Path: csiph.com!usenet.pasdenom.info!gegeweb.org!usenet-fr.net!nerim.net!novso.com!newsfeed.xs4all.nl!newsfeed2.news.xs4all.nl!xs4all!newsgate.cistron.nl!newsgate.news.xs4all.nl!post.news.xs4all.nl!not-for-mail Return-Path: X-Original-To: python-list@python.org Delivered-To: python-list@mail.python.org X-Spam-Status: OK 0.003 X-Spam-Evidence: '*H*': 0.99; '*S*': 0.00; '"this': 0.03; 'mathematics': 0.05; 'say,': 0.05; 'variables': 0.07; 'received:80.91': 0.09; 'received:80.91.229': 0.09; 'received:gmane.org': 0.09; 'received:list': 0.09; 'works.': 0.09; 'python': 0.11; 'construct.': 0.16; 'constructs.': 0.16; 'letting': 0.16; 'received:80.91.229.3': 0.16; 'received:plane.gmane.org': 0.16; 'sure.': 0.16; 'wrote:': 0.18; 'header:User-Agent:1': 0.23; '"you': 0.24; "aren't": 0.24; 'example.': 0.24; 'received:comcast.net': 0.24; 'values': 0.27; 'header:X-Complaints-To:1': 0.27; 'header:In-Reply-To:1': 0.27; 'chris': 0.29; 'words': 0.29; 'said,': 0.30; 'subject:list': 0.30; 'are.': 0.31; 'such.': 0.31; "i'd": 0.34; 'but': 0.35; 'like,': 0.36; 'two': 0.37; 'sometimes': 0.38; 'problems': 0.38; 'to:addr :python-list': 0.38; 'pm,': 0.38; 'though,': 0.39; 'to:addr:python.org': 0.39; 'received:org': 0.40; 'how': 0.40; 'even': 0.60; 'numbers': 0.61; 'teaching': 0.64; 'different': 0.65; 'fact,': 0.69; 'introduce': 0.78; 'careful': 0.91; 'reasons,': 0.91; 'technique': 0.93 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ To: python-list@python.org From: Ned Batchelder Subject: Re: Explanation of list reference Date: Fri, 14 Feb 2014 19:00:36 -0500 References: <13208de8-0f85-4e60-b059-dc087c8fda41@googlegroups.com> <917ede6d-db7c-4a8c-8203-27677283776b@googlegroups.com> <871tz5piy0.fsf@elektro.pacujo.net> <87vbwho1i0.fsf@elektro.pacujo.net> <87mwhtnzdu.fsf@elektro.pacujo.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: c-50-133-228-126.hsd1.ma.comcast.net User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.8; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.3.0 In-Reply-To: <87mwhtnzdu.fsf@elektro.pacujo.net> X-BeenThere: python-list@python.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 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: 24 NNTP-Posting-Host: 2001:888:2000:d::a6 X-Trace: 1392422451 news.xs4all.nl 2829 [2001:888:2000:d::a6]:39028 X-Complaints-To: abuse@xs4all.nl Xref: csiph.com comp.lang.python:66340 On 2/14/14 4:43 PM, Marko Rauhamaa wrote: > Chris Angelico: > >> >be careful of simplifications that will cause problems down the line. > Sure. Let it be said, though, that sometimes you learn through > inaccuracies, a technique used intentionally by Knuth's TeXBook, for > example. In fact, you get through highschool mathematics successfully > without knowing what numbers and variables actually are. > Yes, sometimes for teaching reasons, you have to over-simplify or even introduce artificial constructs. I'd recommend acknowledging them as such. When you say, "There are two fundamentally different kinds of values in Python," or "So we have four kinds of (memory) slots," you aren't letting on that this is a teaching construct. It sounds like you mean that this is how Python actually works. I'd use words like, "This is an oversimplification, but might help...", or "You can think of it like ...". -- Ned Batchelder, http://nedbatchelder.com