Caculate age

[Laura Creighton]

> On Mon, 03 Feb 2003 09:54:38 +0100, Laura Creighton <lac at strakt.com> wrote:
> 
> >
> >Great to hear it.  Sorry for the confusion.
> >
> Is that a subtly humorous comment on my not being
> specific enough, so that you might be wondering what
> _I_ meant? ;-) 

No, that was me replying to Ben who got his program working.
I am setting new records for confusion this weekend, it seems.
I already posted the what I meant and what was wrong with me
because I agree with your rant.  You just read the notes in
a different order from the one that I wrote them.

Laura

I meant, did you really mean to imply
> that integers or numbers are to be avoided altogether
> as dictionary keys? Or were you taking the tack that
> the finer points of integer vs float constants vs
> computed float values etc. was better left totally
> unmentioned in favor of just saying numbers don't
> make great dictionary keys? I.e., newbies don't
> need to know _why_ you say what you say? Or am I
> totally off base? Or just that you don't type as
> fast as Alex ;-)
> 
> You're not doing this ;-)
> <rant apology="sorry">, but the evil twin of this
> is the teaching of a false concept as a
> kind of placeholder for the real truth, and doing it
> without mentioning that it is wrong. Like saying
> a chain hangs in the shape of a parabola. There's
> nothing wrong in saying we'll just pretend, or
> you'll learn later, but misleading someone so they
> have to backtrack in their learning (or lose a bet
> because they trusted the teacher), is execrable.
> </rant>
> Regards,
> Bengt Richter
> -- 
> http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list