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

Groups > comp.lang.python > #60219 > unrolled thread

Got a Doubt ! Wanting for your Help ! Plz make it ASAP !

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

Contents

  Got a Doubt ! Wanting for your Help ! Plz make it ASAP ! Bharath Kummar <bathubharath94@gmail.com> - 2013-11-22 18:22 +0530
    Re: Got a Doubt ! Wanting for your Help ! Plz make it ASAP ! Roy Smith <roy@panix.com> - 2013-11-22 08:56 -0500
    Re: Got a Doubt ! Wanting for your Help ! Plz make it ASAP ! Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2013-11-22 14:12 +0000
      Re: Got a Doubt ! Wanting for your Help ! Plz make it ASAP ! Grant Edwards <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2013-11-22 15:08 +0000
    Re: Got a Doubt ! Wanting for your Help ! Plz make it ASAP ! rusi <rustompmody@gmail.com> - 2013-11-22 06:13 -0800
      Re: Got a Doubt ! Wanting for your Help ! Plz make it ASAP ! Ian Kelly <ian.g.kelly@gmail.com> - 2013-11-22 08:10 -0700
      Re: Got a Doubt ! Wanting for your Help ! Plz make it ASAP ! Ned Batchelder <ned@nedbatchelder.com> - 2013-11-22 07:18 -0800
    Re: Got a Doubt ! Wanting for your Help ! Plz make it ASAP ! Denis McMahon <denismfmcmahon@gmail.com> - 2013-11-23 01:55 +0000
      Re: Got a Doubt ! Wanting for your Help ! Plz make it ASAP ! Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2013-11-23 02:18 +0000
        Re: Got a Doubt ! Wanting for your Help ! Plz make it ASAP ! Dennis Lee Bieber <wlfraed@ix.netcom.com> - 2013-11-22 22:47 -0500
        Re: Got a Doubt ! Wanting for your Help ! Plz make it ASAP ! Ian Kelly <ian.g.kelly@gmail.com> - 2013-11-22 23:42 -0700
          Re: Got a Doubt ! Wanting for your Help ! Plz make it ASAP ! Gregory Ewing <greg.ewing@canterbury.ac.nz> - 2013-11-24 12:31 +1300
          Re: Got a Doubt ! Wanting for your Help ! Plz make it ASAP ! Gregory Ewing <greg.ewing@canterbury.ac.nz> - 2013-11-24 12:35 +1300
        Re: Got a Doubt ! Wanting for your Help ! Plz make it ASAP ! William Ray Wing <wrw@mac.com> - 2013-11-23 09:00 -0500
        Re: Got a Doubt ! Wanting for your Help ! Plz make it ASAP ! Mark Lawrence <breamoreboy@yahoo.co.uk> - 2013-11-23 14:18 +0000
        Re: Got a Doubt ! Wanting for your Help ! Plz make it ASAP ! Dennis Lee Bieber <wlfraed@ix.netcom.com> - 2013-11-23 10:44 -0500
        Re: Got a Doubt ! Wanting for your Help ! Plz make it ASAP ! Tim Chase <python.list@tim.thechases.com> - 2013-11-23 10:35 -0600
        Re: Got a Doubt ! Wanting for your Help ! Plz make it ASAP ! Steve Simmons <square.steve@gmail.com> - 2013-11-23 17:34 +0100
        Re: Got a Doubt ! Wanting for your Help ! Plz make it ASAP ! Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2013-11-24 03:35 +1100
        Re: Got a Doubt ! Wanting for your Help ! Plz make it ASAP ! Steve Simmons <square.steve@gmail.com> - 2013-11-23 17:43 +0100
        Re: Got a Doubt ! Wanting for your Help ! Plz make it ASAP ! Denis McMahon <denismfmcmahon@gmail.com> - 2013-11-23 19:40 +0000
        Re: Got a Doubt ! Wanting for your Help ! Plz make it ASAP ! Rick Johnson <rantingrickjohnson@gmail.com> - 2013-11-23 14:00 -0800
        Re: Got a Doubt ! Wanting for your Help ! Plz make it ASAP ! Rick Johnson <rantingrickjohnson@gmail.com> - 2013-11-23 15:06 -0800
          Re: Got a Doubt ! Wanting for your Help ! Plz make it ASAP ! Tim Chase <python.list@tim.thechases.com> - 2013-11-23 17:22 -0600
          Re: Got a Doubt ! Wanting for your Help ! Plz make it ASAP ! Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2013-11-24 10:30 +1100
          Re: Got a Doubt ! Wanting for your Help ! Plz make it ASAP ! Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2013-11-24 01:38 +0000
            Re: Got a Doubt ! Wanting for your Help ! Plz make it ASAP ! Devin Jeanpierre <jeanpierreda@gmail.com> - 2013-11-23 23:32 -0800
            Re: Got a Doubt ! Wanting for your Help ! Plz make it ASAP ! Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2013-11-24 18:49 +1100
            Re: Got a Doubt ! Wanting for your Help ! Plz make it ASAP ! xDog Walker <thudfoo@gmail.com> - 2013-11-24 08:11 -0800
            Re: Got a Doubt ! Wanting for your Help ! Plz make it ASAP ! Rick Johnson <rantingrickjohnson@gmail.com> - 2013-11-25 11:32 -0800
              Re: Got a Doubt ! Wanting for your Help ! Plz make it ASAP ! Ned Batchelder <ned@nedbatchelder.com> - 2013-11-25 12:10 -0800
                Re: Got a Doubt ! Wanting for your Help ! Plz make it ASAP ! Gregory Ewing <greg.ewing@canterbury.ac.nz> - 2013-11-26 12:12 +1300
                  Re: Got a Doubt ! Wanting for your Help ! Plz make it ASAP ! Larry Martell <larry.martell@gmail.com> - 2013-11-25 18:27 -0500
                Re: Got a Doubt ! Wanting for your Help ! Plz make it ASAP ! Rick Johnson <rantingrickjohnson@gmail.com> - 2013-11-25 19:33 -0800
                  Re: Got a Doubt ! Wanting for your Help ! Plz make it ASAP ! Ned Batchelder <ned@nedbatchelder.com> - 2013-11-26 03:40 -0800
        Re: Got a Doubt ! Wanting for your Help ! Plz make it ASAP ! Grant Edwards <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2013-11-25 16:23 +0000
        Re: Got a Doubt ! Wanting for your Help ! Plz make it ASAP ! Antoon Pardon <antoon.pardon@rece.vub.ac.be> - 2013-11-25 20:53 +0100
        Re: Got a Doubt ! Wanting for your Help ! Plz make it ASAP ! Joel Goldstick <joel.goldstick@gmail.com> - 2013-11-25 15:05 -0500
        Re: Got a Doubt ! Wanting for your Help ! Plz make it ASAP ! Ethan Furman <ethan@stoneleaf.us> - 2013-11-25 12:00 -0800
        Re: Got a Doubt ! Wanting for your Help ! Plz make it ASAP ! Antoon Pardon <antoon.pardon@rece.vub.ac.be> - 2013-11-26 08:32 +0100
        Re: Got a Doubt ! Wanting for your Help ! Plz make it ASAP ! Antoon Pardon <antoon.pardon@rece.vub.ac.be> - 2013-11-26 08:47 +0100
          Re: Got a Doubt ! Wanting for your Help ! Plz make it ASAP ! Roy Smith <roy@panix.com> - 2013-11-26 09:37 -0500
            Re: Got a Doubt ! Wanting for your Help ! Plz make it ASAP ! Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2013-11-27 01:52 +1100
              Re: Got a Doubt ! Wanting for your Help ! Plz make it ASAP ! Alister <alister.ware@ntlworld.com> - 2013-11-26 15:31 +0000
                Re: Got a Doubt ! Wanting for your Help ! Plz make it ASAP ! Gene Heskett <gheskett@wdtv.com> - 2013-11-26 10:51 -0500
              Re: Got a Doubt ! Wanting for your Help ! Plz make it ASAP ! Rick Johnson <rantingrickjohnson@gmail.com> - 2013-11-26 17:26 -0800
                Re: Got a Doubt ! Wanting for your Help ! Plz make it ASAP ! Ned Batchelder <ned@nedbatchelder.com> - 2013-11-26 21:11 -0500
                  Re: Got a Doubt ! Wanting for your Help ! Plz make it ASAP ! Rick Johnson <rantingrickjohnson@gmail.com> - 2013-11-26 20:24 -0800
                    Still off topic. Deal with it. [was Re: Got a Doubt ! Wanting for your Help ! Plz make it ASAP !] Steven D'Aprano <steve@pearwood.info> - 2013-11-27 06:56 +0000
                      Re: Still off topic. Deal with it. [was Re: Got a Doubt ! Wanting for your Help ! Plz make it ASAP !] Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2013-11-27 18:06 +1100
                      Re: Still off topic. Deal with it. [was Re: Got a Doubt ! Wanting for your Help ! Plz make it ASAP !] Jussi Piitulainen <jpiitula@ling.helsinki.fi> - 2013-11-27 11:47 +0200
                    Re: Got a Doubt ! Wanting for your Help ! Plz make it ASAP ! Ned Batchelder <ned@nedbatchelder.com> - 2013-11-27 05:32 -0500
                Completely and utterly Off Topic [was Re: Got a Doubt ! Wanting for your Help ! Plz make it ASAP !] Steven D'Aprano <steve@pearwood.info> - 2013-11-27 06:48 +0000
                  Re: Completely and utterly Off Topic [was Re: Got a Doubt ! Wanting for your Help ! Plz make it ASAP !] Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2013-11-27 18:02 +1100
                  Re: Completely and utterly Off Topic [was Re: Got a Doubt ! Wanting for your Help ! Plz make it ASAP !] rusi <rustompmody@gmail.com> - 2013-11-27 01:47 -0800
                    Re: Completely and utterly Off Topic [was Re: Got a Doubt ! Wanting for your Help ! Plz make it ASAP !] Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2013-11-27 20:57 +1100
                  Re: Completely and utterly Off Topic [was Re: Got a Doubt ! Wanting for your Help ! Plz make it ASAP !] Mark Lawrence <breamoreboy@yahoo.co.uk> - 2013-11-27 10:00 +0000
            Re: Got a Doubt ! Wanting for your Help ! Plz make it ASAP ! Antoon Pardon <antoon.pardon@rece.vub.ac.be> - 2013-11-26 17:57 +0100
            Re: Got a Doubt ! Wanting for your Help ! Plz make it ASAP ! Tim Delaney <timothy.c.delaney@gmail.com> - 2013-11-27 08:42 +1100
            Re: Got a Doubt ! Wanting for your Help ! Plz make it ASAP ! Antoon Pardon <antoon.pardon@rece.vub.ac.be> - 2013-11-27 09:16 +0100
            Re: Got a Doubt ! Wanting for your Help ! Plz make it ASAP ! Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2013-11-27 19:19 +1100
            Re: Got a Doubt ! Wanting for your Help ! Plz make it ASAP ! Antoon Pardon <antoon.pardon@rece.vub.ac.be> - 2013-11-27 09:31 +0100
              Re: Got a Doubt ! Wanting for your Help ! Plz make it ASAP ! Rotwang <sg552@hotmail.co.uk> - 2013-11-27 13:36 +0000
            Re: Got a Doubt ! Wanting for your Help ! Plz make it ASAP ! Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2013-11-27 19:36 +1100
            Re: Got a Doubt ! Wanting for your Help ! Plz make it ASAP ! Antoon Pardon <antoon.pardon@rece.vub.ac.be> - 2013-11-27 10:12 +0100
              Re: Got a Doubt ! Wanting for your Help ! Plz make it ASAP ! rusi <rustompmody@gmail.com> - 2013-11-27 01:32 -0800
                Re: Got a Doubt ! Wanting for your Help ! Plz make it ASAP ! rusi <rustompmody@gmail.com> - 2013-11-27 01:36 -0800
                Re: Got a Doubt ! Wanting for your Help ! Plz make it ASAP ! Paul Rudin <paul.nospam@rudin.co.uk> - 2013-11-27 10:31 +0000
                  Re: Got a Doubt ! Wanting for your Help ! Plz make it ASAP ! Larry Martell <larry.martell@gmail.com> - 2013-11-27 09:09 -0500
                    Re: Got a Doubt ! Wanting for your Help ! Plz make it ASAP ! rusi <rustompmody@gmail.com> - 2013-11-27 06:37 -0800
                    Re: Got a Doubt ! Wanting for your Help ! Plz make it ASAP ! Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2013-11-27 14:45 +0000
                Re: Got a Doubt ! Wanting for your Help ! Plz make it ASAP ! Gene Heskett <gheskett@wdtv.com> - 2013-11-27 08:18 -0500
                Re: Got a Doubt ! Wanting for your Help ! Plz make it ASAP ! Ned Batchelder <ned@nedbatchelder.com> - 2013-11-27 10:25 -0500
                Re: Got a Doubt ! Wanting for your Help ! Plz make it ASAP ! Tim Chase <python.list@tim.thechases.com> - 2013-11-27 10:25 -0600
                  Re: Got a Doubt ! Wanting for your Help ! Plz make it ASAP ! rusi <rustompmody@gmail.com> - 2013-11-27 09:15 -0800
              Re: Got a Doubt ! Wanting for your Help ! Plz make it ASAP ! alex23 <wuwei23@gmail.com> - 2013-11-28 10:58 +1000
                Re: Got a Doubt ! Wanting for your Help ! Plz make it ASAP ! Roy Smith <roy@panix.com> - 2013-11-27 20:08 -0500
                  Re: Got a Doubt ! Wanting for your Help ! Plz make it ASAP ! Tim Chase <python.list@tim.thechases.com> - 2013-11-27 19:24 -0600
            Re: Got a Doubt ! Wanting for your Help ! Plz make it ASAP ! Mark Lawrence <breamoreboy@yahoo.co.uk> - 2013-11-27 10:06 +0000
            Re: Got a Doubt ! Wanting for your Help ! Plz make it ASAP ! Robert Kern <robert.kern@gmail.com> - 2013-11-27 12:51 +0000
            Re: Got a Doubt ! Wanting for your Help ! Plz make it ASAP ! Robert Kern <robert.kern@gmail.com> - 2013-11-27 12:57 +0000
              Re: Got a Doubt ! Wanting for your Help ! Plz make it ASAP ! rusi <rustompmody@gmail.com> - 2013-11-27 05:29 -0800
                Re: Got a Doubt ! Wanting for your Help ! Plz make it ASAP ! Robert Kern <robert.kern@gmail.com> - 2013-11-27 14:00 +0000

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

#60576

On Wed, Nov 27, 2013 at 7:16 PM, Antoon Pardon
<antoon.pardon@rece.vub.ac.be> wrote:
> However that second sentence doesn't make much sense to me. Modern
> languages contain a subset that is called the standard language. This
> is the subset that is generally taught. Especially to those for whom
> the language is foreign. So when you define a specific language to
> use on an international forum, it is strongly suggested that people
> limit themselves to the standard subset and don't use dialects since
> "dialect" AFAIU means it is outside this standard.

Do you mean standard British English, standard American English,
standard Australian English, or some other?

ChrisA

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

#60577

Op 27-11-13 09:19, Chris Angelico schreef:
> On Wed, Nov 27, 2013 at 7:16 PM, Antoon Pardon
> <antoon.pardon@rece.vub.ac.be> wrote:
>> However that second sentence doesn't make much sense to me. Modern
>> languages contain a subset that is called the standard language. This
>> is the subset that is generally taught. Especially to those for whom
>> the language is foreign. So when you define a specific language to
>> use on an international forum, it is strongly suggested that people
>> limit themselves to the standard subset and don't use dialects since
>> "dialect" AFAIU means it is outside this standard.
> 
> Do you mean standard British English, standard American English,
> standard Australian English, or some other?

Does that significantly matter or are you just looking for details
you can use to disagree? As far as I understand the overlap between
standard British English and standard American English is so large
that it doesn't really matter for those who had to learn the language.
Likewise for the overlap with standard Australian English.

-- 
Antoon

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

#60607

On 27/11/2013 08:31, Antoon Pardon wrote:
> Op 27-11-13 09:19, Chris Angelico schreef:
>> [...]
>>
>> Do you mean standard British English, standard American English,
>> standard Australian English, or some other?
>
> Does that significantly matter or are you just looking for details
> you can use to disagree? As far as I understand the overlap between
> standard British English and standard American English is so large
> that it doesn't really matter for those who had to learn the language.

The overlap is large, yes, but there are differences in vocabulary that 
are just as likely to cause confusion as the doubt/question distinction.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LVzwJ6WWlHA&t=5m06s

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

#60578

On Wed, Nov 27, 2013 at 7:31 PM, Antoon Pardon
<antoon.pardon@rece.vub.ac.be> wrote:
> Op 27-11-13 09:19, Chris Angelico schreef:
>> On Wed, Nov 27, 2013 at 7:16 PM, Antoon Pardon
>> <antoon.pardon@rece.vub.ac.be> wrote:
>>> However that second sentence doesn't make much sense to me. Modern
>>> languages contain a subset that is called the standard language. This
>>> is the subset that is generally taught. Especially to those for whom
>>> the language is foreign. So when you define a specific language to
>>> use on an international forum, it is strongly suggested that people
>>> limit themselves to the standard subset and don't use dialects since
>>> "dialect" AFAIU means it is outside this standard.
>>
>> Do you mean standard British English, standard American English,
>> standard Australian English, or some other?
>
> Does that significantly matter or are you just looking for details
> you can use to disagree? As far as I understand the overlap between
> standard British English and standard American English is so large
> that it doesn't really matter for those who had to learn the language.
> Likewise for the overlap with standard Australian English.

It matters hugely when your point depends on their being a single
"standard English". The overlap may be large, but all you've done is
either change the terms without solving the problem (because there are
still multiple language variants being used) or create a new language
(the common subset of English across all usages, which is an
impossible target to aim for).

ChrisA

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

#60579

Op 27-11-13 09:36, Chris Angelico schreef:
> On Wed, Nov 27, 2013 at 7:31 PM, Antoon Pardon
> <antoon.pardon@rece.vub.ac.be> wrote:
>> Op 27-11-13 09:19, Chris Angelico schreef:
>>> On Wed, Nov 27, 2013 at 7:16 PM, Antoon Pardon
>>> <antoon.pardon@rece.vub.ac.be> wrote:
>>>> However that second sentence doesn't make much sense to me. Modern
>>>> languages contain a subset that is called the standard language. This
>>>> is the subset that is generally taught. Especially to those for whom
>>>> the language is foreign. So when you define a specific language to
>>>> use on an international forum, it is strongly suggested that people
>>>> limit themselves to the standard subset and don't use dialects since
>>>> "dialect" AFAIU means it is outside this standard.
>>>
>>> Do you mean standard British English, standard American English,
>>> standard Australian English, or some other?
>>
>> Does that significantly matter or are you just looking for details
>> you can use to disagree? As far as I understand the overlap between
>> standard British English and standard American English is so large
>> that it doesn't really matter for those who had to learn the language.
>> Likewise for the overlap with standard Australian English.
> 
> It matters hugely when your point depends on their being a single
> "standard English". The overlap may be large, but all you've done is
> either change the terms without solving the problem (because there are
> still multiple language variants being used) or create a new language
> (the common subset of English across all usages, which is an
> impossible target to aim for).

You are nitpicking. I didn't say nor implied their is a perfect
solution. However that there is no perfect solution doesn't imply
we can't expect some effort from those with english as a mother
tongue to search for ways in which to express themselves that are
more likely to be understood by those who had to learn english
as a foreign language than just to use their local idiom/dialect.

I think that is basic respect for those who had to learn the language.

-- 
Antoon Pardon

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

#60581

On Wednesday, November 27, 2013 7:41:54 AM UTC+5:30, Ned Batchelder wrote:
> On 11/26/13 8:26 PM, Rick Johnson wrote:

<Classic Rick Rant>

> And will you be here to explain to time-travelling Shakespeare why we 
> are all of us speaking English completely wrong (to his ears)?

And to my (Indian!!) ears when Tim says 'plank in the eye' where King James
says 'beam' it does not cut it.

Propositionally: Its a distinction without a difference
Poetically: Well its subjective... to me its a real difference

Likewise in programming:
Propositionally: All languages are equal -- Turing complete -- and people
discussing/inventing new ones are just wasting their and others' time

Poetically: Like all artistic questions this is not settle-able once
and for all and I must preface the following with an "I find that..."
C is artistic in a very different way from Python and assembly
and Haskell.  And C++ is frighteningly unartistic

It is my impression that the arguments that happen in/around programming languages are more-heat-less-light than in typical art/science because artistic 

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

#60582

On Wednesday, November 27, 2013 3:02:54 PM UTC+5:30, rusi wrote:

[Last line cut-off by mistake!]

> It  is  my  impression  that the  arguments  that  happen  in/around
> programming  languages  are  more-heat-less-light  than  in  typical
> art/science because artistic questions masquerade as scientific ones

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

#60593

rusi <rustompmody@gmail.com> writes:

> Propositionally: All languages are equal -- Turing complete 

As an aside, not all languages are Turing complete. For example Charity
is a language with the property that programs are guaranteed to
terminate.

<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charity_(programming_language)>

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

#60609

On Wed, Nov 27, 2013 at 5:31 AM, Paul Rudin <paul.nospam@rudin.co.uk> wrote:
> rusi <rustompmody@gmail.com> writes:
>
>> Propositionally: All languages are equal -- Turing complete
>
> As an aside, not all languages are Turing complete. For example Charity
> is a language with the property that programs are guaranteed to
> terminate.
>
> <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charity_(programming_language)>

How about INTERCAL?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intercal

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

#60610

On Wednesday, November 27, 2013 7:39:37 PM UTC+5:30, Larry wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 27, 2013 at 5:31 AM, Paul Rudin  wrote:
> > rusi  writes:
> >> Propositionally: All languages are equal -- Turing complete
> > As an aside, not all languages are Turing complete. For example Charity
> > is a language with the property that programs are guaranteed to
> > terminate.

> How about INTERCAL?

> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intercal

Oh its Turing complete alright:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intercal#Details

It would be more apt to say that programmers use dozens of 'languages'
(in the sense of notation) that are very far up/down from Turing
equivalent. eg

- regular expressions and parsing tools like yacc are less than Turing
  equivalent
- specification langauages like Z/UML are more powerful than Turing
  machines in that one can specify unimplementable programs

So when I say 'language' strictly I should say 'programming language'

If (something like) Charity succeeds *as a programming language* then
it will be a significant change in how we view programming.  As a thought experiment that is interesting but I would be skeptical…

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

#60612

On Wed, 27 Nov 2013 09:09:37 -0500, Larry Martell wrote:

> On Wed, Nov 27, 2013 at 5:31 AM, Paul Rudin <paul.nospam@rudin.co.uk>
> wrote:
>> rusi <rustompmody@gmail.com> writes:
>>
>>> Propositionally: All languages are equal -- Turing complete
>>
>> As an aside, not all languages are Turing complete. For example Charity
>> is a language with the property that programs are guaranteed to
>> terminate.
>>
>> <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charity_(programming_language)>
> 
> How about INTERCAL?
> 
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intercal


Intercal is Turing complete.

*Not* being Turing complete is normally a bad thing, at least for a full-
blown programming language. On the other hand, a less powerful non-Turing 
complete language would probably be great for things like user-defined 
macros, plugins, and similar, where the users are not entirely trusted.



-- 
Steven

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

#60602

On Wednesday 27 November 2013 07:44:18 rusi did opine:

> On Wednesday, November 27, 2013 7:41:54 AM UTC+5:30, Ned Batchelder 
wrote:
> > On 11/26/13 8:26 PM, Rick Johnson wrote:
> <Classic Rick Rant>
> 
> > And will you be here to explain to time-travelling Shakespeare why we
> > are all of us speaking English completely wrong (to his ears)?
> 
> And to my (Indian!!) ears when Tim says 'plank in the eye' where King
> James says 'beam' it does not cut it.

And around here, when something comes out correct, it is "better than a 
poke in the eye with a sharp stick" if you want to say it in the local 
idiom.  I used to have a B.I.L. who was always claiming "it was good enough 
for the girls I go with".

I think we, who have American English as our first and only language, 
should be giving allowances for the local idioms where the poster may be 
from, and really try to understand what the other posters mean when their 
unfamiliarity with what each of us might define as proper English might 
result in some ambiguity of our understanding of the question.  If after 
careful re-parsing of the statement, I still haven't understood it, then I 
am not allergic to asking for clarification IF I CAN CONTRIBUTE.  Otherwise 
I sit here and lurk, hoping to learn.

But in no case do I think we have a right to berate the original poster, 
who may not even speak the internet's default language, and may be looking 
up every word in a translation aid book, and doing it both ways to read 
what we might have written in response to what he/she posted.

Someone doing that, is in fact making 200x the effort to communicate 
compared to me.  We should be willing to deal with it, and do our best to 
return the favor.

We aren't doing that at all well when we start a week long thread over a 
miss-spelled word, which while humorous to some, are really nothing but 
contests to see who can come up with the next multi-syllable but totally 
meaningless word.  Its not humorous to those who are making the effort to 
communicate with those of us to whom some dialect of English is the first 
and only language.  Contributing to the confusion should not be the object 
here, but I think that is what we are doing by such action/reaction.

Cheers, Gene
-- 
"There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty:
 soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order."
-Ed Howdershelt (Author)
Genes Web page <http://geneslinuxbox.net:6309/gene>

I wonder if I should put myself in ESCROW!!
A pen in the hand of this president is far more
dangerous than 200 million guns in the hands of
         law-abiding citizens.

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

#60618

On 11/27/13 8:18 AM, Gene Heskett wrote:
> On Wednesday 27 November 2013 07:44:18 rusi did opine:
>
>> On Wednesday, November 27, 2013 7:41:54 AM UTC+5:30, Ned Batchelder
> wrote:
>>> On 11/26/13 8:26 PM, Rick Johnson wrote:
>> <Classic Rick Rant>
>>
>>> And will you be here to explain to time-travelling Shakespeare why we
>>> are all of us speaking English completely wrong (to his ears)?
>>
>> And to my (Indian!!) ears when Tim says 'plank in the eye' where King
>> James says 'beam' it does not cut it.
>
> And around here, when something comes out correct, it is "better than a
> poke in the eye with a sharp stick" if you want to say it in the local
> idiom.  I used to have a B.I.L. who was always claiming "it was good enough
> for the girls I go with".
>
> I think we, who have American English as our first and only language,
> should be giving allowances for the local idioms where the poster may be
> from, and really try to understand what the other posters mean when their
> unfamiliarity with what each of us might define as proper English might
> result in some ambiguity of our understanding of the question.  If after
> careful re-parsing of the statement, I still haven't understood it, then I
> am not allergic to asking for clarification IF I CAN CONTRIBUTE.  Otherwise
> I sit here and lurk, hoping to learn.

+1

> But in no case do I think we have a right to berate the original poster,
> who may not even speak the internet's default language, and may be looking
> up every word in a translation aid book, and doing it both ways to read
> what we might have written in response to what he/she posted.
>
> Someone doing that, is in fact making 200x the effort to communicate
> compared to me.  We should be willing to deal with it, and do our best to
> return the favor.

+1

> We aren't doing that at all well when we start a week long thread over a
> miss-spelled word, which while humorous to some, are really nothing but
> contests to see who can come up with the next multi-syllable but totally
> meaningless word.  Its not humorous to those who are making the effort to
> communicate with those of us to whom some dialect of English is the first
> and only language.  Contributing to the confusion should not be the object
> here, but I think that is what we are doing by such action/reaction.

Thanks, I think this sums up the situation very well.

--Ned.

>
> Cheers, Gene
>

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

#60621

On 2013-11-27 01:32, rusi wrote:
> > And will you be here to explain to time-travelling Shakespeare
> > why we are all of us speaking English completely wrong (to his
> > ears)?  
> 
> And to my (Indian!!) ears when Tim says 'plank in the eye' where
> King James says 'beam' it does not cut it.

Well, would you have preferred it in the "correct" form, in
which I could have said "δοκος εν τω οφθαλμω σου"? ;-)

-tkc

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

#60622

On Wednesday, November 27, 2013 9:55:12 PM UTC+5:30, Tim Chase wrote:
> On 2013-11-27 01:32, rusi wrote:
> > > And will you be here to explain to time-travelling Shakespeare
> > > why we are all of us speaking English completely wrong (to his
> > > ears)?  
> > And to my (Indian!!) ears when Tim says 'plank in the eye' where
> > King James says 'beam' it does not cut it.

> Well, would you have preferred it in the "correct" form, in
> which I could have said "δοκος εν τω οφθαλμω σου"? ;-)

Heh!

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

#60652

On 27/11/2013 7:12 PM, Antoon Pardon wrote:
> However that there is no perfect solution doesn't imply
> we can't expect some effort from those with english as a mother
> tongue to search for ways in which to express themselves that are
> more likely to be understood by those who had to learn english
> as a foreign language than just to use their local idiom/dialect.

How do you expect people to know they're using a local idiom?

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

#60654

In article <l764gb$5k5$1@dont-email.me>, alex23 <wuwei23@gmail.com> 
wrote:

> On 27/11/2013 7:12 PM, Antoon Pardon wrote:
> > However that there is no perfect solution doesn't imply
> > we can't expect some effort from those with english as a mother
> > tongue to search for ways in which to express themselves that are
> > more likely to be understood by those who had to learn english
> > as a foreign language than just to use their local idiom/dialect.
> 
> How do you expect people to know they're using a local idiom?

Look it up in Urban Dictionary and Bob's your uncle.

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

#60655

On 2013-11-27 20:08, Roy Smith wrote:
> > How do you expect people to know they're using a local idiom?
> 
> Look it up in Urban Dictionary and Bob's your uncle.

I thought that's how one could tell if it was an *inappropriate*
idiom.  As a matter of fact, I'm surprised that "Bob's your uncle"
doesn't have more inappropriate definitions on UD.  :-P

-tkc

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

#60587

On 27/11/2013 08:16, Antoon Pardon wrote:
> Op 26-11-13 22:42, Tim Delaney schreef:
>> On 27 November 2013 03:57, Antoon Pardon <antoon.pardon@rece.vub.ac.be
>> <mailto:antoon.pardon@rece.vub.ac.be>> wrote:
>>
>>
>>      So I can now ask my questions in dutch and expect others to try and
>>      understand me instead of me asking them in english? Or can I use
>>      literal translations of dutch idioms even if I suspect that such
>>      a literal translation could be misunderstood and even be insulting?
>>
>>
>> 1. No, because this is stated to be an English-speaking list/newsgroup.
>> It just doesn't specify what dialect of English.
>
> Well so much for this group being an international group with only one
> language allowed.
>
> However that second sentence doesn't make much sense to me. Modern
> languages contain a subset that is called the standard language. This
> is the subset that is generally taught. Especially to those for whom
> the language is foreign. So when you define a specific language to
> use on an international forum, it is strongly suggested that people
> limit themselves to the standard subset and don't use dialects since
> "dialect" AFAIU means it is outside this standard.
>
> Yes I accept that everyone deviates from this standard language and that
> it isn't always easy to know what is and what is not within the standard
> language and that we should allow each other some leeway. However there
> is a difference between saying standard usage is something to aspire to
> and then be tolerant for deviations on the one hand and saying any
> dialect is allowed on the other hand.
>
> So this being an international forum in which for a significant number
> of members english is not their first language, I think it would be
> prudent for those who have englisch as a mother tongue, to try and
> stick to standard english, so as not to burden the first group even
> more.
>
> Doing otherwise IMO doesn't show much respect for that first group, from
> whom is expected they adapt to a (for them) foreign language and then to
> learn that those for which english is their mother tongue don't feel an
> obligation to be helpful by limiting themselves to that part of the
> language that is most likely to be understood by the first group.
>
>> Participants are expected to attempt to be understandable in English,
>> but I personally expect responders to make an effort to work with
>> multiple dialects.
>
> Why do you expect from people who already had to learn a foreign
> language to familiarize themselves with dialects. The variations
> within the standard are already plentyful enough, that you shouldn't
> burden these peoples with dialects too.
>
> You seem to suggest that we can hardly expect from people for whom
> english is their mother tongue to do a serious effort in making
> themselves understandable to others by trying to express themselves
> in standard english.
>
> And that in what is accepted to be an international forum so in which
> we can expect a significant number of people for whom english is not
> their mother tongue.
>

You're in cloud cuckoo land.  And it's English, thank you very much.

-- 
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]

#60600

On 2013-11-27 08:31, Antoon Pardon wrote:
> Op 27-11-13 09:19, Chris Angelico schreef:
>> On Wed, Nov 27, 2013 at 7:16 PM, Antoon Pardon
>> <antoon.pardon@rece.vub.ac.be> wrote:
>>> However that second sentence doesn't make much sense to me. Modern
>>> languages contain a subset that is called the standard language. This
>>> is the subset that is generally taught. Especially to those for whom
>>> the language is foreign. So when you define a specific language to
>>> use on an international forum, it is strongly suggested that people
>>> limit themselves to the standard subset and don't use dialects since
>>> "dialect" AFAIU means it is outside this standard.
>>
>> Do you mean standard British English, standard American English,
>> standard Australian English, or some other?
>
> Does that significantly matter or are you just looking for details
> you can use to disagree? As far as I understand the overlap between
> standard British English and standard American English is so large
> that it doesn't really matter for those who had to learn the language.
> Likewise for the overlap with standard Australian English.

Since the original usage that you are complaining about is "standard" Indian 
English[1], yes, it does significantly matter.

[1] To the extent that there is such a thing as a "standard" form of any 
language. Which there isn't, but I will grant you your premise for the time being.

-- 
Robert Kern

"I have come to believe that the whole world is an enigma, a harmless enigma
  that is made terrible by our own mad attempt to interpret it as though it had
  an underlying truth."
   -- Umberto Eco

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

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

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

csiph-web