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

Groups > comp.lang.python > #16698 > unrolled thread

Re: Questions about LISP and Python.

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

This discussion starts older than the indexed window; earlier articles aren't shown. The article labeled Started by below is the oldest one visible, not the original post.

Contents

  Re: Questions about LISP and Python. Xah Lee <xahlee@gmail.com> - 2011-12-05 20:36 -0800
    Re: Questions about LISP and Python. Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2011-12-06 16:10 +1100
      Re: Questions about LISP and Python. Rick Johnson <rantingrickjohnson@gmail.com> - 2011-12-06 05:13 -0800
        Re: Questions about LISP and Python. Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2011-12-07 00:27 +1100
        Re: Questions about LISP and Python. Ian Kelly <ian.g.kelly@gmail.com> - 2011-12-06 09:58 -0700
          Re: Questions about LISP and Python. Rick Johnson <rantingrickjohnson@gmail.com> - 2011-12-07 20:10 -0800
            Re: Questions about LISP and Python. Andrea Crotti <andrea.crotti.0@gmail.com> - 2011-12-08 11:10 +0000
            Re: Questions about LISP and Python. Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2011-12-08 22:20 +1100
            Re: Questions about LISP and Python. MRAB <python@mrabarnett.plus.com> - 2011-12-08 17:43 +0000
              Re: Questions about LISP and Python. Ben Finney <ben+python@benfinney.id.au> - 2011-12-09 07:23 +1100
        Re: Questions about LISP and Python. alex23 <wuwei23@gmail.com> - 2011-12-06 19:52 -0800
          Re: Questions about LISP and Python. Rick Johnson <rantingrickjohnson@gmail.com> - 2011-12-07 20:14 -0800
    Re: Questions about LISP and Python. alex23 <wuwei23@gmail.com> - 2011-12-05 23:02 -0800
      Re: Questions about LISP and Python. Matt Joiner <anacrolix@gmail.com> - 2011-12-06 18:54 +1100
    Re: Questions about LISP and Python. Alex Mizrahi <alex.mizrahi@gmail.com> - 2011-12-06 11:12 +0200
    Re: Questions about LISP and Python. Andrea Crotti <andrea.crotti.0@gmail.com> - 2011-12-07 10:14 +0000
    Re: Questions about LISP and Python. Terry Reedy <tjreedy@udel.edu> - 2011-12-07 06:17 -0500
      Re: Questions about LISP and Python. Neil Cerutti <neilc@norwich.edu> - 2011-12-07 13:16 +0000

#16698 — Re: Questions about LISP and Python.

On Dec 5, 4:31 am, Tim Bradshaw <t...@tfeb.org> wrote:
> On 2011-12-05 11:51:11 +0000, Xah Lee said:
>
> > python has more readible syntax, more modern computer language
> > concepts, and more robust libraries. These qualities in turn made it
> > popular.
>
> Yet you still post here: why?

i don't like python, and i prefer emacs lisp. The primary reason is
that python is not functional, especially with python 3. The python
community is full of fanatics with their drivels. In that respect,
it's not unlike Common Lisp community and Scheme lisp community.

see also:

〈Python Documentation Problems〉
http://xahlee.org/perl-python/python_doc_index.html

〈Computer Language Design: What's List Comprehension and Why is It
Harmful?〉
http://xahlee.org/comp/list_comprehension.html

〈Lambda in Python 3000〉
http://xahlee.org/perl-python/python_3000.html

〈What Languages to Hate〉
http://xahlee.org/UnixResource_dir/writ/language_to_hate.html

〈Xah on Programing Languages〉
http://xahlee.org/Periodic_dosage_dir/comp_lang.html

 Xah

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#16699

On Tue, Dec 6, 2011 at 3:36 PM, Xah Lee <xahlee@gmail.com> wrote:
> i don't like python, and i prefer emacs lisp. The primary reason is
> that python is not functional, especially with python 3. The python
> community is full of fanatics with their drivels. In that respect,
> it's not unlike Common Lisp community and Scheme lisp community.

So you hate Python. Fine. Why post here? Why not just abandon Python
as a dead loss and go code in Lithp?

Clearly something is keeping you here. Is it that there's something
about Python that you really like, or are you just trolling?

ChrisA

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

#16726

On Dec 5, 11:10 pm, Chris Angelico <ros...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 6, 2011 at 3:36 PM, Xah Lee <xah...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > i don't like python, and i prefer emacs lisp. The primary reason is
> > that python is not functional, especially with python 3. The python
> > community is full of fanatics with their drivels. In that respect,
> > it's not unlike Common Lisp community and Scheme lisp community.
>
> So you hate Python. Fine. Why post here? Why not just abandon Python
> as a dead loss and go code in Lithp?
>
> Clearly something is keeping you here. Is it that there's something
> about Python that you really like, or are you just trolling?


I would say Mr. Lee does in fact find some usefulness of Python (as do
i) HOWEVER he also laments the asinities that plague the language, the
documentation, and especially, this community.

Anyone who would take the time to write *articulate* suggestions for
grave deficiencies in the Python documentation must care. Mr. Lee, has
documented many of the atrocities of the doc in his fine website. I
just recently finished reading a few more of his fine suggestions and
I especially enjoyed the "os.path.split" rant. PRICELESS!

Listen, python is a great language, but not a perfect one. You people
seem to get all upset at even the slightest suggestion that Python is
not perfect. The haughty arrogance i see day after day around me just
makes me sick. Grow up! You are not perfect and neither is Python...
or Guido for that matter.

This community is chalk full (from top to bottom!) of arrogant, tech
geeking, unix hacks who look down on the "outsiders" as excrement. I
believe it's high time for these folks to eat a big slice of humble
pie -- i just fear there is not enough to go around! O_O

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

#16728

On Wed, Dec 7, 2011 at 12:13 AM, Rick Johnson
<rantingrickjohnson@gmail.com> wrote:
> This community is chalk full (from top to bottom!) of arrogant, tech
> geeking, unix hacks who look down on the "outsiders" as excrement. I
> believe it's high time for these folks to eat a big slice of humble
> pie -- i just fear there is not enough to go around! O_O

It's also chock full (note that) of trolls. Do we need a
python-troll-list@python.org? You two could discuss the upcoming Pyson
4000 (that's Python with a Lithp) and how it's going to revolutionize
the world.

ChrisA

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

#16740

On Tue, Dec 6, 2011 at 6:13 AM, Rick Johnson
<rantingrickjohnson@gmail.com> wrote:
> I would say Mr. Lee does in fact find some usefulness of Python (as do
> i) HOWEVER he also laments the asinities that plague the language, the
> documentation, and especially, this community.
>
> Anyone who would take the time to write *articulate* suggestions for
> grave deficiencies in the Python documentation must care. Mr. Lee, has
> documented many of the atrocities of the doc in his fine website. I
> just recently finished reading a few more of his fine suggestions and
> I especially enjoyed the "os.path.split" rant. PRICELESS!

I would be much more impressed if instead of simply whining about the
documentation, Xah Lee would come off his high horse and actually
submit a patch to fix it.  That would be the mark of somebody who
actually cares about the quality of the documentation.  He seems to be
suggesting that the problems he points out are just examples of
systemic problems that make the whole incomprehensible, yet most of
what he specifically identifies seems to be just copy editing for
conciseness.

What I find hilarious, though, is that Xah Lee has written his own
Python documentation, and it's equally bad, if not worse.  Just for
example, I'll critique an arbitrary section.  Let's talk about for
loops.

http://xahlee.org/perl-python/for_statement.html

"""This is a example of “for” statement..

a = range(1,51) # creates a list
for x in a:
    if x % 2 == 0:
        print x, 'even'
"""

What is a "for" statement?  What does it do?  If I'm new to
programming, I have no idea, and the above hasn't even attempted to
introduce the concept, so that example is meaningless to me.
Fortunately, he starts to explain it.

"""In the above, the percent “%” symbol calculates the remainder of
division. The range(m,n) function gives a list from m to n-1"""

Wait, I thought this section was about "for" statements.  Why is the
author suddenly (and poorly) explaining modulo division and the range
function?  These things belong in their own section.

"""Note that in this example, “for” goes over a list."""

Oh, okay, the author finally is telling us what "for" does.  It is
used to "go over" lists, apparently so that we can get to the other
side.  Note that this documentation still has not said anything at all
about "looping" or "repeating" or "iterating" that might help me
understand what that means.  Instead we have "goes over".  If I did
not already understand what a "for" statement does, this would not
make it any clearer.  It reminds me of when I was 6 or so and I asked
my mother what division was, and she told me that it's how many times
a number "goes into" another number.  Even though I was mathematically
inclined, I didn't understand that all, because I had no idea what it
meant for one number to enter another.

"""Each time making “x” the value of the element."""

Okay, apparently there's an element involved, and "x" is going to be
its value.  I really don't think I need to say anything more about
this "sentence".

"""Python also supports “break” and “continue” to exit the loop.
“break” will exit the loop. “continue” will skip code and start the
next iteration."""

Finally the author breaks down and uses the words "loop" and
"iteration", so if the reader actually makes it this far, then they
might actually start to piece together everything that came before
this.

I also want to highlight his introduction of list comprehensions:

http://xahlee.org/perl-python/list_comprehension.html

"""This construct uses a irregular syntax (called “list
comprehension”) to generate a expression normally built by nested
loops. This construct has acquired a incomprehensible name “list
comprehension” in computing industry and academia.
...
Remember, this jargonized “list comprehension” is nothing more than a
irregular syntax for building a list from loops. Its purpose is purely
of syntactical convenience. Advanced languages such as functional
languages often have this power without the syntax irregularity. (For
example, Mathematica's Table function.)
"""

What was that again about "author masturbation" polluting the
documentation, Xah?

On Tue, Dec 6, 2011 at 6:13 AM, Rick Johnson
<rantingrickjohnson@gmail.com> wrote:
> Listen, python is a great language, but not a perfect one. You people
> seem to get all upset at even the slightest suggestion that Python is
> not perfect. The haughty arrogance i see day after day around me just
> makes me sick. Grow up! You are not perfect and neither is Python...
> or Guido for that matter.

I don't think Python, Guido, or myself are perfect.  I think that most
people here don't think that either.

Python has its warts.  For example, I don't like generator syntax.  To
be a generator, a function only has to have a "yield" statement
somewhere in its body.  This is not good self-documenting code.  A
generator should be clearly marked as such somewhere at the top of the
definition.  I also think that tacking coroutines onto generators was
an ugly hack.  Generators and coroutines are conceptually very
different; let's keep them that way.  And I strongly dislike super();
you may have seen me posting previously on the subject.

You need to understand that people don't reject your suggestions
because they're resistant to change.  They reject your suggestions
because you make sweeping pronouncements about the way things should
be and then expect that everybody will automatically agree with you
because you're so obviously right.  In this, you seem to think that
people should regard you in the way that you imagine they already
regard Guido.  In the end, you come across as a clown and an
egomaniac.

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

#16799

On Dec 6, 10:58 am, Ian Kelly <ian.g.ke...@gmail.com> wrote:

(snip... beautiful retort)

Ian you make some damn good points and i could not help but laugh
hysterically at your dissection of Xah's tutorial. I don't 100% agree
with everything Mr. Lee rants about, like for instance, documents
needing to hyper link every possible sub-subject in every possible
subject -- we'd end up with a spaghetti mess of links. Besides,
students should follow a "linear" learning curve and not haphazardly
jump from subject to subject.

However, that being said, what does it prove when you can dissect
someones rant with elegant irony? It simply means that no ONE person
can write great documentation. They say... "it takes a village to
raise a child"... Hmm, i believe it takes a community to create good
docs.

Q: Do we have a "community" here? Hmm, more on that later...

I truly believe that Mr. Lee wants to make Python a better language,
and many other languages also! However he has experienced so much
resistance to his comments that he has  (like many among us) developed
what Psychologists call "learned helplessness".

Xah: "I found a problem"
Communty: "Well write a freaking patch or shut the hell up!
Xah: "Why bother, you will just throw it in the trash to spite me no
matter how good it is."
Commuinty: "You're lazy, you just want to complain"
Xah: "But, that's all you will allow me to do!"

Who's fault is it that Xah is not a productive part of this community?
Hmm? Do we just take the easy way out an blame Xah? Or do we need to
observe our "collective" attitudes to perceived "outsiders"?

I believe this community has a cancer. A cancer that is rotting us
from the inside. A cancer that has metastasis and is spreading like
wild fire.

*Inquisitive Joe asked:* What is the source of this cancer Rick?

The source is a direct result of insufficient leadership. Our current
leader has failed us. Maybe he never wanted to be a leader, but when
you go and declare yourself a "benevolent dictator for life" you'd
damn well better act like one!

Why has GvR not admonished the atrocious behavior of some people in
this community? Why has GvR not admitted publicly the hideous state of
IDLE and Tkinter? Where is the rally call? Where is the community
spirit? The future of Pythin is in your hands Mr. Van Rossum. Will you
step up and do what needs to be done? Will you have the courage? i
sincerely hope so. If not, please step down and allow someone to lead.
I await the supreme commanders ascent to power.

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

#16818

On 12/08/2011 04:10 AM, Rick Johnson wrote:
> ...
>
> Why has GvR not admonished the atrocious behavior of some people in
> this community? Why has GvR not admitted publicly the hideous state of
> IDLE and Tkinter? Where is the rally call? Where is the community
> spirit? The future of Pythin is in your hands Mr. Van Rossum. Will you
> step up and do what needs to be done? Will you have the courage? i
> sincerely hope so. If not, please step down and allow someone to lead.
> I await the supreme commanders ascent to power.

This last part seems like the "lord of the rings", but I guess (even if 
still hope not)
that he's serious :D

Supposing even that Guido resigns, why do you think that the power should go
to you?
Power is not something that you can claim for, you have to earn the 
right, and
ranting doesn't normally buy anything ;)

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

#16820

On Thu, Dec 8, 2011 at 10:10 PM, Andrea Crotti
<andrea.crotti.0@gmail.com> wrote:
> Supposing even that Guido resigns, why do you think that the power should go
> to you?
> Power is not something that you can claim for, you have to earn the right,
> and
> ranting doesn't normally buy anything ;)

Power is something you create. Did you know that you, too, can be head
of an open source project the size of Python? It's easy. Just start
one!

Go to GitHub, Google Code, BitBucket, SourceForge (they all seem to
have exactly two capital letters in them - must be important), or any
other such site, and start coding your new and most awesome language.
You can even make yourself a mailing list so that you can get your
revenge on the Evil Python Mafia (hereunder and hereafter the EPM) by
ignoring every patch ever submitted!

Chris Angelico

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

#16856

On 08/12/2011 04:10, Rick Johnson wrote:
[snip]
> I believe this community has a cancer. A cancer that is rotting us
> from the inside. A cancer that has metastasis and is spreading like
> wild fire.
>
<pedantic>The problem with a cancer is not that it rots, but that it
grows uncontrollably.</pedantic>

> *Inquisitive Joe asked:* What is the source of this cancer Rick?
>
> The source is a direct result of insufficient leadership. Our current
> leader has failed us. Maybe he never wanted to be a leader, but when
> you go and declare yourself a "benevolent dictator for life" you'd
> damn well better act like one!
>
He never declared himself "benevolent dictator for life", others
declared him so.

> Why has GvR not admonished the atrocious behavior of some people in
> this community? Why has GvR not admitted publicly the hideous state of
> IDLE and Tkinter? Where is the rally call? Where is the community
> spirit? The future of Pythin is in your hands Mr. Van Rossum. Will you
> step up and do what needs to be done? Will you have the courage? i
> sincerely hope so. If not, please step down and allow someone to lead.
> I await the supreme commanders ascent to power.

GvR isn't our leader, we are his followers. There's a difference. :-)

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

#16871

MRAB <python@mrabarnett.plus.com> writes:

> GvR isn't our leader, we are his followers. There's a difference. :-)

+1 QotW

-- 
 \     “Guaranteed to work throughout its useful life.” —packaging for |
  `\                                          clockwork toy, Hong Kong |
_o__)                                                                  |
Ben Finney

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

#16765

Rick Johnson <rantingrickjohn...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Anyone who would take the time to write *articulate* suggestions for
> grave deficiencies in the Python documentation must care.

And you're including yourself here by implication, yes?

You have _zero_ desire to see any real improvements to Python and
instead want to come here on a regular basis and show us how big your
brain is. Like Xah, you're unable to grasp that programming is a
_communal_ exercise. You both vilify _everyone_ who doesn't loudly
proclaim your brilliance. You refuse to accept that there are _ways_
of approaching the community to encourage interaction: being a smug
cunt is not one of them. Even worse, the _more_ people point out to
you both how wrong you are, the _more_ convinced you're correct,
because of a bullshit belief in your superiority. You are both
astounding exemplars of the Dunning-Kruger effect.

You're a _troll_. You contribute nothing of value, you hijack threads
for your own agenda, you are _nothing but a source of noise_ to this
list. The months in which you don't post are an absolute goddamn
_delight_ and there would be no loss to anyone if you decided to just
fuck off and take your exercise in public masturbation elsewhere.

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

#16800

On Dec 6, 9:52 pm, alex23 <wuwe...@gmail.com> wrote:
> (snip rambling nonsense)

Alex, i hope you are being theatrical with all this. If not, i fear
you may be putting too much stress on your heart. Please calm down.

> The months in which you don't post are an absolute goddamn
> _delight_

I am working on Python4000 Alex. *Someone* has to re-ignite Guido's
original vision.

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

#16705

On Dec 6, 2:36 pm, Xah Lee <xah...@gmail.com> wrote:
> The python community is full of fanatics with their drivels.

You do know that you could just fuck right off and leave us to it,
yes?

In general, it's the person who is shrilly imposing their minority
opinion on a disinterested audience that deserves the title 'fanatic'.

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

#16706

This guy is an even better troll than that 88888 guy. His spelling is
equally bad. His essays make some good points, but I don't see why he
doesn't shut his trap and move on.

ಠ_ಠ



On Tue, Dec 6, 2011 at 6:02 PM, alex23 <wuwei23@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Dec 6, 2:36 pm, Xah Lee <xah...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> The python community is full of fanatics with their drivels.
>
> You do know that you could just fuck right off and leave us to it,
> yes?
>
> In general, it's the person who is shrilly imposing their minority
> opinion on a disinterested audience that deserves the title 'fanatic'.
> --
> http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list

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

#16711

> i don't like python, and i prefer emacs lisp. The primary reason is
> that python is not functional, especially with python 3. The python
> community is full of fanatics with their drivels. In that respect,
> it's not unlike Common Lisp community and Scheme lisp community.

What functional programming features do you use, Xah? Last time I've 
checked, you didn't care about closures. In this respect, Python is 
better at functional programming than Emacs Lisp.

Do you just like writing arbitrarily long expression? Or you think that 
eval is functional?

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

#16777

On 12/06/2011 04:36 AM, Xah Lee wrote:
> i don't like python, and i prefer emacs lisp. The primary reason is
> that python is not functional, especially with python 3. The python
> community is full of fanatics with their drivels. In that respect,
> it's not unlike Common Lisp community and Scheme lisp community.
>

I love emacs and I love python, but saying that elisp is a better language
than python and more functional is plain ridiculous.
Elisp is great to extend Emacs, but with dynamic scoping and side effects
used everywhere should not even be considered between the functional
languages, at least for how it's mainly used.

This is a typical usage taken from simple.el
(defun pop-global-mark ()
   "Pop off global mark ring and jump to the top location."
   (interactive)
   ;; Pop entries which refer to non-existent buffers.
   (while (and global-mark-ring (not (marker-buffer (car 
global-mark-ring))))
     (setq global-mark-ring (cdr global-mark-ring)))
   (or global-mark-ring
       (error "No global mark set"))
   (let* ((marker (car global-mark-ring))
      (buffer (marker-buffer marker))
      (position (marker-position marker)))
     (setq global-mark-ring (nconc (cdr global-mark-ring)
                   (list (car global-mark-ring))))
     (set-buffer buffer)
     (or (and (>= position (point-min))
          (<= position (point-max)))
     (if widen-automatically
         (widen)
       (error "Global mark position is outside accessible part of buffer")))
     (goto-char position)
     (switch-to-buffer buffer)))

Which means more or elss pop a mark from the mark ring, get the current 
buffer/position,
then set the buffer, widen if necessary, go to some position and switch 
to that buffer.

Nothing wrong with it, but basically it messes around with global state, 
as most elisp functions
do.

And how python 3 would be less functional?

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

#16778

On 12/7/2011 5:14 AM, Andrea Crotti wrote:
> On 12/06/2011 04:36 AM, Xah Lee wrote:
>> i don't like python, and i prefer emacs lisp. The primary reason is
>> that python is not functional, especially with python 3. The python
>> community is full of fanatics with their drivels. In that respect,
>> it's not unlike Common Lisp community and Scheme lisp community.
>>
>
> I love emacs and I love python, but saying that elisp is a better language
> than python and more functional is plain ridiculous.
> Elisp is great to extend Emacs, but with dynamic scoping and side effects
> used everywhere should not even be considered between the functional
> languages, at least for how it's mainly used.
>
> This is a typical usage taken from simple.el
> (defun pop-global-mark ()
> "Pop off global mark ring and jump to the top location."
> (interactive)
> ;; Pop entries which refer to non-existent buffers.
> (while (and global-mark-ring (not (marker-buffer (car global-mark-ring))))
> (setq global-mark-ring (cdr global-mark-ring)))
> (or global-mark-ring
> (error "No global mark set"))
> (let* ((marker (car global-mark-ring))
> (buffer (marker-buffer marker))
> (position (marker-position marker)))
> (setq global-mark-ring (nconc (cdr global-mark-ring)
> (list (car global-mark-ring))))
> (set-buffer buffer)
> (or (and (>= position (point-min))
> (<= position (point-max)))
> (if widen-automatically
> (widen)
> (error "Global mark position is outside accessible part of buffer")))
> (goto-char position)
> (switch-to-buffer buffer)))
>
> Which means more or elss pop a mark from the mark ring, get the current
> buffer/position,
> then set the buffer, widen if necessary, go to some position and switch
> to that buffer.
>
> Nothing wrong with it, but basically it messes around with global state,
> as most elisp functions
> do.
>
> And how python 3 would be less functional?

It does not pretend that surrounding statements with parentheses turns 
them into expressions.
;-)

-- 
Terry Jan Reedy

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

#16781

On 2011-12-07, Terry Reedy <tjreedy@udel.edu> wrote:
> It does not pretend that surrounding statements with
> parentheses turns them into expressions.
> ;-)

I like being in a sexpression. Awwwwww YEAAAAH!

-- 
(Neil Cerutti)

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

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

csiph-web