally, this means the first millennium was only 999 years long, and >>> all subsequent millennia were 1000 years long. (Whereas "millennium" is >>> defined as the set of all years of a given era for a given integer k >>> where y // 1000 == k. How else would you define it?) >>> >>> And if you want to get technical, the gregorian calendar starts from >>> some year no earlier than 1582, depending on the country. The year >>> numbering system has little to do with the calendar type - your >>> assertion in fact regards the BC/AD year numbering system, which was >>> invented by Bede. >>> >>> The astronomical year-numbering system, which does contain a year zero >>> (and uses negative numbers rather than a reverse-numbered "BC" era), and >>> is incidentally used by ISO 8601, was invented by Jacques Cassini in the >>> 17th century. >>> >> >> Are you sure? Because I'm pretty sure these folks were already talking about BC. > > Bede's BC/AD goes back to circa 700AD. It is the use of negative years > for astronomical counting that is circa 1650AD >> >> http://xenohistorian.faithweb.com/holybook/quotes/YK.html > > And that I'll take as something suited for the first of April... It's > almost on par with an old story (in Asimov's I think) on why the pyramids > were behind schedule -- among other things, the pile of government mandated > documentation, on clay tablets of course, was becoming larger than the > pyramid being built; the older records (on the bottom of the stack) were > decomposing from the pressure, etc. If I recall, they discover cuneiform as > more condense than hieroglyphics, and then learn of papyrus/ink (but then > have to support an entire industry of workers to transcribe the old clay > tablets...) > > Here we go again, yet another completely useless thread that is irrelevant to the Python programming language. Hardly surprising that the bots don't bother any more. Are any of the bots still alive? -- My fellow Pythonistas, ask not what our language can do for you, ask what you can do for our language. Mark Lawrence
Back to comp.lang.python | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
[beginner] What's wrong? Michael Okuntsov <okuntsov.mikhail@yandex.ru> - 2016-04-02 03:48 +0600
Re: [beginner] What's wrong? Michael Okuntsov <okuntsov.mikhail@yandex.ru> - 2016-04-02 04:10 +0600
Re: [beginner] What's wrong? sohcahtoa82@gmail.com - 2016-04-01 15:44 -0700
Re: [beginner] What's wrong? Random832 <random832@fastmail.com> - 2016-04-02 00:27 -0400
Re: [beginner] What's wrong? Michael Selik <michael.selik@gmail.com> - 2016-04-02 05:36 +0000
Re: [beginner] What's wrong? William Ray Wing <wrw@mac.com> - 2016-04-02 00:54 -0400
Re: [beginner] What's wrong? Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2016-04-02 19:15 +1100
Re: [beginner] What's wrong? Michael Selik <michael.selik@gmail.com> - 2016-04-02 14:48 +0000
Re: [beginner] What's wrong? Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2016-04-03 01:55 +1100
Re: [beginner] What's wrong? Marko Rauhamaa <marko@pacujo.net> - 2016-04-02 18:07 +0300
Re: [beginner] What's wrong? Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2016-04-03 02:36 +1100
Re: [beginner] What's wrong? Steven D'Aprano <steve@pearwood.info> - 2016-04-03 02:06 +1000
Re: [beginner] What's wrong? Marko Rauhamaa <marko@pacujo.net> - 2016-04-02 19:44 +0300
Re: [beginner] What's wrong? Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2016-04-02 19:12 +0200
Re: [beginner] What's wrong? Rustom Mody <rustompmody@gmail.com> - 2016-04-02 10:28 -0700
Re: [beginner] What's wrong? Marko Rauhamaa <marko@pacujo.net> - 2016-04-02 21:43 +0300
Re: [beginner] What's wrong? Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2016-04-03 13:47 +0200
Re: [beginner] What's wrong? Rustom Mody <rustompmody@gmail.com> - 2016-04-03 07:30 -0700
Re: [beginner] What's wrong? Dan Sommers <dan@tombstonezero.net> - 2016-04-03 15:25 +0000
Re: [beginner] What's wrong? Rustom Mody <rustompmody@gmail.com> - 2016-04-03 08:39 -0700
Re: [beginner] What's wrong? Dan Sommers <dan@tombstonezero.net> - 2016-04-03 16:22 +0000
Re: [beginner] What's wrong? Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2016-04-04 02:44 +1000
Re: [beginner] What's wrong? Rustom Mody <rustompmody@gmail.com> - 2016-04-03 10:18 -0700
Re: [beginner] What's wrong? Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2016-04-04 03:35 +1000
Re: [beginner] What's wrong? Dan Sommers <dan@tombstonezero.net> - 2016-04-03 18:26 +0000
Re: [beginner] What's wrong? Rustom Mody <rustompmody@gmail.com> - 2016-04-03 08:46 -0700
Re: [beginner] What's wrong? Larry Martell <larry.martell@gmail.com> - 2016-04-03 11:55 -0400
Re: [beginner] What's wrong? Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2016-04-04 01:53 +1000
Re: [beginner] What's wrong? Rustom Mody <rustompmody@gmail.com> - 2016-04-03 09:49 -0700
Re: [beginner] What's wrong? Dan Sommers <dan@tombstonezero.net> - 2016-04-03 18:32 +0000
Re: [beginner] What's wrong? Dan Sommers <dan@tombstonezero.net> - 2016-04-03 16:07 +0000
Re: [beginner] What's wrong? Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2016-04-06 21:56 +0200
Unicode normalisation [was Re: [beginner] What's wrong?] Steven D'Aprano <steve@pearwood.info> - 2016-04-07 11:37 +1000
Re: Unicode normalisation [was Re: [beginner] What's wrong?] Marko Rauhamaa <marko@pacujo.net> - 2016-04-07 09:36 +0300
Re: Unicode normalisation [was Re: [beginner] What's wrong?] Peter Pearson <pkpearson@nowhere.invalid> - 2016-04-07 16:51 +0000
Re: Unicode normalisation [was Re: [beginner] What's wrong?] Rustom Mody <rustompmody@gmail.com> - 2016-04-07 21:43 -0700
Re: Unicode normalisation [was Re: [beginner] What's wrong?] Rustom Mody <rustompmody@gmail.com> - 2016-04-07 21:47 -0700
Re: Unicode normalisation [was Re: [beginner] What's wrong?] Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2016-04-08 14:54 +1000
Re: Unicode normalisation [was Re: [beginner] What's wrong?] Rustom Mody <rustompmody@gmail.com> - 2016-04-08 10:51 -0700
Re: Unicode normalisation [was Re: [beginner] What's wrong?] Steven D'Aprano <steve@pearwood.info> - 2016-04-08 16:00 +1000
Re: Unicode normalisation [was Re: [beginner] What's wrong?] Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2016-04-08 16:13 +1000
Re: Unicode normalisation [was Re: [beginner] What's wrong?] Peter Pearson <pkpearson@nowhere.invalid> - 2016-04-08 17:21 +0000
Re: Unicode normalisation [was Re: [beginner] What's wrong?] Marko Rauhamaa <marko@pacujo.net> - 2016-04-08 20:44 +0300
Re: Unicode normalisation [was Re: [beginner] What's wrong?] Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2016-04-09 03:50 +1000
Re: Unicode normalisation [was Re: [beginner] What's wrong?] Peter Pearson <pkpearson@nowhere.invalid> - 2016-04-08 18:03 +0000
Re: Unicode normalisation [was Re: [beginner] What's wrong?] Rustom Mody <rustompmody@gmail.com> - 2016-04-08 11:17 -0700
Re: Unicode normalisation [was Re: [beginner] What's wrong?] Rustom Mody <rustompmody@gmail.com> - 2016-04-08 11:20 -0700
Re: Unicode normalisation [was Re: [beginner] What's wrong?] Rustom Mody <rustompmody@gmail.com> - 2016-04-08 11:04 -0700
Re: Unicode normalisation [was Re: [beginner] What's wrong?] Dennis Lee Bieber <wlfraed@ix.netcom.com> - 2016-04-08 20:20 -0400
Re: Unicode normalisation [was Re: [beginner] What's wrong?] alister <alister.ware@ntlworld.com> - 2016-04-09 08:30 +0000
Re: Unicode normalisation [was Re: [beginner] What's wrong?] Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2016-04-09 14:43 +0100
Re: Unicode normalisation [was Re: [beginner] What's wrong?] Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2016-04-09 15:34 +0100
Re: Unicode normalisation [was Re: [beginner] What's wrong?] Dennis Lee Bieber <wlfraed@ix.netcom.com> - 2016-04-09 14:30 -0400
Re: Unicode normalisation [was Re: [beginner] What's wrong?] Rustom Mody <rustompmody@gmail.com> - 2016-04-09 09:08 -0700
Re: Unicode normalisation [was Re: [beginner] What's wrong?] Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2016-04-09 19:27 +0100
Re: Unicode normalisation [was Re: [beginner] What's wrong?] Mark Lawrence <breamoreboy@yahoo.co.uk> - 2016-04-09 20:25 +0100
Re: Unicode normalisation [was Re: [beginner] What's wrong?] Stephen Hansen <me@ixokai.io> - 2016-04-09 12:45 -0700
Re: Unicode normalisation [was Re: [beginner] What's wrong?] Gregory Ewing <greg.ewing@canterbury.ac.nz> - 2016-04-10 20:35 +1200
QWERTY was not designed to intentionally slow typists down (was: Unicode normalisation [was Re: [beginner] What's wrong?]) Ben Finney <ben+python@benfinney.id.au> - 2016-04-09 10:43 +1000
Re: QWERTY was not designed to intentionally slow typists down (was: Unicode normalisation [was Re: [beginner] What's wrong?]) Steven D'Aprano <steve@pearwood.info> - 2016-04-09 13:28 +1000
Re: QWERTY was not designed to intentionally slow typists down (was: Unicode normalisation [was Re: [beginner] What's wrong?]) Random832 <random832@fastmail.com> - 2016-04-09 11:44 -0400
Re: QWERTY was not designed to intentionally slow typists down (was: Unicode normalisation [was Re: [beginner] What's wrong?]) Random832 <random832@fastmail.com> - 2016-04-09 11:53 -0400
Re: QWERTY was not designed to intentionally slow typists down (was: Unicode normalisation [was Re: [beginner] What's wrong?]) Steven D'Aprano <steve@pearwood.info> - 2016-04-18 11:39 +1000
Re: QWERTY was not designed to intentionally slow typists down (was: Unicode normalisation [was Re: [beginner] What's wrong?]) Random832 <random832@fastmail.com> - 2016-04-17 22:01 -0400
Re: QWERTY was not designed to intentionally slow typists down (was: Unicode normalisation [was Re: [beginner] What's wrong?]) Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2016-04-18 17:21 +1000
Re: QWERTY was not designed to intentionally slow typists down Gregory Ewing <greg.ewing@canterbury.ac.nz> - 2016-04-18 21:17 +1200
Re: QWERTY was not designed to intentionally slow typists down (was: Unicode normalisation [was Re: [beginner] What's wrong?]) Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2016-04-18 12:09 +1000
Re: QWERTY was not designed to intentionally slow typists down Michael Torrie <torriem@gmail.com> - 2016-04-17 21:50 -0600
Re: QWERTY was not designed to intentionally slow typists down (was: Unicode normalisation [was Re: [beginner] What's wrong?]) Dennis Lee Bieber <wlfraed@ix.netcom.com> - 2016-04-18 00:06 -0400
Re: QWERTY was not designed to intentionally slow typists down (was: Unicode normalisation [was Re: [beginner] What's wrong?]) Dennis Lee Bieber <wlfraed@ix.netcom.com> - 2016-04-09 14:52 -0400
Re: QWERTY was not designed to intentionally slow typists down (was: Unicode normalisation [was Re: [beginner] What's wrong?]) pyotr filipivich <phamp@mindspring.com> - 2016-04-09 20:09 -0700
Re: QWERTY was not designed to intentionally slow typists down (was: Unicode normalisation [was Re: [beginner] What's wrong?]) Ian Kelly <ian.g.kelly@gmail.com> - 2016-04-10 07:43 -0600
Re: QWERTY was not designed to intentionally slow typists down (was: Unicode normalisation [was Re: [beginner] What's wrong?]) pyotr filipivich <phamp@mindspring.com> - 2016-04-10 19:14 -0700
Re: QWERTY was not designed to intentionally slow typists down Mark Lawrence <breamoreboy@yahoo.co.uk> - 2016-04-09 20:13 +0100
Re: QWERTY was not designed to intentionally slow typists down alister <alister.ware@ntlworld.com> - 2016-04-09 20:22 +0000
Re: QWERTY was not designed to intentionally slow typists down Mark Lawrence <breamoreboy@yahoo.co.uk> - 2016-04-09 22:23 +0100
Re: QWERTY was not designed to intentionally slow typists down Tim Golden <mail@timgolden.me.uk> - 2016-04-09 22:51 +0100
Re: QWERTY was not designed to intentionally slow typists down Tim Golden <mail@timgolden.me.uk> - 2016-04-09 20:25 +0100
Re: QWERTY was not designed to intentionally slow typists down Mark Lawrence <breamoreboy@yahoo.co.uk> - 2016-04-09 20:36 +0100
Re: QWERTY was not designed to intentionally slow typists down Ethan Furman <ethan@stoneleaf.us> - 2016-04-09 14:33 -0700
RE: [E] QWERTY was not designed to intentionally slow typists down (was: Unicode normalisation [was Re: [beginner] What's wrong?]) "Coll-Barth, Michael" <Michael.Coll-Barth@VerizonWireless.com> - 2016-04-09 13:31 -0400
Re: Unicode normalisation [was Re: [beginner] What's wrong?] Steven D'Aprano <steve@pearwood.info> - 2016-04-09 04:44 +1000
Re: Unicode normalisation [was Re: [beginner] What's wrong?] Marko Rauhamaa <marko@pacujo.net> - 2016-04-08 21:55 +0300
Re: Unicode normalisation [was Re: [beginner] What's wrong?] Gregory Ewing <greg.ewing@canterbury.ac.nz> - 2016-04-10 21:25 +1200
Re: [beginner] What's wrong? Steven D'Aprano <steve@pearwood.info> - 2016-04-03 09:49 +1000
Re: [beginner] What's wrong? Mark Lawrence <breamoreboy@yahoo.co.uk> - 2016-04-03 01:26 +0100
Re: [beginner] What's wrong? Rustom Mody <rustompmody@gmail.com> - 2016-04-03 07:52 -0700
Re: [beginner] What's wrong? Michael Okuntsov <okuntsov.mikhail@yandex.ru> - 2016-04-03 22:24 +0600
Re: [beginner] What's wrong? Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2016-04-04 02:28 +1000
Re: [beginner] What's wrong? Gregory Ewing <greg.ewing@canterbury.ac.nz> - 2016-04-03 16:57 +1200
Re: [beginner] What's wrong? Steven D'Aprano <steve@pearwood.info> - 2016-04-03 15:34 +1000
Re: [beginner] What's wrong? Terry Reedy <tjreedy@udel.edu> - 2016-04-02 15:07 -0400
Re: [beginner] What's wrong? Marko Rauhamaa <marko@pacujo.net> - 2016-04-02 22:36 +0300
Re: [beginner] What's wrong? Michael Selik <michael.selik@gmail.com> - 2016-04-02 21:42 +0000
Re: [beginner] What's wrong? Steven D'Aprano <steve@pearwood.info> - 2016-04-03 10:48 +1000
Re: [beginner] What's wrong? Mark Lawrence <breamoreboy@yahoo.co.uk> - 2016-04-03 02:04 +0100
Re: [beginner] What's wrong? alister <alister.ware@ntlworld.com> - 2016-04-03 12:37 +0000
Re: [beginner] What's wrong? Terry Reedy <tjreedy@udel.edu> - 2016-04-02 14:59 -0400
Re: [beginner] What's wrong? Gregory Ewing <greg.ewing@canterbury.ac.nz> - 2016-04-03 16:43 +1200
Re: [beginner] What's wrong? Dennis Lee Bieber <wlfraed@ix.netcom.com> - 2016-04-02 12:31 -0400
Re: [beginner] What's wrong? Mark Lawrence <breamoreboy@yahoo.co.uk> - 2016-04-03 00:58 +0100
Re: [beginner] What's wrong? sohcahtoa82@gmail.com - 2016-04-08 15:59 -0700
Re: [beginner] What's wrong? Mark Lawrence <breamoreboy@yahoo.co.uk> - 2016-04-09 00:07 +0100
Re: [beginner] What's wrong? Michael Torrie <torriem@gmail.com> - 2016-04-02 16:49 -0600
Re: [beginner] What's wrong? Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2016-04-03 10:12 +0200
Re: [beginner] What's wrong? Mark Lawrence <breamoreboy@yahoo.co.uk> - 2016-04-04 15:04 +0100
Re: [beginner] What's wrong? BartC <bc@freeuk.com> - 2016-04-04 15:51 +0100
From email addresses sometimes strange on this list - was Re: [beginner] What's wrong? Michael Torrie <torriem@gmail.com> - 2016-04-04 16:55 -0600
Re: From email addresses sometimes strange on this list - was Re: [beginner] What's wrong? Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2016-04-05 08:58 +1000
Re: From email addresses sometimes strange on this list - was Re: [beginner] What's wrong? Michael Torrie <torriem@gmail.com> - 2016-04-04 17:19 -0600
csiph-web