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

Groups > comp.lang.python > #5859 > unrolled thread

Why did Quora choose Python for its development?

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

Contents

  Why did Quora choose Python for its development? Beliavsky <beliavsky@aol.com> - 2011-05-20 09:39 -0700
    Re: Why did Quora choose Python for its development? Dotan Cohen <dotancohen@gmail.com> - 2011-05-20 23:47 +0300
    Re: Why did Quora choose Python for its development? Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2011-05-22 15:01 +1000
    Re: Why did Quora choose Python for its development? "Octavian Rasnita" <orasnita@gmail.com> - 2011-05-22 10:44 +0300
      Re: Why did Quora choose Python for its development? Ulrich Eckhardt <ulrich.eckhardt@dominolaser.com> - 2011-05-23 12:56 +0200
        Re: Why did Quora choose Python for its development? Duncan Booth <duncan.booth@invalid.invalid> - 2011-05-23 11:28 +0000
        Re: Why did Quora choose Python for its development? "Octavian Rasnita" <orasnita@gmail.com> - 2011-05-24 08:25 +0300
      Re: Why did Quora choose Python for its development? Kevin Walzer <kw@codebykevin.com> - 2011-05-24 10:09 -0400
        Re: Why did Quora choose Python for its development? Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2011-05-25 00:43 +1000
        Re: Why did Quora choose Python for its development? "Octavian Rasnita" <orasnita@gmail.com> - 2011-05-24 19:11 +0300
    Re: Why did Quora choose Python for its development? Daniel Kluev <dan.kluev@gmail.com> - 2011-05-22 19:20 +1100
    Re: Why did Quora choose Python for its development? "Octavian Rasnita" <orasnita@gmail.com> - 2011-05-22 15:47 +0300
    Re: Why did Quora choose Python for its development? Dennis Lee Bieber <wlfraed@ix.netcom.com> - 2011-05-22 12:09 -0700
    Re: Why did Quora choose Python for its development? Terry Reedy <tjreedy@udel.edu> - 2011-05-22 18:01 -0400
      Re: Why did Quora choose Python for its development? John Bokma <john@castleamber.com> - 2011-05-22 18:55 -0500
    Re: Why did Quora choose Python for its development? Daniel Kluev <dan.kluev@gmail.com> - 2011-05-23 10:42 +1100
    Re: Why did Quora choose Python for its development? "Octavian Rasnita" <orasnita@gmail.com> - 2011-05-23 08:31 +0300
    Re: Why did Quora choose Python for its development? "Octavian Rasnita" <orasnita@gmail.com> - 2011-05-23 09:06 +0300
    Re: Why did Quora choose Python for its development? Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2011-05-23 16:37 +1000
      Re: Why did Quora choose Python for its development? John Bokma <john@castleamber.com> - 2011-05-23 10:26 -0500
    Re: Why did Quora choose Python for its development? Terry Reedy <tjreedy@udel.edu> - 2011-05-23 02:37 -0400
    Re: Why did Quora choose Python for its development? Daniel Kluev <dan.kluev@gmail.com> - 2011-05-23 19:05 +1100
    Re: Why did Quora choose Python for its development? Aleksandar Radulovic <alex@a13x.net> - 2011-05-23 08:52 +0000
    Re: Why did Quora choose Python for its development? "Octavian Rasnita" <orasnita@gmail.com> - 2011-05-23 11:49 +0300
    Re: Why did Quora choose Python for its development? "Octavian Rasnita" <orasnita@gmail.com> - 2011-05-23 12:01 +0300
    Re: Why did Quora choose Python for its development? "Octavian Rasnita" <orasnita@gmail.com> - 2011-05-23 12:41 +0300
    Re: Why did Quora choose Python for its development? Daniel Kluev <dan.kluev@gmail.com> - 2011-05-23 20:58 +1100
    Re: Why did Quora choose Python for its development? Daniel Kluev <dan.kluev@gmail.com> - 2011-05-23 21:16 +1100
    Re: Why did Quora choose Python for its development? "Octavian Rasnita" <orasnita@gmail.com> - 2011-05-23 14:17 +0300
    Re: Why did Quora choose Python for its development? Daniel Kluev <dan.kluev@gmail.com> - 2011-05-23 22:32 +1100
    Re: Why did Quora choose Python for its development? Terry Reedy <tjreedy@udel.edu> - 2011-05-23 13:08 -0400
    Re: Why did Quora choose Python for its development? "Octavian Rasnita" <orasnita@gmail.com> - 2011-05-23 22:05 +0300
    Re: Why did Quora choose Python for its development? "Octavian Rasnita" <orasnita@gmail.com> - 2011-05-23 14:10 +0300
      Re: Why did Quora choose Python for its development? John Bokma <john@castleamber.com> - 2011-05-24 00:17 -0500
        Re: Why did Quora choose Python for its development? "D'Arcy J.M. Cain" <darcy@druid.net> - 2011-05-24 06:09 -0400
          Re: Why did Quora choose Python for its development? John Bokma <john@castleamber.com> - 2011-05-24 11:52 -0500
            Re: Why did Quora choose Python for its development? "D'Arcy J.M. Cain" <darcy@druid.net> - 2011-05-24 13:39 -0400
              Re: Why did Quora choose Python for its development? John Bokma <john@castleamber.com> - 2011-05-24 13:17 -0500
                Re: Why did Quora choose Python for its development? Gregory Ewing <greg.ewing@canterbury.ac.nz> - 2011-05-27 15:48 +1200
                  Re: Why did Quora choose Python for its development? Dennis Lee Bieber <wlfraed@ix.netcom.com> - 2011-05-26 23:53 -0700
                  Re: Why did Quora choose Python for its development? Roy Smith <roy@panix.com> - 2011-05-27 09:47 -0400
                    Re: Why did Quora choose Python for its development? Karim <karim.liateni@free.fr> - 2011-05-27 22:10 +0200
              Re: Why did Quora choose Python for its development? "thegist@nospam.net" <thegist@nospam.net> - 2011-05-25 17:30 -0400
                Re: Why did Quora choose Python for its development? Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2011-05-25 23:52 +0000
                  Re: Why did Quora choose Python for its development? "thegist@nospam.net" <thegist@nospam.net> - 2011-05-26 11:05 -0400
            Re: Why did Quora choose Python for its development? Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2011-05-25 08:01 +1000
              Re: Why did Quora choose Python for its development? John Bokma <john@castleamber.com> - 2011-05-24 18:16 -0500
                Re: Why did Quora choose Python for its development? Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2011-05-25 09:38 +1000
                  Re: Why did Quora choose Python for its development? John Bokma <john@castleamber.com> - 2011-05-24 20:48 -0500
              Re: Why did Quora choose Python for its development? Thorsten Kampe <thorsten@thorstenkampe.de> - 2011-05-25 09:31 +0200
                Re: Why did Quora choose Python for its development? John Bokma <john@castleamber.com> - 2011-05-25 07:01 -0500
                  Re: Why did Quora choose Python for its development? Terry Reedy <tjreedy@udel.edu> - 2011-05-25 12:54 -0400
                  Re: Why did Quora choose Python for its development? Ethan Furman <ethan@stoneleaf.us> - 2011-05-25 10:17 -0700
                    Re: Why did Quora choose Python for its development? John Bokma <john@castleamber.com> - 2011-05-25 14:14 -0500
                      Re: Why did Quora choose Python for its development? Matty Sarro <msarro@gmail.com> - 2011-05-25 17:19 -0400
                        Re: Why did Quora choose Python for its development? Neil Cerutti <neilc@norwich.edu> - 2011-05-26 12:44 +0000
                          Re: Why did Quora choose Python for its development? Roy Smith <roy@panix.com> - 2011-05-26 08:51 -0400
                            Re: Why did Quora choose Python for its development? Ben Finney <ben+python@benfinney.id.au> - 2011-05-26 23:11 +1000
                          Re: Why did Quora choose Python for its development? Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2011-05-26 13:35 +0000
                      Re: Why did Quora choose Python for its development? RainyDay <andrei.avk@gmail.com> - 2011-05-25 17:15 -0700
                  Re: Why did Quora choose Python for its development? Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2011-05-25 23:01 +0000
                    Re: Why did Quora choose Python for its development? John Bokma <john@castleamber.com> - 2011-05-25 22:00 -0500
                      Re: Why did Quora choose Python for its development? Ben Finney <ben@benfinney.id.au> - 2011-05-26 14:25 +1000
                        Re: Why did Quora choose Python for its development? John Bokma <john@castleamber.com> - 2011-05-26 10:36 -0500
                          Re: Why did Quora choose Python for its development? Terry Reedy <tjreedy@udel.edu> - 2011-05-26 16:03 -0400
                            Re: Why did Quora choose Python for its development? Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2011-05-27 03:07 +0000
                              Re: Why did Quora choose Python for its development? Thorsten Kampe <thorsten@thorstenkampe.de> - 2011-05-27 10:10 +0200
                                Re: Why did Quora choose Python for its development? Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2011-05-27 09:31 +0000
                                Re: Why did Quora choose Python for its development? Ethan Furman <ethan@stoneleaf.us> - 2011-05-27 10:12 -0700
                          Re: Why did Quora choose Python for its development? Karim <karim.liateni@free.fr> - 2011-05-26 22:27 +0200
                      Re: Why did Quora choose Python for its development? Ethan Furman <ethan@stoneleaf.us> - 2011-05-26 09:18 -0700
                  Re: Why did Quora choose Python for its development? Thorsten Kampe <thorsten@thorstenkampe.de> - 2011-05-26 10:24 +0200
              Re: Why did Quora choose Python for its development? Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2011-05-25 23:25 +0000
            Re: Why did Quora choose Python for its development? Dennis Lee Bieber <wlfraed@ix.netcom.com> - 2011-05-24 23:00 -0700
              Re: Why did Quora choose Python for its development? Roy Smith <roy@panix.com> - 2011-05-25 07:36 -0400
                Re: Why did Quora choose Python for its development? Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2011-05-25 21:55 +1000
                  Re: Why did Quora choose Python for its development? Roy Smith <roy@panix.com> - 2011-05-25 08:25 -0400
                Re: Why did Quora choose Python for its development? "D'Arcy J.M. Cain" <darcy@druid.net> - 2011-05-25 10:23 -0400
                  Re: Why did Quora choose Python for its development? Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2011-05-25 14:56 +0000
                    Re: Why did Quora choose Python for its development? Matty Sarro <msarro@gmail.com> - 2011-05-25 11:43 -0400
                Re: Why did Quora choose Python for its development? Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2011-05-26 00:26 +1000
        Re: Why did Quora choose Python for its development? "Octavian Rasnita" <orasnita@gmail.com> - 2011-05-24 19:10 +0300
        Re: Why did Quora choose Python for its development? "D'Arcy J.M. Cain" <darcy@druid.net> - 2011-05-24 13:22 -0400
        Re: Why did Quora choose Python for its development? "Octavian Rasnita" <orasnita@gmail.com> - 2011-05-24 11:08 +0300
    Re: Why did Quora choose Python for its development? Daniel Kluev <dan.kluev@gmail.com> - 2011-05-24 14:34 +1100
    Re: Why did Quora choose Python for its development? "Octavian Rasnita" <orasnita@gmail.com> - 2011-05-24 08:39 +0300
    Re: Why did Quora choose Python for its development? "Octavian Rasnita" <orasnita@gmail.com> - 2011-05-24 09:00 +0300
    Re: Why did Quora choose Python for its development? Stefan Behnel <stefan_ml@behnel.de> - 2011-05-24 08:23 +0200
      Re: Why did Quora choose Python for its development? Kevin Walzer <kw@codebykevin.com> - 2011-05-24 10:50 -0400
        Re: Why did Quora choose Python for its development? "Octavian Rasnita" <orasnita@gmail.com> - 2011-05-24 19:18 +0300
    Re: Why did Quora choose Python for its development? "Octavian Rasnita" <orasnita@gmail.com> - 2011-05-24 11:10 +0300
    Re: Why did Quora choose Python for its development? Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2011-05-24 18:20 +1000
    Re: Why did Quora choose Python for its development? Daniel Kluev <dan.kluev@gmail.com> - 2011-05-24 19:55 +1100
    Re: Why did Quora choose Python for its development? "D'Arcy J.M. Cain" <darcy@druid.net> - 2011-05-24 06:05 -0400
      Re: Why did Quora choose Python for its development? Teemu Likonen <tlikonen@iki.fi> - 2011-05-24 16:18 +0300
        Re: Why did Quora choose Python for its development? John Bokma <john@castleamber.com> - 2011-05-24 11:50 -0500
          Re: Why did Quora choose Python for its development? Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2011-05-25 03:30 +1000
            Re: Why did Quora choose Python for its development? John Bokma <john@castleamber.com> - 2011-05-24 12:56 -0500
              Re: Why did Quora choose Python for its development? Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2011-05-25 07:53 +1000
                Re: Why did Quora choose Python for its development? John Bokma <john@castleamber.com> - 2011-05-24 17:00 -0500
    Re: Why did Quora choose Python for its development? "Octavian Rasnita" <orasnita@gmail.com> - 2011-05-24 19:10 +0300
    Re: Why did Quora choose Python for its development? "Octavian Rasnita" <orasnita@gmail.com> - 2011-05-24 19:10 +0300
    Re: Why did Quora choose Python for its development? "thegist@nospam.net" <thegist@nospam.net> - 2011-05-26 11:52 -0400
    Re: Why did Quora choose Python for its development? Daniel Kluev <dan.kluev@gmail.com> - 2011-05-27 08:33 +1100
      Re: Why did Quora choose Python for its development? RainyDay <andrei.avk@gmail.com> - 2011-05-26 16:41 -0700

Page 4 of 6 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 [4] 5 6  Next page →

#6271

On Wed, 25 May 2011 07:01:07 -0500, John Bokma wrote:

> if Python is really so much better than Python [Perl] 
> readability wise, why do I have such a hard time dropping
> Perl and moving on?

My guess is that you have an adversarial view of computer languages, 
therefore after investing so much time and energy and, most importantly, 
self-image into becoming a Perl programmer, dropping it and moving on 
would be tantamount to admitting to yourself that you were "wrong" to 
have wasted so many years on the wrong language.

Whether it is objectively "wrong" or not rarely enters into these things.

That *you personally* can't or won't let go of Perl says nothing about 
the relative readability of Perl and Python code.


-- 
Steven

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

#6290

Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> writes:

> On Wed, 25 May 2011 07:01:07 -0500, John Bokma wrote:
>
>> if Python is really so much better than Python [Perl] 
>> readability wise, why do I have such a hard time dropping
>> Perl and moving on?
>
> My guess is that you have an adversarial view of computer languages, 

Well, it's clear that you are indeed the fuckwit I suspected you
are. What's a pity is that you are so vocal in this group and to me at
least makes it a way less pleasant experience to read this group.

Get a life. Or better, just fuck off and die. It will improve both the
world and the Python community, of which you are nothing but a little,
smelly shitstain.

-- 
John Bokma                                                               j3b

Blog: http://johnbokma.com/        Perl Consultancy: http://castleamber.com/
Perl for books:    http://johnbokma.com/perl/help-in-exchange-for-books.html

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

#6293

> Get a life. Or better, just fuck off and die. It will improve both the
> world and the Python community, of which you are nothing but a little,
> smelly shitstain.

That abuse is entirely unwelcome in this community, against any person.
Please desist.

If you find any contributing members so difficult to deal with, please
don't respond at all.

-- 
 \           “We have met the enemy and he is us.” —Walt Kelly, _Pogo_ |
  `\                                                        1971-04-22 |
_o__)                                                                  |
Ben Finney

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

#6322

Ben Finney <ben@benfinney.id.au> writes:

>> Get a life. Or better, just fuck off and die. It will improve both the
>> world and the Python community, of which you are nothing but a little,
>> smelly shitstain.
>
> That abuse is entirely unwelcome in this community, against any person.
> Please desist.

You should have spoken up sooner, especially as the spokes person of
"this" community. But every bully has is fan club.

-- 
John Bokma                                                               j3b

Blog: http://johnbokma.com/        Perl Consultancy: http://castleamber.com/
Perl for books:    http://johnbokma.com/perl/help-in-exchange-for-books.html

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

#6340

On 5/26/2011 11:36 AM, John Bokma wrote:
> Ben Finney<ben@benfinney.id.au>  writes:

 >>>> [impolite comment not quoted]
>>> Get a life. Or better, just fuck off and die. It will improve both the
>>> world and the Python community, of which you are nothing but a little,
>>> smelly shitstain.
>>
>> That abuse is entirely unwelcome in this community, against any person.
>> Please desist.
>
> You should have spoken up sooner, especially as the spokes person of
> "this" community. But every bully has is fan club.

I agree that the original impolite comment was just that -- impolite -- 
and perhaps enough so that it should have been spoken out against. But I 
also agree that the quoted response is at least three times as bad, 
enough so to understandably push someone to respond. Both comments are 
atypical here.

-- 
Terry Jan Reedy

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

#6364

On Thu, 26 May 2011 16:03:58 -0400, Terry Reedy wrote:

> On 5/26/2011 11:36 AM, John Bokma wrote:
>> Ben Finney<ben@benfinney.id.au>  writes:
> 
>  >>>> [impolite comment not quoted]
>>>> Get a life. Or better, just fuck off and die. It will improve both
>>>> the world and the Python community, of which you are nothing but a
>>>> little, smelly shitstain.
>>>
>>> That abuse is entirely unwelcome in this community, against any
>>> person. Please desist.
>>
>> You should have spoken up sooner, especially as the spokes person of
>> "this" community. But every bully has is fan club.
> 
> I agree that the original impolite comment was just that -- impolite --
> and perhaps enough so that it should have been spoken out against. 

Okay, I've stayed silent while people criticize me long enough. What 
exactly did I say that was impolite? 

Is this one of those things where it is "impolite" to say certain things 
in public even though in private everyone knows they are true?

We all know that some people have adversarial views of all sorts of 
things, including computer languages. "My language of choice is better 
than your language of choice". Most of us can probably name examples, or 
if not, it wouldn't take much effort on Google to find them.

If we're honest to ourselves, we'd realise that we're all at least a 
*little bit* adversarial. XKCD's famous cartoon about "People are WRONG 
on the Internet!" is funny because we can so often relate to it. We 
really do think some languages are better than others, in objective ways 
as well as subjective, and want to "support our language". That's partly 
why we're here, to give back to the language that we enjoy using. We're 
just more nuanced about our opinion than the trolls.

And we also know that people keep going back to their language of choice 
for all sorts of reasons that aren't objective. Why do I keep going back 
to Pascal instead of C? I'll give you all sorts of objective reasons why 
I think Pascal is a better designed language, but the real reason is 
because it makes me comfortable. It was the first language I learned.

Objectively, I should just drop it and move on, but I'm going to keep 
tilting at those windmills hoping to turn the tide of popular opinion and 
see a mass migration of C coders to Pascal...

*cough*

John threw down a distinct challenge:

    if Python is really so much better than Python [sic] 
    readability wise, why do I have such a hard time dropping
    Perl and moving on?

Am I really the only one who can hear the "oh yeah smart guy" at the 
start of that sentence?

If this is one of those lines you're not allowed to cross, where 
everybody knows that people invest self-image in their job or choice of 
language ("dammit, I'm a *Python coder*, I'd never stoop to writing 
COBOL!" sort of thing) but you mustn't mention it because that would be 
impolite, well, screw that for a game of soldiers. Sometimes politeness 
is the grease that keeps society's wheels turning, and sometimes it's 
just blinkers that stops us from understanding ourselves and others.

If I got it wrong about John, oh well, I said it was a guess, and trying 
to get inside someone else's head is always a chancy business. But the 
fact that he responded so aggressively instead of saying "Ha, Freudian 
projection, much?" hints that maybe I hit a button. Or maybe I just ran 
into him on a bad day.

Projection? Yes, I cheerfully admit it. *My* self-image is partly "I am a 
Python coder", not an enterprise Java suit or a VB code monkey. It's more 
complicated than that, of course, but let's remember also that the Perl 
community is *full* of people who self-identify as "Just Another Perl 
Hacker".

John, I'd apologise if I thought I said something rude or nasty to you, 
but I don't, so I don't believe I have anything to apologise for. But I 
will say that I regret that you took it as an attack, and assure you that 
it was not meant that way.



-- 
Steven

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

#6377

* Steven D'Aprano (27 May 2011 03:07:30 GMT)
> Okay, I've stayed silent while people criticize me long enough. What 
> exactly did I say that was impolite? 

Nothing.

> John threw down a distinct challenge:
> 
>     if Python is really so much better than Python [sic] 
>     readability wise, why do I have such a hard time dropping
>     Perl and moving on?
> [...]
> If I got it wrong about John, oh well, I said it was a guess, and
> trying to get inside someone else's head is always a chancy business.

Why were you trying to speculate in response to such a - sorry - dumb[1] 
question? What do his personal failures to switch to Python (why did he 
even try?) have to do with whether a) Python is more readable than Perl 
and b) whether readability counts towards productivity?

/Maybe/ it is simply because he "somehow like[s] Perl more" but 
definitely that is not really relevant to the question about 
readibility.

> Or maybe I just ran into him on a bad day.

"Bad argument day". His other "Python vs Perl is like Latin vs 
Devanagari" argument is not really better. The problem with Perl is that 
it does /not/ use (Latin) alphabetic characters (like a, b, c) to form 
words but symbols ($, %, @. |, *) and re-combines them to give them new 
and special meaning.

So this is exactly /not/ a alphabet vs alphabet thing but a word(s) vs 
symbols.

Thorsten
[1] Sorry for being impolite. But "why do I...?" kind of rhetorical 
questions (as arguments) are just dumb.

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

#6381

On Fri, 27 May 2011 10:10:55 +0200, Thorsten Kampe wrote:

> * Steven D'Aprano (27 May 2011 03:07:30 GMT)
[...]
>> If I got it wrong about John, oh well, I said it was a guess, and
>> trying to get inside someone else's head is always a chancy business.
> 
> Why were you trying to speculate in response to such a - sorry - dumb[1]
> question?

Because someone was WRONG on the INTERNET!!!

*wink*


-- 
Steven

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

#6411

Thorsten Kampe wrote:
> * Steven D'Aprano (27 May 2011 03:07:30 GMT)
>> Okay, I've stayed silent while people criticize me long enough. What 
>> exactly did I say that was impolite? 
> 
> Nothing.
> 
>> John threw down a distinct challenge:
>>
>>     if Python is really so much better than Python [sic] 
>>     readability wise, why do I have such a hard time dropping
>>     Perl and moving on?
>> [...]
>> If I got it wrong about John, oh well, I said it was a guess, and
>> trying to get inside someone else's head is always a chancy business.
> 
> Why were you trying to speculate in response to such a - sorry - dumb[1] 
> question?

He asked the question not once, but multiple times (IIRC at least three, 
possible more) -- after a while it stops being rhetorical.

I would say also, if you don't want an answer, don't ask the question.

~Ethan~

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

#6342

On 05/26/2011 10:03 PM, Terry Reedy wrote:
> On 5/26/2011 11:36 AM, John Bokma wrote:
>> Ben Finney<ben@benfinney.id.au>  writes:
>
> >>>> [impolite comment not quoted]
>>>> Get a life. Or better, just fuck off and die. It will improve both the
>>>> world and the Python community, of which you are nothing but a little,
>>>> smelly shitstain.
>>>
>>> That abuse is entirely unwelcome in this community, against any person.
>>> Please desist.
>>
>> You should have spoken up sooner, especially as the spokes person of
>> "this" community. But every bully has is fan club.
>
> I agree that the original impolite comment was just that -- impolite 
> -- and perhaps enough so that it should have been spoken out against. 
> But I also agree that the quoted response is at least three times as 
> bad, enough so to understandably push someone to respond. Both 
> comments are atypical here.
>

Original one impolite perhaps but only truth could cause such hatred.

Cheers

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

#6326

John,

You say English is not your first language.  Let me assure you that the 
words you chose to use in reply to Stephen were vulgar as well as rude, 
and did more to lesson the overall friendliness of this forum than 
Stephen's adversarial style.

You usually have interesting and informative posts -- please don't 
resort to this tactic.

~Ethan~

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

#6304

* John Bokma (Wed, 25 May 2011 07:01:07 -0500)
> Thorsten Kampe <thorsten@thorstenkampe.de> writes:
> > * Chris Angelico (Wed, 25 May 2011 08:01:38 +1000)
> >> 
> >> On Wed, May 25, 2011 at 3:39 AM, D'Arcy J.M. Cain <darcy@druid.net> wrote:
> >> > One of my favorite quotes (not sure if it was about Perl or APL) is 
> > "I
> >> > refuse to use a programming language where the proponents of it stick
> >> > snippets under each other's nose and say 'I bet you can't guess what
> >> > this does.'"
> >> 
> >> Yes, I believe that was Perl. And an amusing quote. But most of the
> >> point of it comes from the fact that Perl uses punctuation for most of
> >> its keywords, whereas (say) Python uses English words; it's a lot more
> >> fun to crunch something down when you can use $| and friends than when
> >> you have to put "x and y", complete with spaces, for a simple boolean.
> >> But that says nothing about which language is actually better for
> >> working with... [...]
> >
> > It does say something about readibility. And yes, "readability counts". 
> > And yes, readability says a lot about how good a language is for reading 
> > and working with.
> 
> To people used to the latin alphabet languages using a different script
> are unreadable. So readability has a lot to do with what one is used
> to.

You've made that "alphabet" argument more than once. Nevertheless it's 
nonsense (sorry). Perl uses the same alphabet as Python. Only the 
"words" Perl uses ("$|" for instance) are only found in a Perl 
dictionary not in a English or math dictionary like the one that Python 
uses.

That's why you can /read/ Python but you have to /decode/ Perl to 
understand the source code.

> Like I already stated before: if Python is really so much better than
> Python readability wise, why do I have such a hard time dropping Perl
> and moving on?

What kind of argument is that?

Thorsten

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

#6272

On Wed, 25 May 2011 08:01:38 +1000, Chris Angelico wrote:

> On Wed, May 25, 2011 at 3:39 AM, D'Arcy J.M. Cain <darcy@druid.net>
> wrote:

>> When I first looked at Perl it looked like line noise.  When I first
>> looked at Python it looked like pseudo-code.
> 
> When I first looked at assembly language it looked like random junk left
> behind in memory. When I first looked at COBOL it looked like ... COBOL.
> Doesn't make either of them better or worse.

Er, yes it does.

Writing code is primarily for *human readers*. Once you've compiled the 
code once, the computer never need look at it again, but human being come 
back to read it over and over again, to learn from it, or for 
maintenance. We rightfully value our own time and convenience as more 
valuable than that of the computer's, which is why we use programming 
languages at all, instead of having custom-made hardware built for every 
task we want the computer to do: 

"I have to rename a file before August 2015, but the rename itself needs 
to be done in under a picosecond. Know any bespoke chip manufacturers who 
do small runs?"

From that perspective, COBOL is an improvement on assembly, which is why 
there are probably still more COBOL programmers around than people who 
work exclusively on assembly.

Sometimes we compromise, or even subvert, that trade-off: for speed 
critical code where we do care more about the computer's time than our 
own, or for esoteric languages designed to be as hard to read as 
possible. My personal favourites, Oook and Whitespace.

But generally, people spend more time reading code than writing it, 
therefore we should weigh "ease of reading" higher than "ease of 
writing". (My guess is, the weights should be about 5:1.)


> Pseudo-code is not a viable language for a computer to parse, 

Only because "pseudo-code" implies that the code is ambiguous or 
otherwise cannot be parsed. If it could be, it wouldn't be *pseudo*, it 
would be real code (possibly for some compiler that hasn't been written 
yet).


> but it's a
> good language for scribbling down comments in. That doesn't necessarily
> mean that a programming language that's "closer to" pseudo-code is good.

That depends on the nature of pseudo-code. "Pseudo-assembly" has all the 
disadvantages of assembly with none of the advantages, i.e. it doesn't 
actually work. So in that sense, pseudo-code is not necessarily a good 
thing nor a bad thing.

But in general conversation, pseudo-code is usually implied to mean that 
the language is as close to human language as you can make it, while 
still be parsable by a compiler.


> And verbosity doesn't necessarily equate to quality; for instance, when
> I'm working in both Python and PHP, I find it FAR tidier to use Python's
> {1:2,3:4] notation than PHP's array(1=>2,3=>4) - but on the flip side, I
> would prefer to have program structure defined by keywords like "if" and
> "while" than obscure random line noise. (Fortunately, most sane
> languages do indeed use keywords there.)

True. That's one of the limitations of the xtalk family of languages 
derived from Apple's (defunct) Hypertalk: it's awfully verbose, which is 
good for newbies but not quite so good for experts.



-- 
Steven

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

#6195

On Tue, 24 May 2011 13:39:02 -0400, "D'Arcy J.M. Cain" <darcy@druid.net>
declaimed the following in gmane.comp.python.general:


> My point was that even proponents of the language can make a
> significant error based on the way the variable is named.  It's like
> the old Fortran IV that I first learned where the name of the variable
> determined whether it was an integer or a floating point.
>
	Only if one didn't declare the type ahead of time...

	And even then it wasn't that hard to remember (using a non-PC
mnemonic): Indian's are integer (variables starting I to N inclusive
were integers)
-- 
	Wulfraed                 Dennis Lee Bieber         AF6VN
        wlfraed@ix.netcom.com    HTTP://wlfraed.home.netcom.com/

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

#6223

In article <mailman.2052.1306303508.9059.python-list@python.org>,
 Dennis Lee Bieber <wlfraed@ix.netcom.com> wrote:

> On Tue, 24 May 2011 13:39:02 -0400, "D'Arcy J.M. Cain" <darcy@druid.net>
> declaimed the following in gmane.comp.python.general:
> 
> 
> > My point was that even proponents of the language can make a
> > significant error based on the way the variable is named.  It's like
> > the old Fortran IV that I first learned where the name of the variable
> > determined whether it was an integer or a floating point.
> >
> 	Only if one didn't declare the type ahead of time...
> 
> 	And even then it wasn't that hard to remember (using a non-PC
> mnemonic): Indian's are integer (variables starting I to N inclusive
> were integers)

Remembering that I, J, K, L, M, and N were integer was trivial if you 
came from a math background.  And, of course, Fortran was all about 
math, so that was natural.  Those letters are commonly used for integers 
in formulae.  If I write $ x sub i $, anybody who knows math would 
immediately assume that the range of x was reals and the range of i was 
integers.

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

#6224

On Wed, May 25, 2011 at 9:36 PM, Roy Smith <roy@panix.com> wrote:
> Remembering that I, J, K, L, M, and N were integer was trivial if you
> came from a math background.  And, of course, Fortran was all about
> math, so that was natural.  Those letters are commonly used for integers
> in formulae.  If I write $ x sub i $, anybody who knows math would
> immediately assume that the range of x was reals and the range of i was
> integers.

When I studied maths, x and y were reals, and i wasn't. But it wasn't
integer either... :)

Chris Angelico

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

#6231

In article <mailman.2069.1306324514.9059.python-list@python.org>,
 Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Wed, May 25, 2011 at 9:36 PM, Roy Smith <roy@panix.com> wrote:
> > Remembering that I, J, K, L, M, and N were integer was trivial if you
> > came from a math background.  And, of course, Fortran was all about
> > math, so that was natural.  Those letters are commonly used for integers
> > in formulae.  If I write $ x sub i $, anybody who knows math would
> > immediately assume that the range of x was reals and the range of i was
> > integers.
> 
> When I studied maths, x and y were reals, and i wasn't. But it wasn't
> integer either... :)

I was talking of i in the context of a variable, not as a constant.  If 
I write $ 3 + 7i $ in one place and $ x sub i $ in another, most people 
will figure out from the context which is which.

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

#6243

On Wed, 25 May 2011 07:36:40 -0400
Roy Smith <roy@panix.com> wrote:
> Remembering that I, J, K, L, M, and N were integer was trivial if you 
> came from a math background.  And, of course, Fortran was all about 

The easiest way to remember was that the first two letters of INteger
gave you the range.

-- 
D'Arcy J.M. Cain <darcy@druid.net>         |  Democracy is three wolves
http://www.druid.net/darcy/                |  and a sheep voting on
+1 416 425 1212     (DoD#0082)    (eNTP)   |  what's for dinner.

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

#6246

On Wed, 25 May 2011 10:23:59 -0400, D'Arcy J.M. Cain wrote:

> On Wed, 25 May 2011 07:36:40 -0400
> Roy Smith <roy@panix.com> wrote:
>> Remembering that I, J, K, L, M, and N were integer was trivial if you
>> came from a math background.  And, of course, Fortran was all about
> 
> The easiest way to remember was that the first two letters of INteger
> gave you the range.

Huh. I never knew that. I just learned from use that I, J, K, M and N 
were traditionally integers. I never used L for an integer variable, and 
don't know anyone who does.

I for integer is obvious. If you need a second one, you use the next 
letter J, and if you need a third, the one after that, K. If you need 
four, you're probably doing something wrong.

Likewise, N for number (as in, *counting* number). If you need two, using 
N and O is stupid, because O can be confused with 0, so you go backwards 
and use M.

However, using P and Q for integers is merely arbitrary convention.



-- 
Steven

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

#6248

I hate using L for anything, namely because if you type it lowercase
you always have to wonder if its an l or a 1 in a terminal window.
-Matthew

On Wed, May 25, 2011 at 10:56 AM, Steven D'Aprano
<steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> wrote:
> On Wed, 25 May 2011 10:23:59 -0400, D'Arcy J.M. Cain wrote:
>
>> On Wed, 25 May 2011 07:36:40 -0400
>> Roy Smith <roy@panix.com> wrote:
>>> Remembering that I, J, K, L, M, and N were integer was trivial if you
>>> came from a math background.  And, of course, Fortran was all about
>>
>> The easiest way to remember was that the first two letters of INteger
>> gave you the range.
>
> Huh. I never knew that. I just learned from use that I, J, K, M and N
> were traditionally integers. I never used L for an integer variable, and
> don't know anyone who does.
>
> I for integer is obvious. If you need a second one, you use the next
> letter J, and if you need a third, the one after that, K. If you need
> four, you're probably doing something wrong.
>
> Likewise, N for number (as in, *counting* number). If you need two, using
> N and O is stupid, because O can be confused with 0, so you go backwards
> and use M.
>
> However, using P and Q for integers is merely arbitrary convention.
>
>
>
> --
> Steven
> --
> http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
>

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

Page 4 of 6 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 [4] 5 6  Next page →

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

csiph-web