Newbie: finding the key/index of the min/max element

[Stephen J. Turnbull]

>>>>> "James" == James J Besemer <jb at cascade-sys.com> writes:

[Dalke]
    >> I wouldn't say it's strictly off limits.

    James> I was citing a hypothetical example, offered as a possible
    James> way to fullfil Alex' "wish".

I suspect Andrew was also citing your hypothetical example, intending
to imply that very little is "strictly" off limits.

[Aside: 

    James> Perfect.  I never suggested anything so rude as "RTFM".

I've never considered "RTFM" rude when people say it to me, although I
only use it in contexts where I know the other party won't take
offense any more.  I'll grant that a good RTFM HOWTO is needed.  And
of course FAQ technology has improved a lot, so citing FAQs is now
quite easy, and more constructive than a curt RTFM.]

    James> People seem to attach a negative connotation to what I say
    James> no matter how neutral I try to be.  I appreciate that some
    James> of this is my own fault but I'll be glad when you all can
    James> take my words at face value.

This is Usenet.<wink>

But note that you wrote of "dealing with [people]".  While it's not
absolutely clearcut, in context I got a strong sense of "people as
objects" from that phrasing.  Alex wrote in the first person, he was
looking for a way to "deal with" his own annoyance.  This is why Alex
could post what he did without anybody commenting, while your phrase
drew negative comment.  I think about it that way, anyway.

To see the contrast really clearly, it's useful to compare Eric
Raymond's Smart Questions FAQ
http://tuxedo.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html with Simon Tatham's
How to Report Bugs Effectively
http://www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/~sgtatham/bugs.html.  Note how Eric
somehow can't keep himself from using phrases that imply that there
are lusers and sponges lurking about, quite possibly including the
reader, while Simon is much more humble, saying in a very neutral way
"these things need to be communicated, and here's how to do it."
Somehow Simon manages to convey both the idea that reporting bugs
effectively is a difficult task indeed, and his confidence that you
(the reader) are up to the task.

I think people are responding to your words at "face value" (ie, they
would respond the same way if the BDFL or someone unknown to the group
used them, it's not personal).

    James> If the group consensus here is "don't compare python to
    James> Lisp" or "don't ever bring up ternary ops" (as some have
    James> said) then it WOULD save time to list the topics as a taboo
    James> on a list-specific faq.  Meanwhile, this would strike me as
    James> NOT appropriate for the regular faq.

    James> What you think?

I think the group consensus is hard to characterize in so few words.
Definitely some people would rather not hear any comparison of python
to Lisp, or discussion of ternary ops.  So?  This is _your_ newsgroup
just as much as it is theirs.  (With all due respect to the enormous
contribution that some of the "they" have made, even within the last
few days.)  As you point out, you may not get full understanding from
the FAQ, and it's possible to have legitimate disagreements with the
FAQ answers (and even possible to disagree with the BDFL and
ultimately win!)

And vice versa.  The topics aren't taboo, but some people will express
the opinion that they heard this before and don't want to hear it
again ("and won't you RTDF first so you know what's old news?")  It's
their newsgroup as much as it is yours!

[Dalke]
    >> What I've noticed in at least some of your posts is the
    >> tendency to assert an authority which is false-to-fact.

    James> Please let me respectfully disagree just a bit here.

    James> JB [== James] Wrote:

    >> It seems that Python started out (as a Lisp derivative) with
    >> much less of an OO emphasis.  I expect len() has precedent
    >> dating back to the original language.

    James> So first off, the whole statement was my humble OPINION
    James> ("seems") never intended to be a statement of fact.
    James> Furthermore, my error is in a parenthetical, not part of
    James> the main point.

Ah, but this is a standard trope.  You put the assertion of fact in
parens, and many readers will accept the premise "Python is a Lisp
derivative."  You may not have intended that effect, but the effect is
well-known.  [Suzette Haden Elgin's "Verbal Self-Defense" series is an
excellent resource here.]

    >> There appears to be some antagonism in responses to your recent
    >> posts.  I submit that at least part of it comes from this
    >> tendency.

    James> It seems really inconsistent that on a list that ostensibly
    James> is supposed to be so supportive to newcomers that I would
    James> get blasted so for such relatively minor errors (or things
    James> that are not errors at all).

It's supportive to newbies, not newcomers.  Newcomers who can take
care of themselves are expected to shape up.  (Check out any of my
interactions wrt to licensing/definition of free software, with me in
the newcomer role.)

And you were "blasted" by one person (NB, who immediately and
explicitly acknowledged and accepted your apology, as well as your
mince-resistance<wink>); followups have been civil and either
explicitly first-person ("when you wrote X I felt Y") or fairly
neutral about what they think the typical interpretation of your words
and phrasing would be.  (I'm not referring to the technical
controversy, where several people have been quite sharp.  I'm assuming
that that doesn't bother you since no apparent double standard is
involved.)  In my reading (YMMV) they occasionally misinterpret intent
or face value of your words (and sometimes both), but these are
"honest mis-takes", not implausible, and not personal attacks.



-- 
Institute of Policy and Planning Sciences     http://turnbull.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp
University of Tsukuba                    Tennodai 1-1-1 Tsukuba 305-8573 JAPAN
 My nostalgia for Icon makes me forget about any of the bad things.  I don't
have much nostalgia for Perl, so its faults I remember.  Scott Gilbert c.l.py