python adds an extra half space when reading from a string or list

[Joshua Landau]

On 3 July 2013 11:01, Antoon Pardon <antoon.pardon at rece.vub.ac.be> wrote:
> Op 02-07-13 15:40, Joshua Landau schreef:
>> On 2 July 2013 13:01, Antoon Pardon <antoon.pardon at rece.vub.ac.be> wrote:
>>>
>>
>> There is not ever a place on this list where you will need to call
>> someone incompetent. You can explain to someone that they do not
>> understand what they are doing, but when you attack the character of
>> the person it is no longer acceptable.
>
> This is not an attack of character. Level of skill/competence is
> not in general seen as a character trait.

I disagree. I'm not sure how to argue this, rather than point out that
by "character trait" I'm not talking about "intrinsic trait" but
rather "revolving around who you are". The alternative I posed is
talking about things revolving around specific actions that you have
taken.

> It is something one can
> generally increase if one is willing to work on it, and once
> you acquired it, you don't have to keep your guard for situations
> in which you might loose it.

That's not relevant to whether it's a character trait, á mon avis.

>>> So what are the non-insulting terms for
>>>
>>> incompentent, (starting a webservice in a language you're a newby in,
>>> making changes on the life server so that any typo you make, can take
>>> your site out the air),
>> You just did it.
>
> But how do I describe this in one word? What conclusion am I allowed
> to make from all this?

That it's worth taking a little more time doing things if it makes
sure you aren't harming the person on the other end.

> Can I say:

> He displayed a pattern of incompetence?

WIth trepidation. Saying what someone did is "incompetent" is quite judgemental.

> He has been blundering about?

With trepidation. This is just another way of saying the same thing.

> His skill level was unimpressive?

With trepidation. This refers to his character, but is still quite
light and far lower than the level of aggression that spawned my
speaking-up.

> The skill level he displayed, left much to be desired?

Probably. Except only if you remove the comma.


Bear in mind that if the way you were acting was all in my "with
trepidation" category, I would likely have not spoken up. I believe
you crossed a lot further beyond that line.


>>> inconsiderate (behave annoyingly in multiple ways and despite poeple pointing
>>> it out multiple times, mostly continue in the same manner, without taking
>>> their remarks into account) and
>> I do not tend to consider "inconsiderate" inappropriate if said in
>> earnest, as it is defensive. I'd still rather you talked about actions
>> as inconsiderate rather than people, but baby steps.
>
> I don't understand this, since (in)consideration is in general seen as
> a character trait. On that basis I think you have it exactly backwards
> when you consider "incompetent" an attack of character yet seem to
> have little problem with "inconsiderate".

"You are inconsiderate" is describing someone's character. Hence I
believe it would be better to say "what you did was inconsiderate".
What I was saying, though, is that because "inconsiderate" is
defensive and reactionary it is not an insult*. It refers to the fact
that you believe the person you say it to should respect other people
and what he is doing negatively impacts them.

Another example would be: "you are awesome". Despite being a
description of character, I'm not too idiotic to realise that it is
not a mean thing to say. (Even here, "what you did is awesome" is a
*milder* way of saying the same idea.) It's easy to misread what I've
said, but I was never trying to imply that my problem was solely in
this distinction -- it was just that it's important to realise that
the divide exists and very explanatory to some aspects of how people
take commentary.

Both rurpy and you seem to have mistaken me to believe that describing
character vs. describing actions is the be-all and end-all. Rather, I
just believe it is a large factor in the harshness of what you say.

*You seem to have moved back to the term "insult"; this seems
especially appropriate since we are discussing its meaning.

> Yet people who have a more
> inconsiderate character can't work on acquiring consideration, as one
> can on acquiring skill/competence. Sure one can work on it, but it is
> something you have to keep watchful for. Otherwise you can easily slip
> again into a pattern of being/behaving inconsiderate.

Firstly, I disagree. Consideration is a learnt trait as most human
interaction is.

Secondly, I don't understand why you are bringing this up.

>>> jerk (trying to spin your inconsiderate behaviour as you being the victim,
>>> misrepresenting your behaviour when it is being discussed, always "explaining"
>>> your behaviour, as if an explanation would make a difference to the annoyance
>>> you caused to others...)
>> You came close.
>
> Same question as two entries above.

I shall leave this open to see if you think my answer above applies here.