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

Groups > comp.lang.python > #56907 > unrolled thread

Possibly better loop construct, also labels+goto important and on the fly compiler idea.

Back to article view | Back to comp.lang.python

Contents

  Possibly better loop construct, also labels+goto important and on the fly compiler idea. "Skybuck Flying" <Windows7IsOK@DreamPC2006.com> - 2013-10-17 01:36 +0200
    Re: Possibly better loop construct, also labels+goto important and on the fly compiler idea. "Skybuck Flying" <Windows7IsOK@DreamPC2006.com> - 2013-10-17 01:44 +0200
    Re: Possibly better loop construct, also labels+goto important and on the fly compiler idea. Ben Finney <ben+python@benfinney.id.au> - 2013-10-17 10:47 +1100
    Re: Possibly better loop construct, also labels+goto important and on the fly compiler idea. Steven D'Aprano <steve@pearwood.info> - 2013-10-17 09:06 +0000
    Re: Possibly better loop construct, also labels+goto important and on the fly compiler idea. Peter Cacioppi <peter.cacioppi@gmail.com> - 2013-10-17 16:53 -0700
      Re: Possibly better loop construct, also labels+goto important and on the fly compiler idea. Skip Montanaro <skip.montanaro@gmail.com> - 2013-10-17 19:39 -0500
      Re: Possibly better loop construct, also labels+goto important and on the fly compiler idea. Peter Cacioppi <peter.cacioppi@gmail.com> - 2013-10-17 17:41 -0700
      Re: Possibly better loop construct, also labels+goto important and on the fly compiler idea. Mark Lawrence <breamoreboy@yahoo.co.uk> - 2013-10-18 08:40 +0100
      Re: Possibly better loop construct, also labels+goto important and on the fly compiler idea. Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2013-10-18 18:44 +1100
      Re: Possibly better loop construct, also labels+goto important and on the fly compiler idea. Mark Lawrence <breamoreboy@yahoo.co.uk> - 2013-10-18 09:11 +0100
        Re: Possibly better loop construct, also labels+goto important and on the fly compiler idea. Peter Cacioppi <peter.cacioppi@gmail.com> - 2013-10-21 14:19 -0700
          Re: Possibly better loop construct, also labels+goto important and on the fly compiler idea. Dave Angel <davea@davea.name> - 2013-10-22 03:34 +0000
    Re: Possibly better loop construct, also labels+goto important and on the fly compiler idea. Peter Cacioppi <peter.cacioppi@gmail.com> - 2013-10-17 17:43 -0700
      Re: Possibly better loop construct, also labels+goto important and on the fly compiler idea. Mark Lawrence <breamoreboy@yahoo.co.uk> - 2013-10-18 08:42 +0100
    Re: Possibly better loop construct, also labels+goto important and on the fly compiler idea. Mark Lawrence <breamoreboy@yahoo.co.uk> - 2013-10-21 22:35 +0100
    Re: Possibly better loop construct, also labels+goto important and on the fly compiler idea. Bernhard Schornak <schornak@web.de> - 2013-10-23 15:13 +0200
      Re: Possibly better loop construct, also labels+goto important and on the fly compiler idea. "Skybuck Flying" <Windows7IsOK@DreamPC2006.com> - 2013-10-24 22:02 +0200
        Re: Possibly better loop construct, also labels+goto important and on the fly compiler idea. Mark Lawrence <breamoreboy@yahoo.co.uk> - 2013-10-25 15:13 +0100
        Re: Possibly better loop construct, also labels+goto important and on the fly compiler idea. Bernhard Schornak <schornak@web.de> - 2013-10-28 10:58 +0100
        Re: Possibly better loop construct, also labels+goto important and on the fly compiler idea. Bernhard Schornak <schornak@web.de> - 2013-10-28 11:49 +0100
    Re: Possibly better loop construct, also labels+goto important and on the fly compiler idea. Peter Cacioppi <peter.cacioppi@gmail.com> - 2013-10-25 11:57 -0700
      Don't use default Google Group client (was re:....) Terry Reedy <tjreedy@udel.edu> - 2013-10-25 16:05 -0400
        Re: Don't use default Google Group client (was re:....) rurpy@yahoo.com - 2013-10-25 16:44 -0700
          Re: Don't use default Google Group client (was re:....) Mark Lawrence <breamoreboy@yahoo.co.uk> - 2013-10-26 01:19 +0100
            Re: Don't use default Google Group client (was re:....) rurpy@yahoo.com - 2013-10-26 07:58 -0700
              Re: Don't use default Google Group client (was re:....) Mark Lawrence <breamoreboy@yahoo.co.uk> - 2013-10-26 16:38 +0100
                Re: Don't use default Google Group client (was re:....) rurpy@yahoo.com - 2013-10-26 21:36 -0700
          Re: Don't use default Google Group client (was re:....) Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2013-10-26 11:25 +1100
            Re: Don't use default Google Group client (was re:....) rurpy@yahoo.com - 2013-10-26 07:55 -0700
          Re: Don't use default Google Group client (was re:....) Terry Reedy <tjreedy@udel.edu> - 2013-10-25 20:35 -0400
            Re: Don't use default Google Group client (was re:....) rurpy@yahoo.com - 2013-10-26 08:00 -0700
          Re: Don't use default Google Group client (was re:....) Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2013-10-26 02:40 +0000
            Re: Don't use default Google Group client (was re:....) rusi <rustompmody@gmail.com> - 2013-10-26 05:15 -0700
              Re: Don't use default Google Group client Ben Finney <ben+python@benfinney.id.au> - 2013-10-27 00:02 +1100
              Re: Don't use default Google Group client (was re:....) rurpy@yahoo.com - 2013-10-26 08:07 -0700
              Re: Don't use default Google Group client (was re:....) Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2013-10-27 00:25 +1100
                Re: Don't use default Google Group client (was re:....) rurpy@yahoo.com - 2013-10-26 21:43 -0700
            Re: Don't use default Google Group client (was re:....) rurpy@yahoo.com - 2013-10-26 08:05 -0700
              Re: Don't use default Google Group client (was re:....) Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2013-10-26 17:24 +0000
                Re: Don't use default Google Group client (was re:....) rurpy@yahoo.com - 2013-10-26 21:33 -0700
              Re: Don't use default Google Group client (was re:....) Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2013-10-27 09:15 +1100
                Re: Don't use default Google Group client (was re:....) rurpy@yahoo.com - 2013-10-26 21:45 -0700
      Re: Possibly better loop construct, also labels+goto important and on the fly compiler idea. "Rhodri James" <rhodri@wildebst.demon.co.uk> - 2013-10-25 22:09 +0100
    Re: Possibly better loop construct, also labels+goto important and on the fly compiler idea. Peter Cacioppi <peter.cacioppi@gmail.com> - 2013-10-26 13:37 -0700
      Re: Possibly better loop construct, also labels+goto important and on the fly compiler idea. rusi <rustompmody@gmail.com> - 2013-10-26 18:45 -0700
        Re: Possibly better loop construct, also labels+goto important and on the fly compiler idea. Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2013-10-27 12:56 +1100
          Re: Possibly better loop construct, also labels+goto important and on the fly compiler idea. rurpy@yahoo.com - 2013-10-27 22:29 -0700
        Re: Possibly better loop construct, also labels+goto important and on the fly compiler idea. rurpy@yahoo.com - 2013-10-26 22:04 -0700
          Re: Possibly better loop construct, also labels+goto important and on the fly compiler idea. rusi <rustompmody@gmail.com> - 2013-10-27 00:59 -0700
            Re: Possibly better loop construct, also labels+goto important and on the fly compiler idea. rurpy@yahoo.com - 2013-10-27 22:40 -0700
              Re: Possibly better loop construct, also labels+goto important and on the fly compiler idea. rusi <rustompmody@gmail.com> - 2013-10-27 22:56 -0700
                Re: Possibly better loop construct, also labels+goto important and on the fly compiler idea. rusi <rustompmody@gmail.com> - 2013-10-27 23:51 -0700
        Re: Possibly better loop construct, also labels+goto important and on the fly compiler idea. Dennis Lee Bieber <wlfraed@ix.netcom.com> - 2013-10-27 12:10 -0400
      Re: Possibly better loop construct, also labels+goto important and on the fly compiler idea. rusi <rustompmody@gmail.com> - 2013-10-27 03:53 -0700
    Re: Possibly better loop construct, also labels+goto important and on the fly compiler idea. Peter Cacioppi <peter.cacioppi@gmail.com> - 2013-10-26 19:02 -0700

Page 2 of 3 — ← Prev page 1 [2] 3  Next page →

#57545

Dave said :

"Include a quote from whomever you're responding to, and we might
actually take you seriously.  And of course, make sure you don't delete
the attribution. "

This forum is working for me. One of the more frequent and sophisticated posters emailed me saying he appreciates my contributions. 

I'm sorry I'm putting in a bustle in your hedgerow (just a little bit sorry) but I've got 20 balls in the air right now and I haven't got around to configuring a proper client for this feed. The default Google Group client is notoriously cruddy with quotes attribution.

Some readers can discern context from the previous posts. That's sort of what the word context means. But I understand this skill isn't universal.

If it makes you feel better, I'm mostly lurking/learning and just posting on areas where I have expertise. 

Thanks for letting me off with a warning officer, I'll do better next time.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#57556 — Don't use default Google Group client (was re:....)

On 10/25/2013 2:57 PM, Peter Cacioppi wrote:

> The default
> Google Group client is notoriously cruddy with quotes attribution.

So don't use it. Get any decent newsreader, such as Thunderbird, and 
access the list at news.gmane.org as gmane.comp.python.general.

-- 
Terry Jan Reedy

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#57576 — Re: Don't use default Google Group client (was re:....)

On 10/25/2013 02:05 PM, Terry Reedy wrote:
> On 10/25/2013 2:57 PM, Peter Cacioppi wrote:
>> The default
>> Google Group client is notoriously cruddy with quotes attribution.
> 
> So don't use it. Get any decent newsreader, such as Thunderbird, and 
> access the list at news.gmane.org as gmane.comp.python.general.

Peter, you can ignore Terry's "advice" if Google Groups works for you.  
There are a small number of Google haters here who seem larger due to 
their obnoxious noisiness.

I've been using Google Groups to post here for many years and with a 
little care it is usable without annoying anyone except a few drooling
fanatics.  All access methods have pros and cons (and I've posted here
about many of TB numerous cons) so if the usability tradeoff favors 
GG for you (or anyone else) I recommend you not be intimidated by
the anti-GG goon squad.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#57579 — Re: Don't use default Google Group client (was re:....)

On 26/10/2013 00:44, rurpy@yahoo.com wrote:
> On 10/25/2013 02:05 PM, Terry Reedy wrote:
>> On 10/25/2013 2:57 PM, Peter Cacioppi wrote:
>>> The default
>>> Google Group client is notoriously cruddy with quotes attribution.
>>
>> So don't use it. Get any decent newsreader, such as Thunderbird, and
>> access the list at news.gmane.org as gmane.comp.python.general.
>
> Peter, you can ignore Terry's "advice" if Google Groups works for you.
> There are a small number of Google haters here who seem larger due to
> their obnoxious noisiness.
>
> I've been using Google Groups to post here for many years and with a
> little care it is usable without annoying anyone except a few drooling
> fanatics.  All access methods have pros and cons (and I've posted here
> about many of TB numerous cons) so if the usability tradeoff favors
> GG for you (or anyone else) I recommend you not be intimidated by
> the anti-GG goon squad.
>

Thunderbird cons - I've never known any. Google groups cons - continual 
streams of messages on a daily basis that are double spaced despite 
umpteen requests to follow instructions so the crap doesn't get 
repeated.  Just how difficult is it?  Are you prepared to pay for my new 
glasses, as the eye strain caused by google crap really does get to me. 
  Goon squad indeed!!!

-- 
Python is the second best programming language in the world.
But the best has yet to be invented.  Christian Tismer

Mark Lawrence

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#57614 — Re: Don't use default Google Group client (was re:....)

On 10/25/2013 06:19 PM, Mark Lawrence wrote:
> On 26/10/2013 00:44, rurpy@yahoo.com wrote:
>> On 10/25/2013 02:05 PM, Terry Reedy wrote:
>>> On 10/25/2013 2:57 PM, Peter Cacioppi wrote:
>>>> The default
>>>> Google Group client is notoriously cruddy with quotes attribution.
>>>
>>> So don't use it. Get any decent newsreader, such as Thunderbird, and
>>> access the list at news.gmane.org as gmane.comp.python.general.
>>
>> Peter, you can ignore Terry's "advice" if Google Groups works for you.
>> There are a small number of Google haters here who seem larger due to
>> their obnoxious noisiness.
>>
>> I've been using Google Groups to post here for many years and with a
>> little care it is usable without annoying anyone except a few drooling
>> fanatics.  All access methods have pros and cons (and I've posted here
>> about many of TB numerous cons) so if the usability tradeoff favors
>> GG for you (or anyone else) I recommend you not be intimidated by
>> the anti-GG goon squad.
> 
> Thunderbird cons - I've never known any. 

That's odd, because in 
  https://groups.google.com/d/msg/comp.lang.python/FFAe5sJ7kQ4/GmDtHitY50QJ
I responded to a direct question from you about problems 
with Thunderbird.  If you mean instead that because *you've* 
experienced no problems, then none exist, that's your business
but I hope you don't carry that attitude into your programming 

Further, that post was only with technical issues related to 
TB; in another thread in which you participated, I explained 
some of the other usability tradeoffs, issues of personal 
choice and preference which clearly vary between users, for 
example in:
  https://groups.google.com/d/msg/comp.lang.python/Rxw7H4yNGh4/WRZDOzZd76oJ
  https://groups.google.com/d/msg/comp.lang.python/Rxw7H4yNGh4/41hZ3Si5G0cJ
  https://groups.google.com/d/msg/comp.lang.python/Rxw7H4yNGh4/jKu57BLvqIUJ
I question your judgement if you see you own preferences for 
TB as being absolute and applicable to everyone.  The idea 
that there exists any access method for reading this list 
that has *no* cons is ludicrous.

> Google groups cons - continual 
> streams of messages on a daily basis that are double spaced despite 
> umpteen requests to follow instructions so the crap doesn't get 
> repeated.  Just how difficult is it?  Are you prepared to pay for my new 
> glasses, as the eye strain caused by google crap really does get to me. 

You are being absurd.  If you are seriously willing to damage 
your eyesight because you feel compelled to read every post
here then you should seek psychological help right away.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#57623 — Re: Don't use default Google Group client (was re:....)

On 26/10/2013 15:58, rurpy@yahoo.com wrote:

>
> That's odd, because in
>    https://groups.google.com/d/msg/comp.lang.python/FFAe5sJ7kQ4/GmDtHitY50QJ
> I responded to a direct question from you about problems
> with Thunderbird.  If you mean instead that because *you've*
> experienced no problems, then none exist, that's your business
> but I hope you don't carry that attitude into your programming
>

Would you please be kind enough to quote the question that I asked. 
You'll find it extremely difficult as I actually made a stement.  I quote

"
 > Please provide evidence that Thunderbird is buggy.  I use it quite
 > happily, don't have problems, and have never seen anybody complaining
 > about it.
"

I still stand by the above statement, whereas as a constant stream of 
crap arrives here every day from the bug ridden google product(s).  How 
can you ignore it until you've actually looked at it?  Do you have 
Superman's eyesight?

-- 
Python is the second best programming language in the world.
But the best has yet to be invented.  Christian Tismer

Mark Lawrence

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#57718 — Re: Don't use default Google Group client (was re:....)

On 10/26/2013 09:38 AM, Mark Lawrence wrote:
> On 26/10/2013 15:58, rurpy@yahoo.com wrote:
>> That's odd, because in
>>    https://groups.google.com/d/msg/comp.lang.python/FFAe5sJ7kQ4/GmDtHitY50QJ
>> I responded to a direct question from you about problems
>> with Thunderbird.  If you mean instead that because *you've*
>> experienced no problems, then none exist, that's your business
>> but I hope you don't carry that attitude into your programming
> 
> Would you please be kind enough to quote the question that I asked. 
> You'll find it extremely difficult as I actually made a stement.  I quote

Ah, right it was a stement rather than a quesion.  And that
changes my points exactly how?

> [...]
> How 
> can you ignore it until you've actually looked at it?  Do you have 
> Superman's eyesight?

So your eyes are so sensitive that just glancing at a double 
spaced message damages them?  OK....

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#57582 — Re: Don't use default Google Group client (was re:....)

On Sat, Oct 26, 2013 at 10:44 AM,  <rurpy@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Peter, you can ignore Terry's "advice" if Google Groups works for you.
> There are a small number of Google haters here who seem larger due to
> their obnoxious noisiness.
>
> I've been using Google Groups to post here for many years and with a
> little care it is usable without annoying anyone except a few drooling
> fanatics.  All access methods have pros and cons (and I've posted here
> about many of TB numerous cons) so if the usability tradeoff favors
> GG for you (or anyone else) I recommend you not be intimidated by
> the anti-GG goon squad.

As soon as we hear of people automatically blacklisting any posts that
come from Thunderbird, I'll believe you that they're on par. Until
then, no matter how courteous you might be in your use of GG (which
still makes you part of an extremely small minority), you still have a
fundamental downside in that your message simply won't get to
everyone.

As to "without annoying anyone except a few drooling fanatics" - I
wouldn't count myself among those fanatics (do you count me there?),
but the GG issus (mainly with regard to quoted text) DO annoy me, and
very much. Just because I don't flame people or throw tantrums doesn't
mean I don't mind.

ChrisA

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#57613 — Re: Don't use default Google Group client (was re:....)

On 10/25/2013 06:25 PM, Chris Angelico wrote:
> On Sat, Oct 26, 2013 at 10:44 AM,  <rurpy@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> Peter, you can ignore Terry's "advice" if Google Groups works for you.
>> There are a small number of Google haters here who seem larger due to
>> their obnoxious noisiness.
>>
>> I've been using Google Groups to post here for many years and with a
>> little care it is usable without annoying anyone except a few drooling
>> fanatics.  All access methods have pros and cons (and I've posted here
>> about many of TB numerous cons) so if the usability tradeoff favors
>> GG for you (or anyone else) I recommend you not be intimidated by
>> the anti-GG goon squad.
> 
> As soon as we hear of people automatically blacklisting any posts that
> come from Thunderbird, I'll believe you that they're on par. Until
> then, no matter how courteous you might be in your use of GG (which
> still makes you part of an extremely small minority), you still have a
> fundamental downside in that your message simply won't get to
> everyone.

I am aware of that.  As I said the last time the subject came up,

* So what?  Anyone too lazy or with too much need to control, to
 not skip over posts they find annoying probably is someone unlikely
 to offer anything constructive in any thread I'm participating
 in.

* It is not at all clear that the number who actually completely
 ignore GG is more than a very small number.

* Life's full of tradeoffs.  The convenience of GG to some people
 is worth the downside.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#57584 — Re: Don't use default Google Group client (was re:....)

On 10/25/2013 7:44 PM, rurpy@yahoo.com wrote:
> On 10/25/2013 02:05 PM, Terry Reedy wrote:
>> On 10/25/2013 2:57 PM, Peter Cacioppi wrote:
>>> The default
>>> Google Group client is notoriously cruddy with quotes attribution.
>>
>> So don't use it. Get any decent newsreader, such as Thunderbird, and
>> access the list at news.gmane.org as gmane.comp.python.general.
>
> Peter, you can ignore Terry's "advice" if Google Groups works for you.

Rurpy: My advice was real advice (what I do) given in response to 
Cacioppi's complaint 'notoriously cruddy'.

-- 
Terry Jan Reedy

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#57615 — Re: Don't use default Google Group client (was re:....)

On 10/25/2013 06:35 PM, Terry Reedy wrote:
> On 10/25/2013 7:44 PM, rurpy@yahoo.com wrote:
>> On 10/25/2013 02:05 PM, Terry Reedy wrote:
>>> On 10/25/2013 2:57 PM, Peter Cacioppi wrote:
>>>> The default
>>>> Google Group client is notoriously cruddy with quotes attribution.
>>>
>>> So don't use it. Get any decent newsreader, such as Thunderbird, and
>>> access the list at news.gmane.org as gmane.comp.python.general.
>>
>> Peter, you can ignore Terry's "advice" if Google Groups works for you.
> 
> Rurpy: My advice was real advice (what I do) given in response to 
> Cacioppi's complaint 'notoriously cruddy'.

As was mine.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#57590 — Re: Don't use default Google Group client (was re:....)

On Fri, 25 Oct 2013 16:44:45 -0700, rurpy wrote:

> On 10/25/2013 02:05 PM, Terry Reedy wrote:
>> On 10/25/2013 2:57 PM, Peter Cacioppi wrote:
>>> The default
>>> Google Group client is notoriously cruddy with quotes attribution.
>> 
>> So don't use it. Get any decent newsreader, such as Thunderbird, and
>> access the list at news.gmane.org as gmane.comp.python.general.
> 
> Peter, you can ignore Terry's "advice" if Google Groups works for you.
> There are a small number of Google haters here who seem larger due to
> their obnoxious noisiness.

There are people here who hate Google Groups but simply don't chime in. 
I'm one of them. Perhaps I should.

There are also many people who have a blanket "ignore" switch on anything 
coming from GG, not out of any personal vendetta against you, but simply 
out of self-defence. They don't say anything simply because they don't 
see the posts.


> I've been using Google Groups to post here for many years and with a
> little care it is usable without annoying anyone 

This is true, and thank you for taking that care, that is really 
appreciated.

But perhaps you should consider that although GG works for you, it 
doesn't work for many people who don't take that care. So far Peter 
Cacioppi is one of those people. He has shown no inclination that he is 
willing to take the care to communicate well according to the community 
standards here, and he has shown a distressing tendency towards snarky, 
arrogant responses to polite requests to fix his posts.


> except a few drooling
> fanatics.  All access methods have pros and cons (and I've posted here
> about many of TB numerous cons) so if the usability tradeoff favors GG
> for you (or anyone else) I recommend you not be intimidated by the
> anti-GG goon squad.

Your personal attacks are not appreciated. Why can you not accept that 
people who post using GG's defaults cause pain and difficulty to many -- 
probably the great majority -- of readers who use either the mailing list 
or the news group to read this list? Don't you think that they are 
entitled to complain when people repeatedly post double-spaced, hard to 
read messages, or set the reply address wrongly, or include no context or 
attributes, or all of the above at once?

Do you really intend to say that we have no right to complain about how 
difficult Google Groups makes it for us?



-- 
Steven

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#57599 — Re: Don't use default Google Group client (was re:....)

On Saturday, October 26, 2013 8:10:16 AM UTC+5:30, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
> Your personal attacks are not appreciated. Why can you not accept that 
> people who post using GG's defaults cause pain and difficulty to many -- 
> probably the great majority -- of readers who use either the mailing list 
> or the news group to read this list? Don't you think that they are 
> entitled to complain when people repeatedly post double-spaced, hard to 
> read messages, or set the reply address wrongly, or include no context or 
> attributes, or all of the above at once?
> 
> 
> Do you really intend to say that we have no right to complain about how 
> difficult Google Groups makes it for us?

I think you are mixing up cause and effect, symptom and disease, Steven.

The symptoms are
1. Double spaced responses
2. Non/improper attribution
3. Generally idiotic behavior

The 'disease' is:

Google-groups is current technology whereas newsgroups/feeds etc is pre-www technology.

By fairly straightforward statistics -- you should know given the newest module in python 3.4 <wink> -- the probability of idiotic behavior in a bunch of children is going to be significantly higher than the same in a bunch of adults.

Google-groups consist of the 'children-population' (so to speak); newsgroups etc consist of the adult population with some exceptions.

The appropriate way of dealing with children is not to say "Dont be children!" but to say "This kind of behavior is unacceptable out here"

I feel the biggest negative consequence of the anti-GG rhetoric is that the bigger issue -- idiotic behavior -- is left unaddressed in favor of very minor local issues like double-spaced mails.




> So far Peter
> Cacioppi is one of those people. He has shown no inclination that he is
> willing to take the care to communicate well according to the community
> standards here, and he has shown a distressing tendency towards snarky,
> arrogant responses to polite requests to fix his posts. 

I think its fairly straightforward to fix these issues:
First (for complete newbies) one ignores the problem and engages/answers discusses
Then one mildly mentions that this -- double-spacing/non-attribution whatever -- is causing a problem; eg the footnote that Mark (used to) keep
Then more strongly
Then finally give no response to the question under discussion except to point out and underscore the idiotic behavior -- just make sure that the claim of Peter -- "this group is working for me" -- is not kept true.

tl;dr I think Mark's scoldings in this regard will work if they come not just from him but from any and every one.  They are likely to have a larger subscription if you would agree to change: "Dont use GG!!"
to
"Users of GG are requested to read and follow these instructions
https://wiki.python.org/moin/GoogleGroupsPython "

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#57602 — Re: Don't use default Google Group client

rusi <rustompmody@gmail.com> writes:

> On Saturday, October 26, 2013 8:10:16 AM UTC+5:30, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
> > Do you really intend to say that we have no right to complain about
> > how difficult Google Groups makes it for us?
>
> I think you are mixing up cause and effect, symptom and disease, Steven.
>
> The symptoms are
> 1. Double spaced responses
> 2. Non/improper attribution

Both of which are Google Groups failing to implement established
standard interfaces.

> The 'disease' is:
>
> Google-groups is current technology

Google Groups attempts to interface with standard protocols of
communication, and gets it wrong. Google are well-informed of the ways
in which Google Groups is misbehaving, and they are disinclined to fix
the misbehaviour.

> whereas newsgroups/feeds etc is pre-www technology.

So what? Much of the internet is pre-WWW, too. That doesn't excuse the
misbehaviour of software which purports to interface with standard
protocols but gets them wrong.

To the extent that the mis-implementation of Google Groups makes
messages from there more difficult to read, its users should be
agitating for Google to fix the service, and/or switching to software
which conforms to standards better.

-- 
 \        “Visitors are expected to complain at the office between the |
  `\                     hours of 9 and 11 a.m. daily.” —hotel, Athens |
_o__)                                                                  |
Ben Finney

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#57617 — Re: Don't use default Google Group client (was re:....)

On 10/26/2013 06:15 AM, rusi wrote:
>[...]
> Google-groups consist of the 'children-population' (so to speak);
> newsgroups etc consist of the adult population with some exceptions.
> The appropriate way of dealing with children is not to say "Dont be
> children!" but to say "This kind of behavior is unacceptable out
> here"
>[...]

This is exactly the kind of trash-talk that provokes so much discord 
here.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#57649 — Re: Don't use default Google Group client (was re:....)

On Sat, Oct 26, 2013 at 11:15 PM, rusi <rustompmody@gmail.com> wrote:
> tl;dr I think Mark's scoldings in this regard will work if they come not just from him but from any and every one.  They are likely to have a larger subscription if you would agree to change: "Dont use GG!!"
> to
> "Users of GG are requested to read and follow these instructions
> https://wiki.python.org/moin/GoogleGroupsPython "

I would say that "Don't use Google Groups" is absolutely the right
advice, because it penalizes the ultimate cause of the problem. If a
bus company sets timetables that demand the drivers work the
accelerator and brake in binary (one or the other is always flat
down), the advice is not "Don't buy eggs" but "Don't ride that bus
line". Considering how easy it is to use some other way of posting and
reading, there's no reason for the makers of a fundamentally flawed
piece of software to be rewarded with usage.

Anyway, no matter how carefully you fix your own posts, you'll still
run into the one problem you can't fix: that, because of the extremely
poor signal-to-noise ratio from GG, a number of people just won't see
your post.

And trust me. No matter how many times you ask people to read that
wiki page, you'll still get far FAR better results by recommending
Thunderbird or email. I've seen a good number of people go "Oh, my
posts are annoying because of the software I'm using? No probs, I'll
change software to not be annoying", which solves the problem without
the fiddlinesses that the wiki page advocates.

ChrisA

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#57719 — Re: Don't use default Google Group client (was re:....)

On 10/26/2013 07:25 AM, Chris Angelico wrote:
> On Sat, Oct 26, 2013 at 11:15 PM, rusi <rustompmody@gmail.com> wrote:
>> tl;dr I think Mark's scoldings in this regard will work if they come not just from him but from any and every one.  They are likely to have a larger subscription if you would agree to change: "Dont use GG!!"
>> to
>> "Users of GG are requested to read and follow these instructions
>> https://wiki.python.org/moin/GoogleGroupsPython "
> 
> [...]
> Anyway, no matter how carefully you fix your own posts, you'll still
> run into the one problem you can't fix: that, because of the extremely
> poor signal-to-noise ratio from GG, a number of people just won't see
> your post.

I just addressed that in another post.  Perhaps your TB reader 
somehow missed it?

> And trust me. No matter how many times you ask people to read that
> wiki page, you'll still get far FAR better results by recommending
> Thunderbird or email.

By "results" I gather you mean the production of posts that 
are non-annoying to you.  Your "results" do not seem to include
any consideration for what is preferable for the poster -- ie 
a pretty selfish definition of "results".

By all means, mention the option of using TB.  But there is
a difference between a recommendation and coercion.  And please
be accepting if the poster decides that GG is a better solution
for them.

For many people, including those that post here infrequently, 
who work from different platforms, who want remote access, who
don't have time, skills or interest in doing setup more involved
that a few mouse clicks, GG is better answer.

> I've seen a good number of people go "Oh, my
> posts are annoying because of the software I'm using? No probs, I'll
> change software to not be annoying", 

That's fine.  If someone finds TB (or whatever) suits them
better, then all's good for them.  But you are extrapolating
from a few cases to universality.

> which solves the problem without
> the fiddlinesses that the wiki page advocates.

The wiki page advocates nothing.  It offer some options for
both using GG *and* minimizing annoyance to other users.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#57616 — Re: Don't use default Google Group client (was re:....)

On 10/25/2013 08:40 PM, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
> On Fri, 25 Oct 2013 16:44:45 -0700, rurpy wrote:
>> On 10/25/2013 02:05 PM, Terry Reedy wrote:
>>> On 10/25/2013 2:57 PM, Peter Cacioppi wrote:
>>>> The default
>>>> Google Group client is notoriously cruddy with quotes attribution.
>>> 
>>> So don't use it. Get any decent newsreader, such as Thunderbird, and
>>> access the list at news.gmane.org as gmane.comp.python.general.
>> 
>> Peter, you can ignore Terry's "advice" if Google Groups works for you.
>> There are a small number of Google haters here who seem larger due to
>> their obnoxious noisiness.
> 
> There are people here who hate Google Groups but simply don't chime in. 
> I'm one of them. Perhaps I should.
> 
> There are also many people who have a blanket "ignore" switch on anything 
> coming from GG, not out of any personal vendetta against you, but simply 
> out of self-defence. They don't say anything simply because they don't 
> see the posts.

They see the replies so they have every opportunity to reply.
I would hope the reason they don't is because they don't want 
to contribute to the already way too voluminous insults, flames,
nit-picking, troll-baiting and other non-python related garbage 
here.

>> I've been using Google Groups to post here for many years and with a
>> little care it is usable without annoying anyone 
> 
> This is true, and thank you for taking that care, that is really 
> appreciated.
> 
> But perhaps you should consider that although GG works for you, it 
> doesn't work for many people who don't take that care. So far Peter 
> Cacioppi is one of those people. He has shown no inclination that he is 
> willing to take the care to communicate well according to the community 
> standards here, and he has shown a distressing tendency towards snarky, 
> arrogant responses to polite requests to fix his posts.

I hadn't read this whole thread, I just wanted to provide an 
alternative point of view to that expressed by Terry Reedy
re Google Groups (since I use it myself).

However, looking now, I see you pointed out that Peter originally 
cross-posted his two messages to four groups:

 alt.comp.lang.c: 4 posts total
  one (serious, on-topic [*1], non-snarky) reply and a reply from OP.

 alt.comp.lang.borland-delphi: 4 posts total
  same as above

 alt.lang.asm: 6 posts total
  three (serious, on-topic, non-snarky) replies and a reply from the OP

 comp.lang.python: 26 posts and counting
  Two immediate not-on-topic responses, one polite but a little haughty
  (what made the author assume that everyone has a weblog to post to?)
  and one, from *you*, clearly snarky:
   > Oh look, your post was cross-posted to no fewer than four
   > newsgroups. What a surprise!
  Ironic that you are complaining about snarkiness from the OP.
  Those were followed (unsurprisingly) by a snarky response from the
  OP and then (currently and counting) 26 replies, many snarky, none
  addressing the OP's topic and none directly Python related.

Perhaps the snarkiness you complain about came from other earlier
threads, but I did see anything that struck me as horrible in a brief 
sampling.

Why didn't you and the other respondents just ignore the above post, 
likely leading to the same results as in the other three groups?
Instead we are all treated to yet another endless thread (with forked
subject lines making it even harder to avoid) of non-Python related 
verbal pissing.

>> except a few drooling
>> fanatics.  All access methods have pros and cons (and I've posted here
>> about many of TB numerous cons) so if the usability tradeoff favors GG
>> for you (or anyone else) I recommend you not be intimidated by the
>> anti-GG goon squad.
> 
> Your personal attacks are not appreciated. 

What I wrote was a non-personal attack.

> Why can you not accept that 
> people who post using GG's defaults cause pain and difficulty to many -- 

"Pain"?  If you really suffer pain from reading badly formatted 
posts you should consider the advice I gave to Mark Lawrence.
But ignoring the exaggerations, I can and do accept it causes 
some degree of annoyance -- it annoys me as well, and I've no
clue where you got the idea that it didn't.  But it is also 
annoying for many infrequent posters to go though the effort 
to set up a news group reader or deal with a lot of email from 
a high-volume mailing list.  And it is annoying for readers to
wade though the constant torrent of bitching by GG bashers. 
Of course I understand that you consider your annoyances more 
important that other people's but then don't we all.

I am irritated by things here too: people who haven't 
learned to tell the difference between "fact" and "my opinion", 
people who feel free to be blunt to the point of offensiveness
in their posts but who take offense at the mildest slight 
directed at them, people who can tell on the basis of a post 
or two if a question is homework or a poster is drunk or lying 
about a college degree, people who respond to every troll that 
drives by, people who regularly post messages intended for a
totally unrelated group, people who speak for "the community" 
when I never voted for them as spokesperson, etc.  But I try 
not to pollute this group by publicly venting my frustration 
every time I see an irritating post.

> probably the great majority -- of readers who use either the mailing list 
> or the news group to read this list? 

You have no basis other than wishful thinking to claim that.
Google groups has a very large following and my guess is that
the vast majority of c.l.p readers are silent and seldom if
ever post.  The large number of posts here from GG would suggest 
that the readership there is substantial, and the decline in 
"web-1.0" tools (usenet, mailing lists, etc) is additional 
evidence that the number of GG users (who are used to and 
prefer flashier web-based interfaces) may be much greater 
than you would like to think. 

> Don't you think that they are 
> entitled to complain when people repeatedly post double-spaced, hard to 
> read messages, or set the reply address wrongly, or include no context or 
> attributes, or all of the above at once?

"entitled" is too subjective a word for me but I do think
the such complaints have a major negative effect on the value 
of this group to those of us who come here looking for Python-
related discussions.

> Do you really intend to say that we have no right to complain about how 
> difficult Google Groups makes it for us?

Poor baby!  Life is sooo hard, isn't it? :-)

----
[*1] By "on-topic" I mean on topic for the thread, not on-topic 
for the group.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#57637 — Re: Don't use default Google Group client (was re:....)

On Sat, 26 Oct 2013 08:05:27 -0700, rurpy wrote:

> On 10/25/2013 08:40 PM, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
[...]
> However, looking now, I see you pointed out that Peter originally
> cross-posted his two messages to four groups:

I think you are confused. I haven't said anything about Peter Cacioppi 
cross-posting. To the best of my knowledge, he hasn't cross-posted 
anything here.



-- 
Steven

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#57716 — Re: Don't use default Google Group client (was re:....)

On 10/26/2013 11:24 AM, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
> On Sat, 26 Oct 2013 08:05:27 -0700, rurpy wrote:
>> On 10/25/2013 08:40 PM, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
> [...]
>> However, looking now, I see you pointed out that Peter originally
>> cross-posted his two messages to four groups:
> 
> I think you are confused. I haven't said anything about Peter Cacioppi 
> cross-posting. To the best of my knowledge, he hasn't cross-posted 
> anything here.

Yes, it seems I somehow concluded that Skybuck Flying who originated 
the thread (in which you immediately complained about cross-posting)
and Peter were the same person, without any good reason.  Apologies 
to you and Peter.  However, I don't think that invalidates the other
points I made.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

Page 2 of 3 — ← Prev page 1 [2] 3  Next page →

Back to top | Article view | comp.lang.python

csiph-web