Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]


Groups > comp.lang.python > #42191

Re: flaming vs accuracy [was Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3]

Path csiph.com!usenet.pasdenom.info!gegeweb.org!de-l.enfer-du-nord.net!feeder2.enfer-du-nord.net!feeds.phibee-telecom.net!newsfeed.xs4all.nl!newsfeed2.news.xs4all.nl!xs4all!post.news.xs4all.nl!not-for-mail
Return-Path <ethan@stoneleaf.us>
X-Original-To python-list@python.org
Delivered-To python-list@mail.python.org
X-Spam-Status OK 0.009
X-Spam-Evidence '*H*': 0.98; '*S*': 0.00; 'python,': 0.02; 'subject:Python': 0.06; 'correct.': 0.07; 'definitions': 0.07; 'definitions.': 0.07; 'welcome.': 0.07; 'arguments,': 0.09; 'from:addr:ethan': 0.09; 'from:addr:stoneleaf.us': 0.09; 'from:name:ethan furman': 0.09; 'handful': 0.09; 'message- id:@stoneleaf.us': 0.09; 'mind,': 0.09; 'received:184.172': 0.09; 'received:gator410.hostgator.com': 0.09; 'subject: [': 0.09; 'warn': 0.09; '~ethan~': 0.09; '*do': 0.16; 'behave': 0.16; 'behaviour.': 0.16; 'fits': 0.16; 'fluency': 0.16; 'instigate': 0.16; 'posters': 0.16; 's/he': 0.16; 'spammers': 0.16; 'subject: \n ': 0.16; 'think.': 0.16; 'troll': 0.16; 'language': 0.16; 'wrote:': 0.18; 'wed,': 0.18; 'trying': 0.19; 'verbal': 0.19; 'not,': 0.20; 'fit': 0.20; 'saying': 0.22; 'header:User-Agent:1': 0.23; '(such': 0.24; 'logical': 0.24; 'helpful': 0.24; 'posts': 0.26; 'subject:/': 0.26; 'defined': 0.27; 'header:In-Reply-To:1': 0.27; 'point': 0.28; 'rest': 0.29; 'am,': 0.29; 'errors': 0.30; 'said,': 0.30; 'waste': 0.30; '-0700,': 0.31; 'are.': 0.31; 'assert': 0.31; 'continually': 0.31; "d'aprano": 0.31; 'helpful.': 0.31; 'steven': 0.31; 'them?': 0.31; 'values.': 0.31; 'anyone': 0.31; 'compatible': 0.32; 'themselves': 0.32; 'says': 0.33; 'community': 0.33; 'everyone': 0.33; 'whom': 0.33; 'sense': 0.34; 'agree': 0.35; 'no,': 0.35; 'but': 0.35; 'there': 0.35; 'grateful': 0.36; 'words,': 0.36; "didn't": 0.36; 'charset:us- ascii': 0.36; 'should': 0.36; 'too': 0.37; 'clear': 0.37; 'subject:]': 0.38; 'whatever': 0.38; 'to:addr:python-list': 0.38; 'pm,': 0.38; 'anything': 0.39; 'to:addr:python.org': 0.39; 'enough': 0.39; 'how': 0.40; 'even': 0.60; 'negative': 0.60; 'most': 0.60; 'hope': 0.61; 'full': 0.61; 'received:173': 0.61; 'course': 0.61; 'simply': 0.61; 'first': 0.61; 'such': 0.63; 'myself': 0.63; 'today': 0.64; 'skip:n 10': 0.64; 'email addr:yahoo.com': 0.64; 'our': 0.64; 'telling': 0.64; 'more': 0.64; 'due': 0.66; 'here': 0.66; 'reply': 0.66; 'believe': 0.68; 'mar': 0.68; 'opinions': 0.70; 'engage': 0.74; 'further,': 0.74; 'lack': 0.78; 'friendly,': 0.84; 'influence,': 0.84; 'liars': 0.84; 'nice,': 0.84; 'received:gateway14.websitewelcome.com': 0.84; 'subject:long': 0.84; 'tolerant': 0.84; 'unaware': 0.84; 'attitude': 0.91; 'rusi': 0.91; 'tomorrow': 0.95; 'serious': 0.97; '2013': 0.98
Date Thu, 28 Mar 2013 13:31:56 -0700
From Ethan Furman <ethan@stoneleaf.us>
User-Agent Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130106 Thunderbird/17.0.2
MIME-Version 1.0
To python-list@python.org
Subject Re: flaming vs accuracy [was Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3]
References <mailman.3703.1364248275.2939.python-list@python.org> <a52fbe9d-db14-4ed2-bb49-adfb4b56f973@k4g2000yqn.googlegroups.com> <mailman.3771.1364324590.2939.python-list@python.org> <0b779c80-4f50-4716-8c30-47755c15f304@m12g2000yqp.googlegroups.com> <kit1kg$g2u$1@ger.gmane.org> <nad-98F0A4.17004226032013@news.gmane.org> <kitdqr$4m4$2@ger.gmane.org> <nad-8CB9C0.18315026032013@news.gmane.org> <mailman.3805.1364385073.2939.python-list@python.org> <5153a12d$0$29998$c3e8da3$5496439d@news.astraweb.com> <mailman.3845.1364441182.2939.python-list@python.org> <d2cc443a-e049-42ed-abc6-66b5ea600fe7@j1g2000pbq.googlegroups.com> <5153d313$0$29984$c3e8da3$5496439d@news.astraweb.com> <0b6be19c-ff11-4e24-a7dc-fec0af411393@kw7g2000pbb.googlegroups.com> <5153f5ce$0$29984$c3e8da3$5496439d@news.astraweb.com> <fca3aa1f-86a7-4c96-88c2-893ec95ba306@googlegroups.com>
In-Reply-To <fca3aa1f-86a7-4c96-88c2-893ec95ba306@googlegroups.com>
Content-Type text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding 7bit
X-AntiAbuse This header was added to track abuse, please include it with any abuse report
X-AntiAbuse Primary Hostname - gator410.hostgator.com
X-AntiAbuse Original Domain - python.org
X-AntiAbuse Originator/Caller UID/GID - [47 12] / [47 12]
X-AntiAbuse Sender Address Domain - stoneleaf.us
X-BWhitelist no
X-Source
X-Source-Args
X-Source-Dir
X-Source-Sender ([173.12.184.235]) [173.12.184.235]:56326
X-Source-Auth ethan+stoneleaf.us
X-Email-Count 1
X-Source-Cap dG9idWs7dG9idWs7Z2F0b3I0MTAuaG9zdGdhdG9yLmNvbQ==
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.3914.1364503941.2939.python-list@python.org> (permalink)
Lines 79
NNTP-Posting-Host 2001:888:2000:d::a6
X-Trace 1364503941 news.xs4all.nl 6932 [2001:888:2000:d::a6]:57453
X-Complaints-To abuse@xs4all.nl
Xref csiph.com comp.lang.python:42191

Show key headers only | View raw


On 03/28/2013 12:54 PM, rurpy@yahoo.com wrote:
> On 03/28/2013 01:48 AM, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
>> On Wed, 27 Mar 2013 22:42:18 -0700, rusi wrote:
> For someone who delights in pointing out the logical errors
> of others you are often remarkably sloppy in your own logic.
>
> Of course language can be both helpful and excessively strong.
> That is the case when language less strong would be
> equally or more helpful.

It can also be the case when language less strong would be useless.


> Further, "liar" is both so non-objective and so pejoratively
> emotive that it is a word much more likely to be used by
> someone interested in trolling than in a serious discussion,
> so most sensible people here likely would not bite.

Non-objective?  If today poster B says X, and tomorrow poster B says s/he was unaware of X until just now, is not "liar" 
a reasonable conclusion?


>> I hope that we all agree that we want a nice, friendly, productive
>> community where everyone is welcome.
>
> I hope so too but it is likely that some people want a place
> to develop and assert some sense of influence, engage in verbal
> duels, instigate arguments, etc.  That can be true of regulars
> here as well as drive-by posters.
>
>> But some people simply cannot or
>> will not behave in ways that are compatible with those community values.
>> There are some people whom we *do not want here*
>
> In other words, everyone is NOT welcome.

Correct.  Do you not agree?


>> -- spoilers and messers,
>> vandals and spammers and cheats and liars and trolls and crackpots of all
>> sorts.
>
> Where those terms are defined by you and a handful of other
> voracious posters.  "Troll" in particular is often used to
> mean someone who disagrees with the borg mind here, or who
> says anything negative about Python, or who due attitude or
> lack of full English fluency do not express themselves in
> a sufficiently submissive way.

I cannot speak for the borg mind, but for myself a troll is anyone who continually posts rants (such as RR & XL) or who 
continuously hijacks threads to talk about their pet peeve (such as jmf).


>> We only disagree as to the best way to make it clear to them that
>> they are not welcome so long as they continue their behaviour.
>
> No, we disagree on who fits those definitions and even
> how tolerant we are to those who do fit the definitions.
> The policing that you and a handful of other self-appointed
> net-cops try to do is far more obnoxious that the original
> posts are.

I completely disagree, and I am grateful to those who bother to take the time to continually point out the errors from 
those posters and to warn newcomers that those posters should not be believed.


> Believe or not, most of the rest of us here are smart enough to
> form our own opinions of such posters without you and the other
> c.l.p truthsquad members telling us what to think.

If one of my first few posts on c.l.p netted a response from a troll I would greatly appreciate a reply from one of the 
regulars saying that was a troll so I didn't waste time trying to use whatever they said, or be concerned that the 
language I was trying to use and learn was horribly flawed.

If the "truthsquad" posts are so offensive to you, why don't you kill-file them?

--
~Ethan~

Back to comp.lang.python | Previous | NextPrevious in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread


Thread

Performance of int/long in Python 3 Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2013-03-26 08:51 +1100
  Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3 Cousin Stanley <cousinstanley@gmail.com> - 2013-03-25 23:35 +0000
    Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3 Dan Stromberg <drsalists@gmail.com> - 2013-03-25 17:12 -0700
    Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3 Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2013-03-26 17:26 +1100
      Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3 Cousin Stanley <cousinstanley@gmail.com> - 2013-03-26 13:38 +0000
        Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3 Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2013-03-27 01:08 +1100
          Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3 Cousin Stanley <cousinstanley@gmail.com> - 2013-03-26 16:41 +0000
            Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3 Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2013-03-27 03:54 +1100
            Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3 Terry Reedy <tjreedy@udel.edu> - 2013-03-26 14:24 -0400
  Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3 jmfauth <wxjmfauth@gmail.com> - 2013-03-26 11:50 -0700
    Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3 Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2013-03-27 06:03 +1100
      Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3 jmfauth <wxjmfauth@gmail.com> - 2013-03-26 13:44 -0700
        Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3 Mark Lawrence <breamoreboy@yahoo.co.uk> - 2013-03-26 20:50 +0000
          Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3 Grant Edwards <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2013-03-26 21:08 +0000
            Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3 Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2013-03-27 08:14 +1100
              Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3 Gregory Ewing <greg.ewing@canterbury.ac.nz> - 2013-03-27 12:10 +1300
                Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3 Dave Angel <davea@davea.name> - 2013-03-26 19:19 -0400
            Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3 Mark Lawrence <breamoreboy@yahoo.co.uk> - 2013-03-26 21:26 +0000
            Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3 Dave Angel <davea@davea.name> - 2013-03-26 17:28 -0400
            Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3 Dennis Lee Bieber <wlfraed@ix.netcom.com> - 2013-03-26 23:14 -0400
            Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3 jmfauth <wxjmfauth@gmail.com> - 2013-03-27 13:30 -0700
        Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3 Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2013-03-27 07:52 +1100
        Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3 Ned Deily <nad@acm.org> - 2013-03-26 17:00 -0700
          Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3 rurpy@yahoo.com - 2013-03-26 21:31 -0700
        Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3 Mark Lawrence <breamoreboy@yahoo.co.uk> - 2013-03-27 00:20 +0000
        Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3 Ned Deily <nad@acm.org> - 2013-03-26 18:31 -0700
        Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3 Mark Lawrence <breamoreboy@yahoo.co.uk> - 2013-03-27 11:51 +0000
          Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3 Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2013-03-28 01:47 +0000
            flaming vs accuracy [was Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3] Ethan Furman <ethan@stoneleaf.us> - 2013-03-27 20:18 -0700
              Re: flaming vs accuracy [was Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3] rusi <rustompmody@gmail.com> - 2013-03-27 20:49 -0700
                Re: flaming vs accuracy [was Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3] Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2013-03-28 05:20 +0000
                Re: flaming vs accuracy [was Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3] rusi <rustompmody@gmail.com> - 2013-03-27 22:42 -0700
                Re: flaming vs accuracy [was Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3] Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2013-03-28 07:48 +0000
                Re: flaming vs accuracy [was Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3] rurpy@yahoo.com - 2013-03-28 12:54 -0700
                Re: flaming vs accuracy [was Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3] Ethan Furman <ethan@stoneleaf.us> - 2013-03-28 13:31 -0700
                Re: flaming vs accuracy [was Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3] Grant Edwards <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2013-03-29 14:52 +0000
                Re: flaming vs accuracy [was Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3] Ethan Furman <ethan@stoneleaf.us> - 2013-03-29 08:51 -0700
                Re: flaming vs accuracy [was Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3] Grant Edwards <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2013-03-29 16:50 +0000
                Re: flaming vs accuracy [was Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3] rurpy@yahoo.com - 2013-03-29 14:26 -0700
                Re: flaming vs accuracy [was Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3] Ethan Furman <ethan@stoneleaf.us> - 2013-03-29 16:07 -0700
                Re: flaming vs accuracy [was Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3] jmfauth <wxjmfauth@gmail.com> - 2013-03-31 00:35 -0700
                ASCII versus non-ASCII [was Re: flaming vs accuracy [was Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3]] Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2013-03-31 08:22 +0000
                Re: flaming vs accuracy [was Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3] Mark Lawrence <breamoreboy@yahoo.co.uk> - 2013-03-31 13:55 +0100
                Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3 rusi <rustompmody@gmail.com> - 2013-03-31 22:33 -0700
                Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3 Ian Kelly <ian.g.kelly@gmail.com> - 2013-03-31 23:52 -0600
                Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3 Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2013-04-01 16:57 +1100
                Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3 Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2013-04-01 08:14 +0000
                Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3 Roy Smith <roy@panix.com> - 2013-04-01 08:15 -0400
                Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3 rusi <rustompmody@gmail.com> - 2013-04-01 06:11 -0700
                Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3 Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2013-04-01 17:02 +0000
                Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3 Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2013-04-01 17:07 +0000
                Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3 Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2013-04-02 04:20 +1100
                Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3 MRAB <python@mrabarnett.plus.com> - 2013-04-01 18:53 +0100
                Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3 jmfauth <wxjmfauth@gmail.com> - 2013-04-01 12:15 -0700
                Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3 Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2013-04-02 06:28 +1100
                Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3 jmfauth <wxjmfauth@gmail.com> - 2013-04-01 13:28 -0700
                Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3 Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2013-04-02 07:35 +1100
                Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3 Mark Lawrence <breamoreboy@yahoo.co.uk> - 2013-04-01 22:38 +0100
                Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3 Mark Lawrence <breamoreboy@yahoo.co.uk> - 2013-04-01 22:43 +0100
                Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3 Neil Hodgson <nhodgson@iinet.net.au> - 2013-04-02 10:43 +1100
                Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3 jmfauth <wxjmfauth@gmail.com> - 2013-04-02 00:24 -0700
                Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3 Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2013-04-02 19:03 +1100
                Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3 Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2013-04-02 08:35 +0000
                Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3 jmfauth <wxjmfauth@gmail.com> - 2013-04-02 02:24 -0700
                Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3 Mark Lawrence <breamoreboy@yahoo.co.uk> - 2013-04-02 10:43 +0100
                Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3 Steve Simmons <square.steve@gmail.com> - 2013-04-02 11:58 +0100
                Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3 rusi <rustompmody@gmail.com> - 2013-04-02 06:42 -0700
                Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3 Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2013-04-02 14:03 +0000
                Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3 Steve Simmons <square.steve@gmail.com> - 2013-04-02 15:39 +0100
                Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3 Mark Lawrence <breamoreboy@yahoo.co.uk> - 2013-04-02 16:02 +0100
                Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3 jmfauth <wxjmfauth@gmail.com> - 2013-04-02 08:12 -0700
                Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3 Mark Lawrence <breamoreboy@yahoo.co.uk> - 2013-04-02 16:43 +0100
                Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3 rusi <rustompmody@gmail.com> - 2013-04-02 10:08 -0700
                Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3 Terry Jan Reedy <tjreedy@udel.edu> - 2013-04-02 17:33 -0400
                Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3 Joshua Landau <joshua.landau.ws@gmail.com> - 2013-04-02 23:40 +0100
                Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3 Ethan Furman <ethan@stoneleaf.us> - 2013-04-02 08:09 -0700
                Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3 Mark Lawrence <breamoreboy@yahoo.co.uk> - 2013-04-02 15:12 +0100
                Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3 Steve Simmons <square.steve@gmail.com> - 2013-04-02 16:03 +0100
                Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3 Ethan Furman <ethan@stoneleaf.us> - 2013-04-02 08:17 -0700
                Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3 rusi <rustompmody@gmail.com> - 2013-04-02 09:57 -0700
                Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3 jmfauth <wxjmfauth@gmail.com> - 2013-04-02 11:22 -0700
                Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3 rusi <rustompmody@gmail.com> - 2013-04-02 11:50 -0700
                Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3 Lele Gaifax <lele@metapensiero.it> - 2013-04-03 00:52 +0200
                Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3 jmfauth <wxjmfauth@gmail.com> - 2013-04-02 02:20 -0700
                Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3 Ian Kelly <ian.g.kelly@gmail.com> - 2013-04-02 13:44 -0600
                Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3 Neil Hodgson <nhodgson@iinet.net.au> - 2013-04-03 14:31 +1100
                Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3 rusi <rustompmody@gmail.com> - 2013-04-02 20:53 -0700
                Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3 Neil Hodgson <nhodgson@iinet.net.au> - 2013-04-03 15:03 +1100
                Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3 rusi <rustompmody@gmail.com> - 2013-04-02 22:11 -0700
                Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3 Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2013-04-03 17:22 +1100
                Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3 Roy Smith <roy@panix.com> - 2013-04-03 09:28 -0400
                Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3 Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2013-04-04 00:38 +1100
                Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3 Roy Smith <roy@panix.com> - 2013-04-03 00:10 -0400
                Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3 Neil Hodgson <nhodgson@iinet.net.au> - 2013-04-03 19:15 +1100
                Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3 Roy Smith <roy@panix.com> - 2013-04-03 09:25 -0400
                Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3 Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2013-04-04 00:34 +1100
                Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3 Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2013-04-03 05:32 +0000
                Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3 Terry Jan Reedy <tjreedy@udel.edu> - 2013-04-03 02:19 -0400
                Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3 Neil Hodgson <nhodgson@iinet.net.au> - 2013-04-03 17:27 +1100
                Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3 Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2013-04-03 17:25 +1100
                Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3 Neil Hodgson <nhodgson@iinet.net.au> - 2013-04-03 17:29 +1100
                Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3 Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2013-04-03 17:52 +1100
                Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3 Ian Kelly <ian.g.kelly@gmail.com> - 2013-04-03 01:06 -0600
                Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3 Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2013-04-03 18:24 +1100
                Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3 Neil Hodgson <nhodgson@iinet.net.au> - 2013-04-03 18:37 +1100
                Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3 rusi <rustompmody@gmail.com> - 2013-04-03 01:07 -0700
                Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3 Neil Hodgson <nhodgson@iinet.net.au> - 2013-04-03 19:22 +1100
                Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3 Dave Angel <davea@davea.name> - 2013-04-03 06:20 -0400
                Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3 Neil Hodgson <nhodgson@iinet.net.au> - 2013-04-03 22:05 +1100
                Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3 Dave Angel <davea@davea.name> - 2013-04-03 07:52 -0400
                Sorting [was Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3] Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2013-04-03 14:43 +0000
                Re: Sorting [was Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3] Roy Smith <roy@panix.com> - 2013-04-03 11:00 -0400
                Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3 Ian Kelly <ian.g.kelly@gmail.com> - 2013-04-03 10:30 -0600
                Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3 Dave Angel <davea@davea.name> - 2013-04-03 13:51 -0400
                Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3 Neil Hodgson <nhodgson@iinet.net.au> - 2013-04-04 09:58 +1100
                Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3 Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2013-04-03 07:53 +0000
                Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3 Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2013-04-03 19:02 +1100
                Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3 jmfauth <wxjmfauth@gmail.com> - 2013-04-03 01:08 -0700
                Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3 Mark Lawrence <breamoreboy@yahoo.co.uk> - 2013-04-03 12:27 +0100
                Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3 Roy Smith <roy@panix.com> - 2013-04-03 09:43 -0400
                Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3 Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2013-04-04 01:17 +1100
                Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3 Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2013-04-03 15:07 +0000
                Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3 Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2013-04-04 08:57 +1100
                Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3 Serhiy Storchaka <storchaka@gmail.com> - 2013-04-06 12:09 +0300
                Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3 Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2013-04-07 07:24 +1000
                Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3 Ethan Furman <ethan@stoneleaf.us> - 2013-04-06 14:58 -0700
                Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3 Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2013-04-07 01:29 +0000
                Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3 Ian Kelly <ian.g.kelly@gmail.com> - 2013-04-06 19:58 -0600
                Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3 Roy Smith <roy@panix.com> - 2013-04-06 22:18 -0400
                Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3 Ian Kelly <ian.g.kelly@gmail.com> - 2013-04-06 23:22 -0600
                Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3 Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2013-04-07 08:29 +0000
                Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3 Ian Kelly <ian.g.kelly@gmail.com> - 2013-04-06 20:00 -0600
                Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3 Serhiy Storchaka <storchaka@gmail.com> - 2013-04-07 11:02 +0300
                Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3 Mark Lawrence <breamoreboy@yahoo.co.uk> - 2013-04-07 16:14 +0100
                Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3 Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2013-04-03 15:02 +0000
                Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3 Ian Kelly <ian.g.kelly@gmail.com> - 2013-04-03 10:38 -0600
                Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3 Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2013-04-03 17:43 +0000
                Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3 Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2013-04-04 08:55 +1100
                Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3 Mark Lawrence <breamoreboy@yahoo.co.uk> - 2013-04-03 23:39 +0100
                Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3 Roy Smith <roy@panix.com> - 2013-04-03 20:49 -0400
                Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3 rusi <rustompmody@gmail.com> - 2013-04-03 09:10 -0700
                Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3 Ethan Furman <ethan@stoneleaf.us> - 2013-04-03 10:09 -0700
                Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3 Roy Smith <roy@panix.com> - 2013-04-03 20:46 -0400
                Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3 Ian Kelly <ian.g.kelly@gmail.com> - 2013-04-03 10:53 -0600
                Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3 Neil Hodgson <nhodgson@iinet.net.au> - 2013-04-02 20:28 +1100
                Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3 Mark Lawrence <breamoreboy@yahoo.co.uk> - 2013-04-03 14:56 +0100
                Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3 Mark Lawrence <breamoreboy@yahoo.co.uk> - 2013-04-01 20:54 +0100
                Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3 roy@panix.com (Roy Smith) - 2013-04-01 16:31 -0400
                Re: flaming vs accuracy [was Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3] Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2013-03-29 00:35 +0000
                Re: flaming vs accuracy [was Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3] Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2013-03-28 21:22 +1100
                Re: flaming vs accuracy [was Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3] Ned Deily <nad@acm.org> - 2013-03-28 13:23 -0700
                Re: flaming vs accuracy [was Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3] Ethan Furman <ethan@stoneleaf.us> - 2013-03-27 23:12 -0700
                Re: flaming vs accuracy [was Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3] jmfauth <wxjmfauth@gmail.com> - 2013-03-28 02:03 -0700
                Re: flaming vs accuracy [was Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3] Ian Foote <ian@feete.org> - 2013-03-28 09:36 +0000
                Re: flaming vs accuracy [was Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3] Neil Hodgson <nhodgson@iinet.net.au> - 2013-03-28 23:11 +1100
                Re: flaming vs accuracy [was Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3] Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2013-03-28 13:01 +0000
                Re: flaming vs accuracy [was Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3] jmfauth <wxjmfauth@gmail.com> - 2013-03-28 07:12 -0700
                Re: flaming vs accuracy [was Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3] Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2013-03-29 01:38 +1100
                Re: flaming vs accuracy [was Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3] jmfauth <wxjmfauth@gmail.com> - 2013-03-28 08:14 -0700
                Re: flaming vs accuracy [was Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3] Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2013-03-29 02:21 +1100
                Re: flaming vs accuracy [was Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3] jmfauth <wxjmfauth@gmail.com> - 2013-03-28 08:45 -0700
                Re: flaming vs accuracy [was Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3] Terry Reedy <tjreedy@udel.edu> - 2013-03-28 12:01 -0400
                Re: flaming vs accuracy [was Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3] Ian Kelly <ian.g.kelly@gmail.com> - 2013-03-28 10:11 -0600
                Surrogate pairs in new flexible string representation [was Re: flaming vs accuracy [was Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3]] Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2013-03-29 00:39 +0000
                Re: Surrogate pairs in new flexible string representation [was Re: flaming vs accuracy [was Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3]] Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2013-03-29 11:54 +1100
                Re: Surrogate pairs in new flexible string representation [was Re: flaming vs accuracy [was Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3]] Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2013-03-29 02:37 +0000
                Re: Surrogate pairs in new flexible string representation [was Re: flaming vs accuracy [was Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3]] Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2013-03-29 13:44 +1100
                Re: Surrogate pairs in new flexible string representation [was Re: flaming vs accuracy [was Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3]] Ian Kelly <ian.g.kelly@gmail.com> - 2013-03-29 00:11 -0600
                Re: Surrogate pairs in new flexible string representation [was Re: flaming vs accuracy [was Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3]] Ian Kelly <ian.g.kelly@gmail.com> - 2013-03-29 00:22 -0600
                Re: Surrogate pairs in new flexible string representation [was Re: flaming vs accuracy [was Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3]] Terry Reedy <tjreedy@udel.edu> - 2013-03-29 14:06 -0400
                Re: Surrogate pairs in new flexible string representation Christian Heimes <christian@python.org> - 2013-03-29 23:05 +0100
                Re: Surrogate pairs in new flexible string representation [was Re: flaming vs accuracy [was Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3]] Mark Lawrence <breamoreboy@yahoo.co.uk> - 2013-03-29 01:03 +0000
                Re: Surrogate pairs in new flexible string representation [was Re: flaming vs accuracy [was Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3]] Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2013-03-29 12:10 +1100
                Re: Surrogate pairs in new flexible string representation [was Re: flaming vs accuracy [was Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3]] MRAB <python@mrabarnett.plus.com> - 2013-03-29 02:00 +0000
                Re: flaming vs accuracy [was Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3] Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2013-03-29 03:16 +1100
                Re: flaming vs accuracy [was Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3] Ian Kelly <ian.g.kelly@gmail.com> - 2013-03-28 10:01 -0600
                Re: flaming vs accuracy [was Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3] Neil Hodgson <nhodgson@iinet.net.au> - 2013-03-29 14:34 +1100
                unicode and the FSR [was: Re: flaming vs accuracy [was Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3]] Ethan Furman <ethan@stoneleaf.us> - 2013-03-28 21:56 -0700
                Re: flaming vs accuracy [was Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3] Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2013-03-29 16:33 +1100
                Re: flaming vs accuracy [was Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3] Neil Hodgson <nhodgson@iinet.net.au> - 2013-03-29 16:46 +1100
                Re: flaming vs accuracy [was Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3] MRAB <python@mrabarnett.plus.com> - 2013-03-28 14:51 +0000
                Re: flaming vs accuracy [was Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3] Neil Hodgson <nhodgson@iinet.net.au> - 2013-03-29 14:57 +1100
                Re: flaming vs accuracy [was Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3] Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2013-03-29 02:07 +1100
                Re: flaming vs accuracy [was Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3] Oscar Benjamin <oscar.j.benjamin@gmail.com> - 2013-03-28 09:47 +0000
                Re: flaming vs accuracy [was Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3] Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2013-03-28 21:30 +1100
                Re: flaming vs accuracy [was Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3] jmfauth <wxjmfauth@gmail.com> - 2013-03-28 06:34 -0700
                Re: flaming vs accuracy [was Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3] Ian Kelly <ian.g.kelly@gmail.com> - 2013-03-28 10:33 -0600
                Re: flaming vs accuracy [was Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3] jmfauth <wxjmfauth@gmail.com> - 2013-03-28 09:55 -0700
                Re: flaming vs accuracy [was Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3] Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2013-03-29 04:13 +1100
                Re: flaming vs accuracy [was Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3] jmfauth <wxjmfauth@gmail.com> - 2013-03-28 10:48 -0700
                Re: flaming vs accuracy [was Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3] Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2013-03-29 04:55 +1100
                Re: flaming vs accuracy [was Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3] jmfauth <wxjmfauth@gmail.com> - 2013-03-28 13:26 -0700
                Re: flaming vs accuracy [was Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3] Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2013-03-29 08:45 +1100
                Re: flaming vs accuracy [was Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3] Terry Reedy <tjreedy@udel.edu> - 2013-03-28 19:12 -0400
                Re: flaming vs accuracy [was Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3] Benjamin Kaplan <benjamin.kaplan@case.edu> - 2013-03-28 13:29 -0700
                Re: flaming vs accuracy [was Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3] jmfauth <wxjmfauth@gmail.com> - 2013-03-28 14:11 -0700
                Re: flaming vs accuracy [was Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3] jmfauth <wxjmfauth@gmail.com> - 2013-03-28 14:33 -0700
                Re: flaming vs accuracy [was Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3] MRAB <python@mrabarnett.plus.com> - 2013-03-28 21:50 +0000
                Re: flaming vs accuracy [was Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3] Benjamin Kaplan <benjamin.kaplan@case.edu> - 2013-03-28 14:52 -0700
                Re: flaming vs accuracy [was Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3] Dennis Lee Bieber <wlfraed@ix.netcom.com> - 2013-03-28 19:53 -0400
                Re: flaming vs accuracy [was Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3] Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2013-03-29 11:03 +1100
                Re: flaming vs accuracy [was Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3] Mark Lawrence <breamoreboy@yahoo.co.uk> - 2013-03-29 00:15 +0000
            Re: flaming vs accuracy [was Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3] Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2013-03-28 14:40 +1100
              Re: flaming vs accuracy [was Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3] 88888 Dihedral <dihedral88888@googlemail.com> - 2013-03-28 16:04 -0700
              Re: flaming vs accuracy [was Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3] 88888 Dihedral <dihedral88888@googlemail.com> - 2013-03-28 16:04 -0700
            Re: flaming vs accuracy [was Re: Performance of int/long in Python 3] Mark Lawrence <breamoreboy@yahoo.co.uk> - 2013-03-28 12:39 +0000

csiph-web