From johannes.gunz97 at gmail.com Thu Nov 14 10:05:08 2013 From: johannes.gunz97 at gmail.com (johannes.gunz97 at gmail.com) Date: Thu, 14 Nov 2013 07:05:08 -0800 (PST) Subject: Invalid syntax with print "Hello World" In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Am Donnerstag, 12. M?rz 2009 07:57:11 UTC+1 schrieb Henrik Bechmann: > obviously total mewbiew: > > My first program in Python Windows > > print "Hello World" > > I select Run/Run Module and get an error: > > Syntax error, with the closing quote highlighted. > > Tried with single quotes as well. Same problem. > > Can someone explain my mistake? > > Thanks, > > - Henrik thanx From unknown at unknown.com Thu Nov 14 11:41:23 2013 From: unknown at unknown.com (unknown) Date: Thu, 14 Nov 2013 16:41:23 GMT Subject: Invalid syntax with print "Hello World" Message-ID: On Thu, 14 Nov 2013 07:05:08 -0800, johannes.gunz97 wrote: > Am Donnerstag, 12. M?rz 2009 07:57:11 UTC+1 schrieb Henrik Bechmann: >> obviously total mewbiew: >> >> My first program in Python Windows >> >> print "Hello World" >> >> I select Run/Run Module and get an error: >> >> Syntax error, with the closing quote highlighted. >> >> Tried with single quotes as well. Same problem. >> >> Can someone explain my mistake? >> >> Thanks, >> >> - Henrik > > thanx which version of python? if V3.X then you need print ('Hello World') as print has changed from a statement to a function. From bgailer at gmail.com Thu Nov 14 16:22:19 2013 From: bgailer at gmail.com (bob gailer) Date: Thu, 14 Nov 2013 16:22:19 -0500 Subject: Invalid syntax with print "Hello World" In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <52853F0B.3070804@gmail.com> On 11/14/2013 10:05 AM, johannes.gunz97 at gmail.com wrote: > Am Donnerstag, 12. M?rz 2009 07:57:11 UTC+1 schrieb Henrik Bechmann: >> obviously total mewbiew: >> >> My first program in Python Windows >> >> print "Hello World" I assume you are running Python 3 in which case you need > print("Hello World") -- Bob Gailer 919-636-4239 Chapel Hill NC From rurpy at yahoo.com Fri Nov 1 00:41:32 2013 From: rurpy at yahoo.com (rurpy at yahoo.com) Date: Thu, 31 Oct 2013 21:41:32 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Possibly better loop construct, also labels+goto important and on the fly compiler idea. In-Reply-To: <527217a4$0$29884$c3e8da3$5496439d@news.astraweb.com> References: <6f2b7$525f2302$5419b3e4$13466@cache1.tilbu1.nb.home.nl> <774fd$526a559c$5419b3e4$11247@cache1.tilbu1.nb.home.nl> <32495$526f9dfe$5419b3e4$14369@cache1.tilbu1.nb.home.nl> <526fc14f$0$29972$c3e8da3$5496439d@news.astraweb.com> <5b3f2903-2ab1-4cda-a503-7ffad5d5b7a7@googlegroups.com> <5270ddd6$0$6512$c3e8da3$5496439d@news.astraweb.com> <425ea0db-41c7-4244-91b5-3e48d48e206c@googlegroups.com> <527217a4$0$29884$c3e8da3$5496439d@news.astraweb.com> Message-ID: <90f57eb4-7fff-47e8-86f1-d0fa717cc181@googlegroups.com> On 10/31/2013 02:41 AM, Steven D'Aprano wrote: > On Wed, 30 Oct 2013 19:48:55 -0700, rurpy wrote: >> On 10/30/2013 04:22 AM, Steven D'Aprano wrote: >>> Skybuck's experience at programming *is relevant* to the question of >>> whether or not he understands what he is talking about. >> No. You claimed his proposition "made no sense" based on your analysis >> of it. > > I said absolutely nothing of the sort. You're making that quote up -- not > just misinterpreting what I said, or taking my words in the worst > possible way, but completely inventing things I never said. Yes, on rereading you are correct, you did not say his proposition made no sense, you disagreed with him that "putting this exit condition on the top makes no sense" and claimed he had no business making such a statement since he had no programming experience. I misattributed the "no sense" quote. Please note that that is not the same as "making something up". > Not only did > I never say that Skybuck's proposition "made no sense", but I gave an > example of a language with a loop that does exactly what he wants, and > explicitly described as making sense: > > "There is one sort of loop where it makes sense to have the loop condition > at the end. Python doesn't have such a loop, but Pascal does: the repeat > until loop." As I said above, I read your response as disagreeing with Skybuck's idea: that the loop test should *always* go at the bottom. That you agree with *sometimes* putting the test at the bottom does not contradict that you disagreed with his general proposition. > I don't know whether to be more offended for myself, that you would > invent such a bare-faced falsehood about what I said, or for anyone else > reading this thread, that you should assume they would fail to notice > that not only did I not say what you quote me as saying, but that it is > the *opposite* of what I actually said. No, it was *not* the opposite. It was an overstatement of your position: "I think the proposition is nutty" versus "I disagree with the proposition". Presumably if you think a proposition is nutty or non-nonsensical you also disagree with it and the former is a stronger version of the latter. > I don't know whether you are deliberately lying, or whether you're just > such a careless reader that you have attributed words actually written by > Skybuck to me, but either way I expect an apology from you for putting > false words into my mouth. An apology is due when someone does some damage to things or people (including reputation or feelings) that should have been avoided. My overstating your disagreement with Skybuck was inadvertent, does not change the points I was making (it does not matter whether you thought he was wrong or nutty) and did no significant damage to you or your reputation. You damage your own reputation far more by your use of erroneous protestations, hyperpole and faux indignation [*1] to distract from the actual issue, your implications that I may be lying, deliberately misrepresenting and inventing bare-faced falsehoods, and your propensity to attack others based on unsubstantiated speculation which was the origin of this discussion. So I acknowledge I overstated your position, but sorry, no apology beyond that. Now hopefully having addressed the indignation bit we can get back to the actual points under discussion? > As for the rest of your argument, I am not of the opinion that he is an > inexperienced programmer because his proposal is "nutty" (YOUR word, not > mine) since I don't think his proposal is completely nutty. There are use- > cases for putting the loop condition at the end. I think he is an > inexperienced programmer because of the lack of any sign in his emails > that he has any meaningful experience in programming. Replacing "his proposal is nutty" with "his proposal is wrong", what "signs" did you expect to be present beyond the fact he advocated looping in a way you don't agree with? A CV? As I pointed out (again missing from your quotes) he *did* claim programing experience in his original post. I also note your change from your original "no programming experience" to "no meaningful programming experience". > As for your defence[1] of the ad hominem "Clearly Julie is mistaken, > she's just a girl, what would she know about programming?", [...] That part was poorly written and was not intended to be a defense of the Julie ad hominen. My intent was to acknowledge that it was an ad hominem, show a reason why it was an ad hominem and show that that same reason also applied to your ad hominem attack against Skybuck. Unfortunately in a late- night last-minute edit I screwed it up pretty badly. I started off, >> Secondly, the example ad hominem argument you gave, "Clearly >> Julie is mistaken, she's just a girl, what would she know about >> programming?" depends on the non-validity of the logical >> implication. When what I meant was more like, >> Secondly, the example ad hominem argument you gave, "Clearly >> Julie is mistaken, she's just a girl, what would she know about >> programming?", that it is an ad hominen depends on the non-validity >> of the logical implication. I then tried to show you that whether someone accepts an argument as an ad hominem or not depends on whether one accepts the validity of the implication or not by using, as an example, people that I thought you would know exist, if not know personally. >> Yet I'm sure you are aware that are some people who >> would find that a valid implication and if you could not defend it, >> then you would not be able to claim ad hominem. That of course makes no sense, since for you to claim it is an ad hominem, you (being the one who presented it as an ad hominem) need to show the implication is *invalid*, not defend it. You would defend the claim that the whole statement is an ad hominem. Which is what I intended to say. Finally >> Of course it *is* >> easily defendable which is why you used it as an example. Again I was thinking of the entire statement as defendable as an ad hominem, not the logical implication within, but that is sadly not how it came out and I can see how the whole thing reads the the opposite of what I intended. I will note though that had you read with a more open mind you might have noticed something was amiss since I would hardly be saying you would have used that as an example if it obviously wasn't an ad hominem. While I screwed up that explanation, the conclusion remains the same: that an argument is an ad hominem depends on the invalidity of the embedded implication. Your accusation of no "programming experience" toward Skybuck is an ad hominem despite your denial because (in addition to the personal aspect) the implicit implication is "his claim, 'putting the loop condition at the top is wrong' is wrong" -> "he has no programming experience." and that is an invalid implication, especially given the existence of his explicit statement that he *did* have programming experience. I hope that explanation is a little clearer. >[...snip uninteresting discourse on Aristotle and elk knees...] > And so we come back to Skybuck, who > apparently believes that the use of GOTO instead of loops makes > code more reliable and easier to maintain. First he never said anything about reliability or maintenance. He said explicitly wanted goto's for error handling and to the extent I understood him, I gather he wanted access to low-level asm-like features from HLLs, which would be consistent with his cross-posting to alt.lang.asm. Also, advocating availability of goto's does not imply no programming experience. Someone who's used goto's in Visual Basic for error exits might want them elsewhere (not saying it's a good idea, just that it doesn't show "no programming experience"). Further, I have seen credible posts in this very group that pointed out that goto might be useful in Python in some circumstances. I myself wouldn't mind its availability for one use: the implementation of efficient FSMs. So even if you add his advocacy for goto to the basis for your conclusion he has no programming experience, it's still not a valid conclusion and just your opinion. To be clear: I am not defending his arguments, I am saying that your claim that he has no programming experience is not supported by what he wrote and added nothing to your perfectly fine criticism of his proposition; you could (and should) have left out those spurious claims. ---- [*1] Obviously I can't read your mind and can only speculate whether or not you are truly as offended as you say or why. I thought that accusing you of faux indignation for rhetorical effect is more complementary (at least you do so skillfully) then leaving the implication that you unjustifiably go off the emotional wagon so easily. From steve+comp.lang.python at pearwood.info Fri Nov 1 01:41:02 2013 From: steve+comp.lang.python at pearwood.info (Steven D'Aprano) Date: 01 Nov 2013 05:41:02 GMT Subject: Possibly better loop construct, also labels+goto important and on the fly compiler idea. References: <6f2b7$525f2302$5419b3e4$13466@cache1.tilbu1.nb.home.nl> <774fd$526a559c$5419b3e4$11247@cache1.tilbu1.nb.home.nl> <32495$526f9dfe$5419b3e4$14369@cache1.tilbu1.nb.home.nl> <526fc14f$0$29972$c3e8da3$5496439d@news.astraweb.com> <5b3f2903-2ab1-4cda-a503-7ffad5d5b7a7@googlegroups.com> <5270ddd6$0$6512$c3e8da3$5496439d@news.astraweb.com> <425ea0db-41c7-4244-91b5-3e48d48e206c@googlegroups.com> <527217a4$0$29884$c3e8da3$5496439d@news.astraweb.com> <90f57eb4-7fff-47e8-86f1-d0fa717cc181@googlegroups.com> Message-ID: <52733eed$0$29972$c3e8da3$5496439d@news.astraweb.com> On Thu, 31 Oct 2013 21:41:32 -0700, rurpy wrote: > On 10/31/2013 02:41 AM, Steven D'Aprano wrote: >> On Wed, 30 Oct 2013 19:48:55 -0700, rurpy wrote: >>> On 10/30/2013 04:22 AM, Steven D'Aprano wrote: >>>> Skybuck's experience at programming *is relevant* to the question of >>>> whether or not he understands what he is talking about. >>> No. You claimed his proposition "made no sense" based on your >>> analysis of it. >> >> I said absolutely nothing of the sort. You're making that quote up -- >> not just misinterpreting what I said, or taking my words in the worst >> possible way, but completely inventing things I never said. > > Yes, on rereading you are correct, you did not say his proposition made > no sense, you disagreed with him that "putting this exit condition on > the top makes no sense" and claimed he had no business making such a > statement I said nothing of the sort. Good lord Rurpy, I've already called you out once for misrepresenting what I've said, and here you are doing it again. You didn't have the good graces to even say sorry, instead trying to weasel out of an apology with a feeble "acknowledge[ment] that I overstated your position", and here you are again digging yourself deeper into the hole. That's three posts in a row -- your original post where you characterised me as making an "attack" on Skybuck, the second post where you escalated by attributing words I never wrote to me, and now this one where yet again you continue to misrepresent my post despite being called out on it. [...] > I am saying that your claim > that he has no programming experience is not supported by what he wrote I did not claim Skybuck had "no business" (your words) making such a statement about loop conditions. Far from it, I treated his opinion as a serious one worthy of discussion, discussing situations that both support and contradict his idea. I *asked him* if he had programming experience, with an explicit question, and even began the question with the sort of social lubricant that acknowledges that the question is a touchy one ("please excuse my question"). I suggested that *it seems* that he doesn't have such experience. The normal, good-faith implication of this is that I am stating an opinion of how it seems to me, not an absolute fact. The whole exercise was to engage Skybuck in conversation, give him a chance to demonstrate (or at least assert) that I was mistaken about his lack of experience, and defend or amend his claim that putting the loop condition at the beginning of the loop makes no sense. Unless you are prepared to discuss this in good faith, instead of continuing to misrepresent what I say, I am done discussing this with you. -- Steven From rurpy at yahoo.com Fri Nov 1 21:50:02 2013 From: rurpy at yahoo.com (rurpy at yahoo.com) Date: Fri, 1 Nov 2013 18:50:02 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Possibly better loop construct, also labels+goto important and on the fly compiler idea. In-Reply-To: <52733eed$0$29972$c3e8da3$5496439d@news.astraweb.com> References: <6f2b7$525f2302$5419b3e4$13466@cache1.tilbu1.nb.home.nl> <774fd$526a559c$5419b3e4$11247@cache1.tilbu1.nb.home.nl> <32495$526f9dfe$5419b3e4$14369@cache1.tilbu1.nb.home.nl> <526fc14f$0$29972$c3e8da3$5496439d@news.astraweb.com> <5b3f2903-2ab1-4cda-a503-7ffad5d5b7a7@googlegroups.com> <5270ddd6$0$6512$c3e8da3$5496439d@news.astraweb.com> <425ea0db-41c7-4244-91b5-3e48d48e206c@googlegroups.com> <527217a4$0$29884$c3e8da3$5496439d@news.astraweb.com> <90f57eb4-7fff-47e8-86f1-d0fa717cc181@googlegroups.com> <52733eed$0$29972$c3e8da3$5496439d@news.astraweb.com> Message-ID: <5ac7a478-8333-49e1-8f87-442bbdab42dc@googlegroups.com> On 10/31/2013 11:41 PM, Steven D'Aprano wrote: > On Thu, 31 Oct 2013 21:41:32 -0700, rurpy wrote: >[...] >> Yes, on rereading you are correct, you did not say his proposition made >> no sense, you disagreed with him that "putting this exit condition on >> the top makes no sense" and claimed he had no business making such a >> statement > > I said nothing of the sort. Steven, please stop. Trying to treat you as as an intelligent and intellectually honest person and consistently getting crap like this back is getting annoying. Here is a synopsis of the post in question (quotes are direct quotes, not paraphrase) [*1]: Skybuck: "To put the exit condition at the bottom is logical." You: Ask if Skybuck has "ever done any programming at all?". You: Give example of python While loop with test at top You: Give example of loop with test at bottom: "inappropriate" and "ugly") You: Example of For loop with test at bottom: "silly" You: Example of Until loop with test at bottom: "makes sense" Skybuck: Example of loop with test at bottom. You: Similar While loop with test at top: "better" You: Similar Until loop with test at bottom: "I would use a while loop" Skybuck: "Putting this exit condition on the top makes no sense." You: "Wait until you actually start programming before deciding what makes sense or doesn't." I paraphrased that dialog as "you disagreed with him that 'putting this exit condition on the top makes no sense' and claimed he had no business making such a statement". Instead of endlessly repeating your misrepresentation charges along with exaggerations like "nothing of the sort", why don't you for once actually say how my paraphrase differs materially in meaning from what was said? How would you paraphrase it? And, how does what you said disprove my primary point: that you stated as fact he had no programming experience when such a statement was your speculation, not fact, and thus likely to raise someone's hackles? > Good lord Rurpy, I've already called you out once for misrepresenting > what I've said, and here you are doing it again. You didn't have the good > graces to even say sorry, instead trying to weasel out of an apology with > a feeble "acknowledge[ment] that I overstated your position", and here > you are again digging yourself deeper into the hole. That's three posts > in a row -- your original post where you characterised me as making an > "attack" on Skybuck, the second post where you escalated by attributing > words I never wrote to me, and now this one where yet again you continue > to misrepresent my post despite being called out on it. Steven, in every one of those posts I explained and justified my statements. You don't even have the decency to address those points -- instead you simply snip them out and repeat your same accusations over and over as though by repeating them enough times they will magically become true. You may think you are being clever (or perhaps it is out of desperation to avoid admitting that your response to Skybuck was, as I demonstrated, an unjustified ad hominem attack) but your twisting and squirming to avoid acknowledging my points is painfully transparent. > [...] >> I am saying that your claim >> that he has no programming experience is not supported by what he wrote > > I did not claim Skybuck had "no business" (your words) making such a > statement about loop conditions. Far from it, I treated his opinion as a > serious one worthy of discussion, discussing situations that both support > and contradict his idea. His idea was that loop tests should always or usually be done at the end of the loop. You discussed *nothing* that supported that idea. You contradicted it by showing a number of examples where you claimed testing at the top was better. > I *asked him* if he had programming experience, with an explicit > question, and even began the question with the sort of social lubricant > that acknowledges that the question is a touchy one ("please excuse my > question"). I suggested that *it seems* that he doesn't have such > experience. The normal, good-faith implication of this is that I am > stating an opinion of how it seems to me, not an absolute fact. You seem to have a very selective memory. I quoted your concluding sentence, which you conveniently leave out above, previously in this message. You did not "suggest" when you said "Wait until you start programming...". Nor is that an expression of opinion. If you can't even tell when you're misrespresenting your own words, how do you expect to be able to tell when someone else does? Why don't you just own up to what you wrote? > The whole > exercise was to engage Skybuck in conversation, give him a chance to > demonstrate (or at least assert) that I was mistaken about his lack of > experience, and defend or amend his claim that putting the loop condition > at the beginning of the loop makes no sense. Then perhaps you should not have ended your exercise by telling him he had no programming experience (directly contradicting his earlier statement that he did.) > Unless you are prepared to discuss this in good faith, instead of > continuing to misrepresent what I say, I am done discussing this with you. Good faith? Is that is supposed to be a joke? Yes, please. I have wasted enough time trying to respond calmly, logically and honestly to your sleazy, and amusing to no one but your fans, rhetorical gymnastics. If you can't write with any kind of honesty or integrity, please do stop. One last serious comment, take it or leave it: On the off chance you actually do believe you said nothing to Skybuck that he should be offended by, you might want to consider that perhaps your perceptions of how you think others should react to your words are not the same way as others actually do. ---- [*1] https://groups.google.com/d/msg/comp.lang.python/p1E0d1UGeY8/-yNyjkagJ-MJ From steve+comp.lang.python at pearwood.info Fri Nov 1 23:52:23 2013 From: steve+comp.lang.python at pearwood.info (Steven D'Aprano) Date: 02 Nov 2013 03:52:23 GMT Subject: Possibly better loop construct, also labels+goto important and on the fly compiler idea. References: <6f2b7$525f2302$5419b3e4$13466@cache1.tilbu1.nb.home.nl> <774fd$526a559c$5419b3e4$11247@cache1.tilbu1.nb.home.nl> <32495$526f9dfe$5419b3e4$14369@cache1.tilbu1.nb.home.nl> <526fc14f$0$29972$c3e8da3$5496439d@news.astraweb.com> <5b3f2903-2ab1-4cda-a503-7ffad5d5b7a7@googlegroups.com> <5270ddd6$0$6512$c3e8da3$5496439d@news.astraweb.com> <425ea0db-41c7-4244-91b5-3e48d48e206c@googlegroups.com> <527217a4$0$29884$c3e8da3$5496439d@news.astraweb.com> <90f57eb4-7fff-47e8-86f1-d0fa717cc181@googlegroups.com> <52733eed$0$29972$c3e8da3$5496439d@news.astraweb.com> <5ac7a478-8333-49e1-8f87-442bbdab42dc@googlegroups.com> Message-ID: <527476f6$0$29972$c3e8da3$5496439d@news.astraweb.com> On Fri, 01 Nov 2013 18:50:02 -0700, rurpy wrote: > Instead of endlessly repeating your misrepresentation charges along with > exaggerations like "nothing of the sort", why don't you for once > actually say how my paraphrase differs materially in meaning from what > was said? I have directly addressed your points three times. I did not "attack" the OP by any reasonable definition of the word. My post was not an ad hominem. Skybuck's experience as a programmer is relevant to the credibility of his opinions about programming. I did not declare as a fact that he had no experience, as you claim, but posed it as a question and expressed it explicitly as a subjective observation. Each time I have responded to you, I have given direct quotes and directly addressed the substance of your posts, which is all to do with the supposed tone of my response to the OP. Each time you have continued to misrepresent me, misquote me, and interpret my words assuming bad faith rather than good, in order to justify your idea that my post was an ad hominem attack. Including this post, where you make the false statement that: [quote] His idea was that loop tests should always or usually be done at the end of the loop. You discussed *nothing* that supported that idea. Emphasis yours. But in fact I gave the concrete example of Pascal repeat...until loops, which have the test at the end of the loop. So yet again your claims are simply wrong. This is four posts in a row now that you have wrongly represented me. I can only conclude that you think that by repeating a lie often enough, you'll convince others that it must be true and "win". I will no longer play this game with you. Goodbye. *plonk* -- Steven From rurpy at yahoo.com Sun Nov 3 12:46:35 2013 From: rurpy at yahoo.com (rurpy at yahoo.com) Date: Sun, 3 Nov 2013 09:46:35 -0800 (PST) Subject: Possibly better loop construct, also labels+goto important and on the fly compiler idea. In-Reply-To: <527476f6$0$29972$c3e8da3$5496439d@news.astraweb.com> References: <6f2b7$525f2302$5419b3e4$13466@cache1.tilbu1.nb.home.nl> <774fd$526a559c$5419b3e4$11247@cache1.tilbu1.nb.home.nl> <32495$526f9dfe$5419b3e4$14369@cache1.tilbu1.nb.home.nl> <526fc14f$0$29972$c3e8da3$5496439d@news.astraweb.com> <5b3f2903-2ab1-4cda-a503-7ffad5d5b7a7@googlegroups.com> <5270ddd6$0$6512$c3e8da3$5496439d@news.astraweb.com> <425ea0db-41c7-4244-91b5-3e48d48e206c@googlegroups.com> <527217a4$0$29884$c3e8da3$5496439d@news.astraweb.com> <90f57eb4-7fff-47e8-86f1-d0fa717cc181@googlegroups.com> <52733eed$0$29972$c3e8da3$5496439d@news.astraweb.com> <5ac7a478-8333-49e1-8f87-442bbdab42dc@googlegroups.com> <527476f6$0$29972$c3e8da3$5496439d@news.astraweb.com> Message-ID: On 11/01/2013 09:52 PM, Steven D'Aprano wrote: >[...] > I did not declare as a > fact that he had no experience, as you claim, but posed it as a question > and expressed it explicitly as a subjective observation. This is a key point. Several of your other denials are true only if you are right about this. You concluded your reply to Skybuck with: "Wait *until* you *start* programming..." [my emphasis] The implication, that the OP does not have any programming experience, will be clear to anyone with with even mediocre English speaking ability. The semantic information conveyed to the OP is the same as the statement of fact, "you have no programming experience" and it is perfectly valid to claim that you told the OP that he had no programming experience. I pointed this out in nearly every email but in every one of your responses to it, you ignore that concluding sentence and mention *only* your initial questioning sentence to justify your assertion that you "posed it as a question". As an aside, you shouldn't rely on that initial question sentence so much either -- just because something is framed as a question does not mean its intent is not to attack: "excuse me for asking, but are you an asshole?" You asked, "have you *ever* done *any* programming *at all*?" [my emphasis] which could be as easily taken as rhetorically laying the ground for discrediting his idea as an honest neutral question and the former interpretation is strengthened by your concluding "wait until..." statement. My claims of "ad hominem" and "attack" follow from the fact that you *did* tell the OP he had no programming experience, in direct contradiction to what he had stated, and with no evidence to support your claim beyond the OP's opinions on loops and goto's. > Each time I have responded to you, I have given direct quotes and > directly addressed the substance of your posts, which is all to do with > the supposed tone of my response to the OP. Each time you have continued > to misrepresent me, misquote me, and interpret my words assuming bad > faith rather than good, in order to justify your idea that my post was an > ad hominem attack. > > Including this post, where you make the false statement that: > > [quote] > His idea was that loop tests should always or usually be done > at the end of the loop. You discussed *nothing* that supported > that idea. > > Emphasis yours. But in fact I gave the concrete example of Pascal > repeat...until loops, which have the test at the end of the loop. So yet > again your claims are simply wrong. That was an unfortunate example for you to chose since it directly contradicts your claims. Read that quote again. You are a programmer. You should understand logic. Please explain how acknowledging *one* useful end-of-loop construct supports the idea that /quote/ loop tests should *always or usually* be done at the end of the loop /endquote/, especially when you present it with long string of cases where testing at the bottom is *not* desirable. You did not agree with the OPs idea that the test should *always* go at the end of the loop and I represented your opinion as such. This was pointed out to you before yet you continue to claim I am misrepresenting you. > This is four posts in a row now that you have wrongly represented me. I > can only conclude that you think that by repeating a lie often enough, > you'll convince others that it must be true and "win". In my preceding post, I pointed out your practice of repeating the same discredited accusations in the the hope that repeating them enough would somehow make them true... It is amusing to see you lift my own words to use against me (although I used the word "accusation" and you choose to use the word "lie" -- a difference in our standards I guess.) I misrepresented you once, immediately acknowledged and corrected it when you pointed it out. You have continued to accuse me of misrepresenting you in *every* post you've made, while refusing to respond to my request to tell me how you think you *should* be paraphrased. Indeed you have followed a consistent policy of falsely accusing me of underhanded and disreputable practices, while at the same time, often in the same sentence, engaging copiously in exactly those same practices yourself. > I will no longer > play this game with you. Goodbye. > > *plonk* Bye. From joshua at landau.ws Sat Nov 2 14:22:38 2013 From: joshua at landau.ws (Joshua Landau) Date: Sat, 2 Nov 2013 18:22:38 +0000 Subject: Possibly better loop construct, also labels+goto important and on the fly compiler idea. In-Reply-To: <52733eed$0$29972$c3e8da3$5496439d@news.astraweb.com> References: <6f2b7$525f2302$5419b3e4$13466@cache1.tilbu1.nb.home.nl> <774fd$526a559c$5419b3e4$11247@cache1.tilbu1.nb.home.nl> <32495$526f9dfe$5419b3e4$14369@cache1.tilbu1.nb.home.nl> <526fc14f$0$29972$c3e8da3$5496439d@news.astraweb.com> <5b3f2903-2ab1-4cda-a503-7ffad5d5b7a7@googlegroups.com> <5270ddd6$0$6512$c3e8da3$5496439d@news.astraweb.com> <425ea0db-41c7-4244-91b5-3e48d48e206c@googlegroups.com> <527217a4$0$29884$c3e8da3$5496439d@news.astraweb.com> <90f57eb4-7fff-47e8-86f1-d0fa717cc181@googlegroups.com> <52733eed$0$29972$c3e8da3$5496439d@news.astraweb.com> Message-ID: On 1 November 2013 05:41, Steven D'Aprano wrote: > On Thu, 31 Oct 2013 21:41:32 -0700, rurpy wrote: > >> On 10/31/2013 02:41 AM, Steven D'Aprano wrote: >>> On Wed, 30 Oct 2013 19:48:55 -0700, rurpy wrote: >>>> On 10/30/2013 04:22 AM, Steven D'Aprano wrote: >>>>> Skybuck's experience at programming *is relevant* to the question of >>>>> whether or not he understands what he is talking about. >>>> No. You claimed his proposition "made no sense" based on your >>>> analysis of it. >>> >>> I said absolutely nothing of the sort. You're making that quote up -- >>> not just misinterpreting what I said, or taking my words in the worst >>> possible way, but completely inventing things I never said. >> >> Yes, on rereading you are correct, you did not say his proposition made >> no sense, you disagreed with him that "putting this exit condition on >> the top makes no sense" and claimed he had no business making such a >> statement > > I said nothing of the sort. Personally, rurpy's reading seems like a reasonable one to me. Maybe not correct in a technical sense, but at least reasonable. Particularly, the phrase "Wait until you actually start programming before deciding what makes sense or doesn't." seems especially harsh, and would be furthermore so should Skybuck be a professional programmer. That's a phrase easy to take badly, especially over this medium. Sure, you in all probability didn't mean it like that but rurpy isn't uncalled for in raising the concern. Really I just want to remind you that you're both on the same side here. From breamoreboy at yahoo.co.uk Sat Nov 2 14:36:54 2013 From: breamoreboy at yahoo.co.uk (Mark Lawrence) Date: Sat, 02 Nov 2013 18:36:54 +0000 Subject: Possibly better loop construct, also labels+goto important and on the fly compiler idea. In-Reply-To: References: <6f2b7$525f2302$5419b3e4$13466@cache1.tilbu1.nb.home.nl> <774fd$526a559c$5419b3e4$11247@cache1.tilbu1.nb.home.nl> <32495$526f9dfe$5419b3e4$14369@cache1.tilbu1.nb.home.nl> <526fc14f$0$29972$c3e8da3$5496439d@news.astraweb.com> <5b3f2903-2ab1-4cda-a503-7ffad5d5b7a7@googlegroups.com> <5270ddd6$0$6512$c3e8da3$5496439d@news.astraweb.com> <425ea0db-41c7-4244-91b5-3e48d48e206c@googlegroups.com> <527217a4$0$29884$c3e8da3$5496439d@news.astraweb.com> <90f57eb4-7fff-47e8-86f1-d0fa717cc181@googlegroups.com> <52733eed$0$29972$c3e8da3$5496439d@news.astraweb.com> Message-ID: On 02/11/2013 18:22, Joshua Landau wrote: > On 1 November 2013 05:41, Steven D'Aprano > wrote: >> On Thu, 31 Oct 2013 21:41:32 -0700, rurpy wrote: >> >>> On 10/31/2013 02:41 AM, Steven D'Aprano wrote: >>>> On Wed, 30 Oct 2013 19:48:55 -0700, rurpy wrote: >>>>> On 10/30/2013 04:22 AM, Steven D'Aprano wrote: >>>>>> Skybuck's experience at programming *is relevant* to the question of >>>>>> whether or not he understands what he is talking about. >>>>> No. You claimed his proposition "made no sense" based on your >>>>> analysis of it. >>>> >>>> I said absolutely nothing of the sort. You're making that quote up -- >>>> not just misinterpreting what I said, or taking my words in the worst >>>> possible way, but completely inventing things I never said. >>> >>> Yes, on rereading you are correct, you did not say his proposition made >>> no sense, you disagreed with him that "putting this exit condition on >>> the top makes no sense" and claimed he had no business making such a >>> statement >> >> I said nothing of the sort. > > Personally, rurpy's reading seems like a reasonable one to me. Maybe > not correct in a technical sense, but at least reasonable. > > Particularly, the phrase > > "Wait until you actually start programming before deciding what makes > sense or doesn't." > > seems especially harsh, and would be furthermore so should Skybuck be > a professional programmer. That's a phrase easy to take badly, > especially over this medium. > > Sure, you in all probability didn't mean it like that but rurpy isn't > uncalled for in raising the concern. Really I just want to remind you > that you're both on the same side here. > Coming from me this is probably a classic case of pot calling the kettle black, but how about reading the Spike Milligan story The White Flag before this also escalates out of control. -- Python is the second best programming language in the world. But the best has yet to be invented. Christian Tismer Mark Lawrence From steve+comp.lang.python at pearwood.info Sun Nov 3 01:17:27 2013 From: steve+comp.lang.python at pearwood.info (Steven D'Aprano) Date: 03 Nov 2013 05:17:27 GMT Subject: Possibly better loop construct, also labels+goto important and on the fly compiler idea. References: <6f2b7$525f2302$5419b3e4$13466@cache1.tilbu1.nb.home.nl> <774fd$526a559c$5419b3e4$11247@cache1.tilbu1.nb.home.nl> <32495$526f9dfe$5419b3e4$14369@cache1.tilbu1.nb.home.nl> <526fc14f$0$29972$c3e8da3$5496439d@news.astraweb.com> <5b3f2903-2ab1-4cda-a503-7ffad5d5b7a7@googlegroups.com> <5270ddd6$0$6512$c3e8da3$5496439d@news.astraweb.com> <425ea0db-41c7-4244-91b5-3e48d48e206c@googlegroups.com> <527217a4$0$29884$c3e8da3$5496439d@news.astraweb.com> <90f57eb4-7fff-47e8-86f1-d0fa717cc181@googlegroups.com> <52733eed$0$29972$c3e8da3$5496439d@news.astraweb.com> Message-ID: <5275dc67$0$29972$c3e8da3$5496439d@news.astraweb.com> On Sat, 02 Nov 2013 18:22:38 +0000, Joshua Landau wrote: [...] > Sure, you in all probability didn't mean it like that but rurpy isn't > uncalled for in raising the concern. Really I just want to remind you > that you're both on the same side here. Thanks for the comments Joshua, but I'm afraid I cannot agree. I gave it a lot of thought and I cannot continue to give Rurpy the presumption of good faith any longer. This saddens me, but that's the way it is. I'm trying hard to give up threads like this, where people debate the subjective tone of an email and ever more pedantic arguments about the precise wording. Even when all participants are arguing in good faith, they risk becoming quagmires which go nowhere in dozens of posts. -- Steven From antoon.pardon at rece.vub.ac.be Sun Nov 3 04:45:43 2013 From: antoon.pardon at rece.vub.ac.be (Antoon Pardon) Date: Sun, 03 Nov 2013 10:45:43 +0100 Subject: Possibly better loop construct, also labels+goto important and on the fly compiler idea. In-Reply-To: <5275dc67$0$29972$c3e8da3$5496439d@news.astraweb.com> References: <6f2b7$525f2302$5419b3e4$13466@cache1.tilbu1.nb.home.nl> <774fd$526a559c$5419b3e4$11247@cache1.tilbu1.nb.home.nl> <32495$526f9dfe$5419b3e4$14369@cache1.tilbu1.nb.home.nl> <526fc14f$0$29972$c3e8da3$5496439d@news.astraweb.com> <5b3f2903-2ab1-4cda-a503-7ffad5d5b7a7@googlegroups.com> <5270ddd6$0$6512$c3e8da3$5496439d@news.astraweb.com> <425ea0db-41c7-4244-91b5-3e48d48e206c@googlegroups.com> <527217a4$0$29884$c3e8da3$5496439d@news.astraweb.com> <90f57eb4-7fff-47e8-86f1-d0fa717cc181@googlegroups.com> <52733eed$0$29972$c3e8da3$5496439d@news.astraweb.com> <5275dc67$0$29972$c3e8da3$5496439d@news.astraweb.com> Message-ID: <52761B47.1000505@rece.vub.ac.be> Op 03-11-13 06:17, Steven D'Aprano schreef: > On Sat, 02 Nov 2013 18:22:38 +0000, Joshua Landau wrote: > [...] >> Sure, you in all probability didn't mean it like that but rurpy isn't >> uncalled for in raising the concern. Really I just want to remind you >> that you're both on the same side here. > > Thanks for the comments Joshua, but I'm afraid I cannot agree. I gave it > a lot of thought and I cannot continue to give Rurpy the presumption of > good faith any longer. This saddens me, but that's the way it is. > > I'm trying hard to give up threads like this, where people debate the > subjective tone of an email and ever more pedantic arguments about the > precise wording. Even when all participants are arguing in good faith, > they risk becoming quagmires which go nowhere in dozens of posts. I'm not so sure it is all in good faith. I see a lot of persons digging in their heels and not much effort in trying to understand someone else's point of view. -- Antoon Pardon From rurpy at yahoo.com Sun Nov 3 12:50:10 2013 From: rurpy at yahoo.com (rurpy at yahoo.com) Date: Sun, 3 Nov 2013 09:50:10 -0800 (PST) Subject: Possibly better loop construct, also labels+goto important and on the fly compiler idea. In-Reply-To: <5275dc67$0$29972$c3e8da3$5496439d@news.astraweb.com> References: <6f2b7$525f2302$5419b3e4$13466@cache1.tilbu1.nb.home.nl> <774fd$526a559c$5419b3e4$11247@cache1.tilbu1.nb.home.nl> <32495$526f9dfe$5419b3e4$14369@cache1.tilbu1.nb.home.nl> <526fc14f$0$29972$c3e8da3$5496439d@news.astraweb.com> <5b3f2903-2ab1-4cda-a503-7ffad5d5b7a7@googlegroups.com> <5270ddd6$0$6512$c3e8da3$5496439d@news.astraweb.com> <425ea0db-41c7-4244-91b5-3e48d48e206c@googlegroups.com> <527217a4$0$29884$c3e8da3$5496439d@news.astraweb.com> <90f57eb4-7fff-47e8-86f1-d0fa717cc181@googlegroups.com> <52733eed$0$29972$c3e8da3$5496439d@news.astraweb.com> <5275dc67$0$29972$c3e8da3$5496439d@news.astraweb.com> Message-ID: <8b17f1cb-2446-4ad7-93a6-c30717261f96@googlegroups.com> On 11/02/2013 11:17 PM, Steven D'Aprano wrote: > On Sat, 02 Nov 2013 18:22:38 +0000, Joshua Landau wrote: > [...] >> Sure, you in all probability didn't mean it like that but rurpy isn't >> uncalled for in raising the concern. Really I just want to remind you >> that you're both on the same side here. > > Thanks for the comments Joshua, but I'm afraid I cannot agree. I gave it > a lot of thought and I cannot continue to give Rurpy the presumption of > good faith any longer. This saddens me, but that's the way it is. Steven, "presumption of good faith" is typical of the disingenuous remarks that have permeated your posts in this thread. Early on, I misrepresented you by claiming you thought Skybuck's proposal was "nutty" rather than that you simply and reasonably disagreed with it [*1]. I also used the phrase "makes no sense" implying it came from you rather than from Skybuck as it had [*2]. However in pointing my mistake out [*3], you did so with remarks like: "You're making that quote up" "that you would invent such a bare-faced falsehood "that it is the *opposite* of what I actually said "I don't know whether you are deliberately lying" "you're just such a careless reader" As soon as you pointed out my mistake, I immediately acknowledged and corrected it [*4]. You continued with the outrage and attacks on my character. Bad faith in my part indeed. The nice thing about email is that there exists a record that anyone can refer to if they want to discern the truth. ---- [*1] https://groups.google.com/d/msg/comp.lang.python/p1E0d1UGeY8/e6Xs56paZSoJ [*2] https://groups.google.com/d/msg/comp.lang.python/p1E0d1UGeY8/yDJJER6EJiIJ [*3] https://groups.google.com/d/msg/comp.lang.python/p1E0d1UGeY8/SwMcqPLMwjgJ [*4] https://groups.google.com/d/msg/comp.lang.python/p1E0d1UGeY8/7fLfIxBG4UUJ From antoon.pardon at rece.vub.ac.be Sun Nov 3 13:49:19 2013 From: antoon.pardon at rece.vub.ac.be (Antoon Pardon) Date: Sun, 03 Nov 2013 19:49:19 +0100 Subject: Possibly better loop construct, also labels+goto important and on the fly compiler idea. In-Reply-To: <5275dc67$0$29972$c3e8da3$5496439d@news.astraweb.com> References: <6f2b7$525f2302$5419b3e4$13466@cache1.tilbu1.nb.home.nl> <774fd$526a559c$5419b3e4$11247@cache1.tilbu1.nb.home.nl> <32495$526f9dfe$5419b3e4$14369@cache1.tilbu1.nb.home.nl> <526fc14f$0$29972$c3e8da3$5496439d@news.astraweb.com> <5b3f2903-2ab1-4cda-a503-7ffad5d5b7a7@googlegroups.com> <5270ddd6$0$6512$c3e8da3$5496439d@news.astraweb.com> <425ea0db-41c7-4244-91b5-3e48d48e206c@googlegroups.com> <527217a4$0$29884$c3e8da3$5496439d@news.astraweb.com> <90f57eb4-7fff-47e8-86f1-d0fa717cc181@googlegroups.com> <52733eed$0$29972$c3e8da3$5496439d@news.astraweb.com> <5275dc67$0$29972$c3e8da3$5496439d@news.astraweb.com> Message-ID: <52769AAF.2070508@rece.vub.ac.be> Op 03-11-13 06:17, Steven D'Aprano schreef: > On Sat, 02 Nov 2013 18:22:38 +0000, Joshua Landau wrote: > [...] >> Sure, you in all probability didn't mean it like that but rurpy isn't >> uncalled for in raising the concern. Really I just want to remind you >> that you're both on the same side here. > > Thanks for the comments Joshua, but I'm afraid I cannot agree. I gave it > a lot of thought and I cannot continue to give Rurpy the presumption of > good faith any longer. This saddens me, but that's the way it is. Why can't you? I think you should give Rurpy more credit. If you want this to make a welcoming community, then you should take such remarks seriously. You should realise that you are not in a good position to evaluate how your words come accross because you rely on the knowledge of your intentions. Others who don't know your intentions can reasonably get a very different understanding of what you intended. > I'm trying hard to give up threads like this, where people debate the > subjective tone of an email and ever more pedantic arguments about the > precise wording. Even when all participants are arguing in good faith, > they risk becoming quagmires which go nowhere in dozens of posts. So it seems you want this to be a welcoming community, as long as we don't propose you to change your own behaviour. As soon as it is suggested you may have to adapt your own behaviour in order to make this a welcoming community, threads where this sort of things are discusseed in, no longer appeal to you? From ben+python at benfinney.id.au Sun Nov 3 17:11:28 2013 From: ben+python at benfinney.id.au (Ben Finney) Date: Mon, 04 Nov 2013 09:11:28 +1100 Subject: Possibly better loop construct, also labels+goto important and on the fly compiler idea. References: <6f2b7$525f2302$5419b3e4$13466@cache1.tilbu1.nb.home.nl> <774fd$526a559c$5419b3e4$11247@cache1.tilbu1.nb.home.nl> <32495$526f9dfe$5419b3e4$14369@cache1.tilbu1.nb.home.nl> <526fc14f$0$29972$c3e8da3$5496439d@news.astraweb.com> <5b3f2903-2ab1-4cda-a503-7ffad5d5b7a7@googlegroups.com> <5270ddd6$0$6512$c3e8da3$5496439d@news.astraweb.com> <425ea0db-41c7-4244-91b5-3e48d48e206c@googlegroups.com> <527217a4$0$29884$c3e8da3$5496439d@news.astraweb.com> <90f57eb4-7fff-47e8-86f1-d0fa717cc181@googlegroups.com> <52733eed$0$29972$c3e8da3$5496439d@news.astraweb.com> <5275dc67$0$29972$c3e8da3$5496439d@news.astraweb.com> <52769AAF.2070508@rece.vub.ac.be> Message-ID: <7wiow9yw33.fsf@benfinney.id.au> Antoon Pardon writes: > Op 03-11-13 06:17, Steven D'Aprano schreef: > > I'm trying hard to give up threads like this, where people debate > > the subjective tone of an email and ever more pedantic arguments > > about the precise wording. Even when all participants are arguing in > > good faith, they risk becoming quagmires which go nowhere in dozens > > of posts. > > So it seems you want this to be a welcoming community, as long as we > don't propose you to change your own behaviour. We aim to be a community that always welcomes diversity of people. This does not entail always welcoming bad behaviour. Steven is aiming to change his behaviour to make the community more welcoming of people: he is aiming to cease contributing to threads where the bad behaviour is an interminable discussion of tone and pedantry. This is, as I see it, wholly compatible with making the community more welcoming to people, by reducing the volume of such threads. -- \ Eccles: ?I just saw the Earth through the clouds!? Lew: ?Did | `\ it look round?? Eccles: ?Yes, but I don't think it saw me.? | _o__) ?The Goon Show, _Wings Over Dagenham_ | Ben Finney From antoon.pardon at rece.vub.ac.be Mon Nov 4 03:38:52 2013 From: antoon.pardon at rece.vub.ac.be (Antoon Pardon) Date: Mon, 04 Nov 2013 09:38:52 +0100 Subject: Possibly better loop construct, also labels+goto important and on the fly compiler idea. In-Reply-To: <7wiow9yw33.fsf@benfinney.id.au> References: <6f2b7$525f2302$5419b3e4$13466@cache1.tilbu1.nb.home.nl> <774fd$526a559c$5419b3e4$11247@cache1.tilbu1.nb.home.nl> <32495$526f9dfe$5419b3e4$14369@cache1.tilbu1.nb.home.nl> <526fc14f$0$29972$c3e8da3$5496439d@news.astraweb.com> <5b3f2903-2ab1-4cda-a503-7ffad5d5b7a7@googlegroups.com> <5270ddd6$0$6512$c3e8da3$5496439d@news.astraweb.com> <425ea0db-41c7-4244-91b5-3e48d48e206c@googlegroups.com> <527217a4$0$29884$c3e8da3$5496439d@news.astraweb.com> <90f57eb4-7fff-47e8-86f1-d0fa717cc181@googlegroups.com> <52733eed$0$29972$c3e8da3$5496439d@news.astraweb.com> <5275dc67$0$29972$c3e8da3$5496439d@news.astraweb.com> <52769AAF.2070508@rece.vub.ac.be> <7wiow9yw33.fsf@benfinney.id.au> Message-ID: <52775D1C.2090502@rece.vub.ac.be> Op 03-11-13 23:11, Ben Finney schreef: > Antoon Pardon writes: > >> Op 03-11-13 06:17, Steven D'Aprano schreef: >>> I'm trying hard to give up threads like this, where people debate >>> the subjective tone of an email and ever more pedantic arguments >>> about the precise wording. Even when all participants are arguing in >>> good faith, they risk becoming quagmires which go nowhere in dozens >>> of posts. >> >> So it seems you want this to be a welcoming community, as long as we >> don't propose you to change your own behaviour. > > We aim to be a community that always welcomes diversity of people. This > does not entail always welcoming bad behaviour. But the question was whether some behaviour of steve himself was contributing or in conflict with his aim. > Steven is aiming to change his behaviour to make the community more > welcoming of people: he is aiming to cease contributing to threads where > the bad behaviour is an interminable discussion of tone and pedantry. > This is, as I see it, wholly compatible with making the community more > welcoming to people, by reducing the volume of such threads. Sorry but from my side that sounds awefully convenient. When the behaviour of others is questionable, they undermine the welcoming atmosphere of the community. When Steves behaviour is questionable the others are behaving badly by discussing tone and pedantry. This is a typical: "Heads, I win, Tail, you lose" situation that is being set up. -- Antoon Pardon From ben+python at benfinney.id.au Mon Nov 4 04:07:00 2013 From: ben+python at benfinney.id.au (Ben Finney) Date: Mon, 04 Nov 2013 20:07:00 +1100 Subject: Possibly better loop construct, also labels+goto important and on the fly compiler idea. References: <6f2b7$525f2302$5419b3e4$13466@cache1.tilbu1.nb.home.nl> <774fd$526a559c$5419b3e4$11247@cache1.tilbu1.nb.home.nl> <32495$526f9dfe$5419b3e4$14369@cache1.tilbu1.nb.home.nl> <526fc14f$0$29972$c3e8da3$5496439d@news.astraweb.com> <5b3f2903-2ab1-4cda-a503-7ffad5d5b7a7@googlegroups.com> <5270ddd6$0$6512$c3e8da3$5496439d@news.astraweb.com> <425ea0db-41c7-4244-91b5-3e48d48e206c@googlegroups.com> <527217a4$0$29884$c3e8da3$5496439d@news.astraweb.com> <90f57eb4-7fff-47e8-86f1-d0fa717cc181@googlegroups.com> <52733eed$0$29972$c3e8da3$5496439d@news.astraweb.com> <5275dc67$0$29972$c3e8da3$5496439d@news.astraweb.com> <52769AAF.2070508@rece.vub.ac.be> <7wiow9yw33.fsf@benfinney.id.au> <52775D1C.2090502@rece.vub.ac.be> Message-ID: <7weh6wzgaz.fsf@benfinney.id.au> Antoon Pardon writes: > This is a typical: "Heads, I win, Tail, you lose" situation that is > being set up. If you see a discussion as a zero-sum game ? like a coin toss, where one person's win can only be at the expense of someone else's loss ? then I fear this isn't going to be productive. Suffice it to say that any number of parties can be behaving badly in a discussion. If one person declares their choice not to continue an unhelpful discussion, that does does not mean that they declare victory, nor that they declare defeat. Discussions that are about ?winning? or ?losing? the discussion are pretty futile in this forum anyway. -- \ ?The only tyrant I accept in this world is the still voice | `\ within.? ?Mohandas Gandhi | _o__) | Ben Finney From antoon.pardon at rece.vub.ac.be Mon Nov 4 04:38:17 2013 From: antoon.pardon at rece.vub.ac.be (Antoon Pardon) Date: Mon, 04 Nov 2013 10:38:17 +0100 Subject: Possibly better loop construct, also labels+goto important and on the fly compiler idea. In-Reply-To: <7weh6wzgaz.fsf@benfinney.id.au> References: <6f2b7$525f2302$5419b3e4$13466@cache1.tilbu1.nb.home.nl> <774fd$526a559c$5419b3e4$11247@cache1.tilbu1.nb.home.nl> <32495$526f9dfe$5419b3e4$14369@cache1.tilbu1.nb.home.nl> <526fc14f$0$29972$c3e8da3$5496439d@news.astraweb.com> <5b3f2903-2ab1-4cda-a503-7ffad5d5b7a7@googlegroups.com> <5270ddd6$0$6512$c3e8da3$5496439d@news.astraweb.com> <425ea0db-41c7-4244-91b5-3e48d48e206c@googlegroups.com> <527217a4$0$29884$c3e8da3$5496439d@news.astraweb.com> <90f57eb4-7fff-47e8-86f1-d0fa717cc181@googlegroups.com> <52733eed$0$29972$c3e8da3$5496439d@news.astraweb.com> <5275dc67$0$29972$c3e8da3$5496439d@news.astraweb.com> <52769AAF.2070508@rece.vub.ac.be> <7wiow9yw33.fsf@benfinney.id.au> <52775D1C.2090502@rece.vub.ac.be> <7weh6wzgaz.fsf@benfinney.id.au> Message-ID: <52776B09.7060100@rece.vub.ac.be> Op 04-11-13 10:07, Ben Finney schreef: > Antoon Pardon writes: > >> This is a typical: "Heads, I win, Tail, you lose" situation that is >> being set up. > > If you see a discussion as a zero-sum game ? like a coin toss, where one > person's win can only be at the expense of someone else's loss ? then I > fear this isn't going to be productive. I don't see it that way. My point is that Steve seems to work hard creating the impression that he does see it that way. My impression is that Steve is not that much interrested in a welcoming group as he is interrested in a group where he himself feels at ease. Where the two coincide, he argues for a welcoming group. Where the two may be in conflict, he is more interested in defending his behaviour or brushing it of than he is in contributing to a welcoming group. > Suffice it to say that any number of parties can be behaving badly in a > discussion. If one person declares their choice not to continue an > unhelpful discussion, that does does not mean that they declare victory, > nor that they declare defeat. Discussions that are about ?winning? or > ?losing? the discussion are pretty futile in this forum anyway. Unhelpful for whom? My thought is that a welcoming group is able to resolve or a least discuss conflicts. If you declare the discussion not helpful and see that as a reason not to continue with it, you are IMO not contributing to such a group. With the numerous times Steve told the rest about how he wants a welcoming group, he doesn't seem that much interrested in actually doing an effort himself. -- Antoon Pardon From antoon.pardon at rece.vub.ac.be Fri Nov 1 08:50:30 2013 From: antoon.pardon at rece.vub.ac.be (Antoon Pardon) Date: Fri, 01 Nov 2013 13:50:30 +0100 Subject: Possibly better loop construct, also labels+goto important and on the fly compiler idea. In-Reply-To: <90f57eb4-7fff-47e8-86f1-d0fa717cc181@googlegroups.com> References: <6f2b7$525f2302$5419b3e4$13466@cache1.tilbu1.nb.home.nl> <774fd$526a559c$5419b3e4$11247@cache1.tilbu1.nb.home.nl> <32495$526f9dfe$5419b3e4$14369@cache1.tilbu1.nb.home.nl> <526fc14f$0$29972$c3e8da3$5496439d@news.astraweb.com> <5b3f2903-2ab1-4cda-a503-7ffad5d5b7a7@googlegroups.com> <5270ddd6$0$6512$c3e8da3$5496439d@news.astraweb.com> <425ea0db-41c7-4244-91b5-3e48d48e206c@googlegroups.com> <527217a4$0$29884$c3e8da3$5496439d@news.astraweb.com> <90f57eb4-7fff-47e8-86f1-d0fa717cc181@googlegroups.com> Message-ID: <5273A396.7020502@rece.vub.ac.be> Op 01-11-13 05:41, rurpy at yahoo.com schreef: > On 10/31/2013 02:41 AM, Steven D'Aprano wrote: > >> I don't know whether you are deliberately lying, or whether you're just >> such a careless reader that you have attributed words actually written by >> Skybuck to me, but either way I expect an apology from you for putting >> false words into my mouth. > > An apology is due when someone does some damage to things > or people (including reputation or feelings) that should > have been avoided. > > My overstating your disagreement with Skybuck was inadvertent, > does not change the points I was making (it does not matter > whether you thought he was wrong or nutty) and did no > significant damage to you or your reputation. It seems rather obvious from Steven's reaction, your overstatement hurt (damaged) his feelings. Since you ackowleged that damaged feelings are cause for an apology, it seems by your own words an apology is due. -- Antoon Pardon From rurpy at yahoo.com Fri Nov 1 21:51:40 2013 From: rurpy at yahoo.com (rurpy at yahoo.com) Date: Fri, 1 Nov 2013 18:51:40 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Possibly better loop construct, also labels+goto important and on the fly compiler idea. In-Reply-To: References: <6f2b7$525f2302$5419b3e4$13466@cache1.tilbu1.nb.home.nl> <774fd$526a559c$5419b3e4$11247@cache1.tilbu1.nb.home.nl> <32495$526f9dfe$5419b3e4$14369@cache1.tilbu1.nb.home.nl> <526fc14f$0$29972$c3e8da3$5496439d@news.astraweb.com> <5b3f2903-2ab1-4cda-a503-7ffad5d5b7a7@googlegroups.com> <5270ddd6$0$6512$c3e8da3$5496439d@news.astraweb.com> <425ea0db-41c7-4244-91b5-3e48d48e206c@googlegroups.com> <527217a4$0$29884$c3e8da3$5496439d@news.astraweb.com> <90f57eb4-7fff-47e8-86f1-d0fa717cc181@googlegroups.com> Message-ID: <5f4a4fee-4dcd-41de-bbb3-58244ce81a01@googlegroups.com> On 11/01/2013 06:50 AM, Antoon Pardon wrote: > Op 01-11-13 05:41, rurpy at yahoo.com schreef: >> On 10/31/2013 02:41 AM, Steven D'Aprano wrote: >> >>> I don't know whether you are deliberately lying, or whether you're just >>> such a careless reader that you have attributed words actually written by >>> Skybuck to me, but either way I expect an apology from you for putting >>> false words into my mouth. >> >> An apology is due when someone does some damage to things >> or people (including reputation or feelings) that should >> have been avoided. >> >> My overstating your disagreement with Skybuck was inadvertent, >> does not change the points I was making (it does not matter >> whether you thought he was wrong or nutty) and did no >> significant damage to you or your reputation. > > It seems rather obvious from Steven's reaction, your overstatement > hurt (damaged) his feelings. It it not obvious to me at all. > Since you ackowleged that damaged > feelings are cause for an apology, it seems by your own words > an apology is due. I explained why an apology was not appropriate previously. From antoon.pardon at rece.vub.ac.be Sat Nov 2 07:15:38 2013 From: antoon.pardon at rece.vub.ac.be (Antoon Pardon) Date: Sat, 02 Nov 2013 12:15:38 +0100 Subject: Possibly better loop construct, also labels+goto important and on the fly compiler idea. In-Reply-To: <5f4a4fee-4dcd-41de-bbb3-58244ce81a01@googlegroups.com> References: <6f2b7$525f2302$5419b3e4$13466@cache1.tilbu1.nb.home.nl> <774fd$526a559c$5419b3e4$11247@cache1.tilbu1.nb.home.nl> <32495$526f9dfe$5419b3e4$14369@cache1.tilbu1.nb.home.nl> <526fc14f$0$29972$c3e8da3$5496439d@news.astraweb.com> <5b3f2903-2ab1-4cda-a503-7ffad5d5b7a7@googlegroups.com> <5270ddd6$0$6512$c3e8da3$5496439d@news.astraweb.com> <425ea0db-41c7-4244-91b5-3e48d48e206c@googlegroups.com> <527217a4$0$29884$c3e8da3$5496439d@news.astraweb.com> <90f57eb4-7fff-47e8-86f1-d0fa717cc181@googlegroups.com> <5f4a4fee-4dcd-41de-bbb3-58244ce81a01@googlegroups.com> Message-ID: <5274DEDA.2020400@rece.vub.ac.be> Op 02-11-13 02:51, rurpy at yahoo.com schreef: > On 11/01/2013 06:50 AM, Antoon Pardon wrote: >> Op 01-11-13 05:41, rurpy at yahoo.com schreef: >>> On 10/31/2013 02:41 AM, Steven D'Aprano wrote: >>> >>>> I don't know whether you are deliberately lying, or whether you're just >>>> such a careless reader that you have attributed words actually written by >>>> Skybuck to me, but either way I expect an apology from you for putting >>>> false words into my mouth. >>> >>> An apology is due when someone does some damage to things >>> or people (including reputation or feelings) that should >>> have been avoided. >>> >>> My overstating your disagreement with Skybuck was inadvertent, >>> does not change the points I was making (it does not matter >>> whether you thought he was wrong or nutty) and did no >>> significant damage to you or your reputation. >> >> It seems rather obvious from Steven's reaction, your overstatement >> hurt (damaged) his feelings. > > It it not obvious to me at all. Shouldn't you be erring on the safe side? Rather issue an appology when it may not be really needed than refuse to give one when it may be appropiate? >> Since you ackowleged that damaged >> feelings are cause for an apology, it seems by your own words >> an apology is due. > > I explained why an apology was not appropriate previously. No you didn't. What you did was trying to minimize your contribution. -- Antoon Pardon From Windows7IsOK at DreamPC2006.com Sat Nov 2 15:49:27 2013 From: Windows7IsOK at DreamPC2006.com (Skybuck Flying) Date: Sat, 2 Nov 2013 20:49:27 +0100 Subject: Possibly better loop construct, also labels+goto important and on the fly compiler idea. In-Reply-To: References: <6f2b7$525f2302$5419b3e4$13466@cache1.tilbu1.nb.home.nl> <774fd$526a559c$5419b3e4$11247@cache1.tilbu1.nb.home.nl> <32495$526f9dfe$5419b3e4$14369@cache1.tilbu1.nb.home.nl> Message-ID: <6724c$5275cd26$5419b3e4$20097@cache80.multikabel.net> For those programmers that want to write clear/understandable/less buggy code instead of the fastest it could be interesting. Also ultimately compilers are free to implement it they way they want it ;) Thus freeing the programmer from strange assembler instruction orders as usual ;) If you ever would like to write your own compiler you are free to implement it the way you want it and thus hopefully your assembler analysis makes sense ;) Bye, Skybuck. From rosuav at gmail.com Sun Nov 3 00:17:36 2013 From: rosuav at gmail.com (Chris Angelico) Date: Sun, 3 Nov 2013 15:17:36 +1100 Subject: Possibly better loop construct, also labels+goto important and on the fly compiler idea. In-Reply-To: <6724c$5275cd26$5419b3e4$20097@cache80.multikabel.net> References: <6f2b7$525f2302$5419b3e4$13466@cache1.tilbu1.nb.home.nl> <774fd$526a559c$5419b3e4$11247@cache1.tilbu1.nb.home.nl> <32495$526f9dfe$5419b3e4$14369@cache1.tilbu1.nb.home.nl> <6724c$5275cd26$5419b3e4$20097@cache80.multikabel.net> Message-ID: On Sun, Nov 3, 2013 at 6:49 AM, Skybuck Flying wrote: > For those programmers that want to write clear/understandable/less buggy > code instead of the fastest it could be interesting. "it", without context? What could be interesting? You're not quoting any text, so I have no idea what you're referring to. Correspondingly in your other paragraphs. ChrisA From steve+comp.lang.python at pearwood.info Fri Nov 1 03:00:29 2013 From: steve+comp.lang.python at pearwood.info (Steven D'Aprano) Date: 01 Nov 2013 07:00:29 GMT Subject: OT: Hierarchies [was Re: Possibly better loop construct, also labels+goto important and on the fly compiler idea.] References: <6f2b7$525f2302$5419b3e4$13466@cache1.tilbu1.nb.home.nl> <1c0d2f01-d012-4dee-b806-710c2da310f0@googlegroups.com> <427db41c-3b31-43cf-86f3-1a6d283f451b@googlegroups.com> <8bc1e9a7-9e7b-4640-a594-e9170957bcaf@googlegroups.com> <936e5abe-f8e8-4008-987b-dcdace5f97ed@googlegroups.com> <426990fc-4285-46df-9295-421dbe5b40cd@googlegroups.com> Message-ID: <5273518d$0$29972$c3e8da3$5496439d@news.astraweb.com> On Tue, 29 Oct 2013 17:22:03 +1100, Chris Angelico wrote: > On Tue, Oct 29, 2013 at 3:03 PM, wrote: >> Regarding esr's "smart-questions", although I acknowledge it has useful >> advice, I have always found it elitist and abrasive. I wish someone >> would rewrite it without the "we are gods" attitude. > > I find it actually pretty appropriate. The attitude comes from a > hierarchy in which we are not at the top - but neither is esr. Hmmm, well it's not clear to me that ESR doesn't consider himself at the top of any hacker hierarchy. I'm sure that he considers that there are those who know more than him with respect to some specific technology or other, and I'm sure he doesn't think geeks fall into organisation charts with nice neat lines between those who report to whom. But I also think he doesn't have the false modesty to put himself anywhere but in the top "elite geek hacker" category. [...] > We're in a hierarchy (or actually > several independent and unrelated ones), and being at the top means (in > the open source world) being everyone's servant; and the people at the > top simply don't have time to be _everyone's_ servant personally, so > they need some sous-servants to help them to help people. An interesting thought, but I wouldn't put it that way. It seems to me that a better description would be that geeks tend to be big believers in "giving back", or perhaps something akin to "Whiteman's Burden" that Kipling believed in, the idea that those who have have a duty to those who don't. Of course, the whole colonialism thing is out of favour these days, and truth be told the idea of bringing "civilization to the savages" was more honoured in the breach than in the observance even in Kipling's day. But the idea that those who have more than others (be that skills, knowledge or possessions) have a duty towards those who don't is not a bad philosophy to live be. If we must have hierarchies -- and alas, Homo sapiens being as it is, we do -- it is better for those at the top to have a duty to serve as well as privileges. That's what Heinlein was getting at with the (often misunderstood) "Starship Troopers". Did it glorify military service? Yes it did, but it also emphasised the *service* part. If you want the privilege of citizenship, they you have to earn it by first serving. But I think that *servant* is not the right description for the relationship you are talking about. That implies that (say) I could demand ESR's service at any time, or at least at any time within pre- defined boundaries (even servants get days off), and that he would have no right to refuse service. But that's not the case. He is a volunteer who is free to say No at any time, and the quickest way to get him to say No would be to treat him as a servant. -- Steven From rosuav at gmail.com Fri Nov 1 04:19:24 2013 From: rosuav at gmail.com (Chris Angelico) Date: Fri, 1 Nov 2013 19:19:24 +1100 Subject: OT: Hierarchies [was Re: Possibly better loop construct, also labels+goto important and on the fly compiler idea.] In-Reply-To: <5273518d$0$29972$c3e8da3$5496439d@news.astraweb.com> References: <6f2b7$525f2302$5419b3e4$13466@cache1.tilbu1.nb.home.nl> <1c0d2f01-d012-4dee-b806-710c2da310f0@googlegroups.com> <427db41c-3b31-43cf-86f3-1a6d283f451b@googlegroups.com> <8bc1e9a7-9e7b-4640-a594-e9170957bcaf@googlegroups.com> <936e5abe-f8e8-4008-987b-dcdace5f97ed@googlegroups.com> <426990fc-4285-46df-9295-421dbe5b40cd@googlegroups.com> <5273518d$0$29972$c3e8da3$5496439d@news.astraweb.com> Message-ID: On Fri, Nov 1, 2013 at 6:00 PM, Steven D'Aprano wrote: > On Tue, 29 Oct 2013 17:22:03 +1100, Chris Angelico wrote: > >> On Tue, Oct 29, 2013 at 3:03 PM, wrote: >>> Regarding esr's "smart-questions", although I acknowledge it has useful >>> advice, I have always found it elitist and abrasive. I wish someone >>> would rewrite it without the "we are gods" attitude. >> >> I find it actually pretty appropriate. The attitude comes from a >> hierarchy in which we are not at the top - but neither is esr. > > Hmmm, well it's not clear to me that ESR doesn't consider himself at the > top of any hacker hierarchy. I'm sure that he considers that there are > those who know more than him with respect to some specific technology or > other, and I'm sure he doesn't think geeks fall into organisation charts > with nice neat lines between those who report to whom. But I also think > he doesn't have the false modesty to put himself anywhere but in the top > "elite geek hacker" category. There are multiple independent hierarchies, and in some of them, he may well be at (or close to) the top - but not all of them. Proper acceptance of a hierarchical world includes knowing that there's always someone above you. > But I think that *servant* is not the right description for the > relationship you are talking about. That implies that (say) I could > demand ESR's service at any time, or at least at any time within pre- > defined boundaries (even servants get days off), and that he would have > no right to refuse service. But that's not the case. He is a volunteer > who is free to say No at any time, and the quickest way to get him to say > No would be to treat him as a servant. It's a tricky concept to describe, and I agree that "servant" isn't an ideal term for it. I'm the head of a (tiny) community called Minstrel Hall, and what that means is that whenever anyone needs something done, it's my job to do it. That's not the classic understanding of the servant's role (the bonded man who has to do whatever he's told immediately), but is somewhat closer to a somewhat obscure term: servitor [1] or sizar [2]. I first met that word via Princess Ida, who stated that her university had no such students, though Wikipedia gives a better actual definition. The head of a community has certain duties to perform [3] and may or may not receive respect in return. Ultimately, if the head doesn't do his (or her, but the "his/her" "he/she" gets tedious) duties, he'll have no community following him, so he's responsible to his members in a very direct way. ChrisA [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Servitor [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sizar [3] The quirky part of my brain is thinking now of this, sung by one of the kings in a newly-formed republican monarchy (it makes sense in context): http://math.boisestate.edu/gas/gondoliers/web_opera/gond12.html From peter.cacioppi at gmail.com Sat Nov 2 15:40:36 2013 From: peter.cacioppi at gmail.com (Peter Cacioppi) Date: Sat, 2 Nov 2013 12:40:36 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Possibly better loop construct, also labels+goto important and on the fly compiler idea. In-Reply-To: <6f2b7$525f2302$5419b3e4$13466@cache1.tilbu1.nb.home.nl> References: <6f2b7$525f2302$5419b3e4$13466@cache1.tilbu1.nb.home.nl> Message-ID: <79a7d224-2b35-4ff3-a914-645d581282c7@googlegroups.com> Mark said : "The White Flag before this also escalates out of control. " This word "before" ... I don't think it means what you think it means. This thread has been off the rails for days. From breamoreboy at yahoo.co.uk Fri Nov 1 11:07:27 2013 From: breamoreboy at yahoo.co.uk (Mark Lawrence) Date: Fri, 01 Nov 2013 15:07:27 +0000 Subject: Error Testing In-Reply-To: References: <33549834-2f27-47f3-abea-eb3486909dec@googlegroups.com> <9e734f2b-9bcd-47d8-adb9-de6501fa6e7d@googlegroups.com> <52717d82$0$1677$e4fe514c@dreader35.news.xs4all.nl> <586c9c5d-d0d4-44c7-8454-94dcfc128318@googlegroups.com> <88E26096-00C2-47B5-B26B-0B0F7803AA47@mac.com> Message-ID: On 01/11/2013 14:51, Dennis Lee Bieber wrote: > On Fri, 01 Nov 2013 03:25:03 +0000, Mark Lawrence > declaimed the following: > >> On 01/11/2013 02:27, William Ray Wing wrote: >>> >>> supper computers >>> >> >> Somebody must have tough teeth, though thinking about it I recall people >> eating bicycles :) > > Was visualizing them used as plate warmers... > Hum, water cooled mainframes, tell that to the kids... -- Python is the second best programming language in the world. But the best has yet to be invented. Christian Tismer Mark Lawrence From invalid at invalid.invalid Fri Nov 1 04:32:24 2013 From: invalid at invalid.invalid (Grant Edwards) Date: Fri, 1 Nov 2013 08:32:24 +0000 (UTC) Subject: Error Testing References: <33549834-2f27-47f3-abea-eb3486909dec@googlegroups.com> <9e734f2b-9bcd-47d8-adb9-de6501fa6e7d@googlegroups.com> <52717d82$0$1677$e4fe514c@dreader35.news.xs4all.nl> <586c9c5d-d0d4-44c7-8454-94dcfc128318@googlegroups.com> Message-ID: On 2013-11-01, William Ray Wing wrote: > Actually, FORTRAN is probably responsible for more CPU cycles being > executed even today than most other languages. If you think about > the fact that most large scientific simulation codes (weather > forecasting, combustion modeling, finite-element modeling and so on), > are still FORTRAN based, and that those are the codes that occupy > multi-hundred-thousand-core petaflop class supper computers for weeks > on end, you have to respect its longevity. IIRC, some of the scientific computing libraries I used to use daily in Python data-crunching programs are still written in FORTRAN. -- Grant From breamoreboy at yahoo.co.uk Fri Nov 1 05:39:31 2013 From: breamoreboy at yahoo.co.uk (Mark Lawrence) Date: Fri, 01 Nov 2013 09:39:31 +0000 Subject: Error Testing In-Reply-To: <07cfa0a9-2f6f-41e4-ba17-e01a0c5cf8f4@googlegroups.com> References: <33549834-2f27-47f3-abea-eb3486909dec@googlegroups.com> <9e734f2b-9bcd-47d8-adb9-de6501fa6e7d@googlegroups.com> <52717d82$0$1677$e4fe514c@dreader35.news.xs4all.nl> <586c9c5d-d0d4-44c7-8454-94dcfc128318@googlegroups.com> <968a68b3-a1d7-4d7a-935c-6eb027c5f0a9@googlegroups.com> <07cfa0a9-2f6f-41e4-ba17-e01a0c5cf8f4@googlegroups.com> Message-ID: On 01/11/2013 03:50, rusi wrote: > On Friday, November 1, 2013 4:29:35 AM UTC+5:30, Denis McMahon wrote: > >> My mistake, that was what Albert said, you were simply standing up for >> him. > >> Please s/you/he/ in the lines of my previous post quoted above, and >> accept my apologies for my mistake. > > Heh! Chill! Yeah there is some hamming distance between the strings > "Albert van der Horst" and "Rusi Mody". But you were objecting not to the state-er but to the statement... > > Sanity is being restored to this mailing list in that an apology is offered and accepted with such good grace. If only that grumpy old git from the south of England, whose name currently escapes me, could always behave in the same manner :) -- Python is the second best programming language in the world. But the best has yet to be invented. Christian Tismer Mark Lawrence From albert at spenarnc.xs4all.nl Fri Nov 1 18:48:05 2013 From: albert at spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) Date: 01 Nov 2013 22:48:05 GMT Subject: Python Front-end to GCC References: <4012031f-5334-4be8-a673-e0d8c8917fb2@googlegroups.com> <5266aa80$0$29981$c3e8da3$5496439d@news.astraweb.com> Message-ID: <52742fa5$0$26880$e4fe514c@dreader37.news.xs4all.nl> In article , Chris Kaynor wrote: >-=-=-=-=-=- >Global: > >int arr[10]; >int main() >{ > int i; > for (i = 0; i < 10; i++) { > printf("arr[%d] = %d\n", i, arr[i]); > } > printf("\n"); > return 0; >} > >As for a reference: >http://stackoverflow.com/questions/1831290/static-variable-initialization > and >http://stackoverflow.com/questions/3373108/why-are-static-variables-auto-initialized-to-zero, >both of which then reference the C++ standard. Or even better: #include int arr[] = {1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8}; int main() { int i; for (i = 0; i < sizeof(arr)/sizeof(int); i++) { printf("arr[%d] = %d\n", i, arr[i]); } printf("\n"); return 0; } Output: " albert at cherry:/tmp$ a.out arr[0] = 1 arr[1] = 2 arr[2] = 3 arr[3] = 4 arr[4] = 5 arr[5] = 6 arr[6] = 7 arr[7] = 8 " This is the output of objdump -x a.out (after stripping) " a.out: file format elf64-x86-64 a.out architecture: i386:x86-64, flags 0x00000112: EXEC_P, HAS_SYMS, D_PAGED start address 0x0000000000400450 .... Lots of segments. 23 .got.plt 00000030 0000000000600900 0000000000600900 00000900 2**3 CONTENTS, ALLOC, LOAD, DATA 24 .data 00000040 0000000000600940 0000000000600940 00000940 2**5 CONTENTS, ALLOC, LOAD, DATA 25 .bss 00000010 0000000000600980 0000000000600980 00000980 2**3 ALLOC 26 .comment 0000001c 0000000000000000 0000000000000000 00000980 2**0 CONTENTS, READONLY SYMBOL TABLE: no symbols " Look at .data It is CONTENTS LOAD DATA, i.e. it has content in the executable binary and this is loaded as such into memory at startup. You can also ask to dump the content of the sections: objdump -s a.out a.out: file format elf64-x86-64 ... Contents of section .data: 600940 00000000 00000000 00000000 00000000 ................ 600950 00000000 00000000 00000000 00000000 ................ 600960 01000000 02000000 03000000 04000000 ................ 600970 05000000 06000000 07000000 08000000 ................ Contents of section .comment: 0000 4743433a 20284465 6269616e 20342e34 GCC: (Debian 4.4 0010 2e352d38 2920342e 342e3500 .5-8) 4.4.5. > > >> >> -- >> Steven >> -- >> https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list >> > >-=-=-=-=-=- >[Alternative: text/html] >-=-=-=-=-=- -- Albert van der Horst, UTRECHT,THE NETHERLANDS Economic growth -- being exponential -- ultimately falters. albert at spe&ar&c.xs4all.nl &=n http://home.hccnet.nl/a.w.m.van.der.horst From sharath.cs.smp at gmail.com Fri Nov 15 10:59:53 2013 From: sharath.cs.smp at gmail.com (sharath.cs.smp at gmail.com) Date: Fri, 15 Nov 2013 07:59:53 -0800 (PST) Subject: Python Front-end to GCC In-Reply-To: <4012031f-5334-4be8-a673-e0d8c8917fb2@googlegroups.com> References: <4012031f-5334-4be8-a673-e0d8c8917fb2@googlegroups.com> Message-ID: <776e8433-e716-4edd-8615-1765fba16087@googlegroups.com> On Sunday, 20 October 2013 10:56:46 UTC-7, Philip Herron wrote: > Hey, > > > > I've been working on GCCPY since roughly november 2009 at least in its > > concept. It was announced as a Gsoc 2010 project and also a Gsoc 2011 > > project. I was mentored by Ian Taylor who has been an extremely big > > influence on my software development carrer. > > > > Gccpy is an Ahead of time implementation of Python ontop of GCC. So it > > works as you would expect with a traditional compiler such as GCC to > > compile C code. Or G++ to compile C++ etc. > > > > Whats interesting and deserves a significant mention is my work is > > heavily inspired by Paul Biggar's phd thesis on optimizing dynamic > > languages and his work on PHC a ahead of time php compiler. I've had > > so many ups and down in this project and i need to thank Andi Hellmund > > for his contributions to the project. > > http://paulbiggar.com/research/#phd-dissertation > > > > The project has taken so many years as an in my spare time project to > > get to this point. I for example its taken me so long simply to > > understand a stabilise the core fundamentals for the compiler and how > > it could all work. > > > > The release can be found here. I will probably rename the tag to the > > milestone (lucy) later on. > > https://github.com/redbrain/gccpy/releases/tag/v0.1-24 > > (Lucy is our dog btw, German Shepard (6 years young) loves to lick > > your face off :) ) > > > > Documentation can be found http://gcc.gnu.org/wiki/PythonFrontEnd. > > (Although this is sparse partialy on purpose since i do not wan't > > people thinking this is by any means ready to compile real python > > applications) > > > > I've found some good success with this project in compiling python > > though its largely unknown to the world simply because i am nervous of > > the compiler and more specifically the python compiler world. > > > > But at least to me there is at least to me an un-answered question in > > current compiler implementations. AOT vs Jit. > > > > Is a jit implementation of a language (not just python) better than > > traditional ahead of time compilation. > > > > What i can say is ahead of time at least strips out the crap needed > > for the users code to be run. As in people are forgetting the basics > > of how a computer works in my opinion when it comes to making code run > > faster. Simply need to reduce the number of instructions that need to > > be executed in order to preform what needs to be done. Its not about > > Jit and bla bla keyword llvm keyword instruction scheduling keyword > > bla. > > > > I could go into the arguments but i feel i should let the project > > speak for itself its very immature so you really cant compare it to > > anything like it but it does compile little bits and bobs fairly well > > but there is much more work needed. > > > > There is nothing at steak, its simply an idea provoked from a great > > phd thesis and i want to see how it would work out. I don't get funded > > of paid. I love working on compilers and languages but i don't have a > > day job doing it so its my little pet to open source i believe its at > > least worth some research. > > > > I would really like to hear the feedback good and bad. I can't > > describe how much work i've put into this and how much persistence > > I've had to have in light of recent reddit threads talking about my > > project. > > > > I have so many people to thank to get to this point! Namely Ian > > Taylor, Paul Biggar, Andi Hellmund, Cyril Roelandt Robert Bradshaw, > > PyBelfast, and the Linux Outlaws community. I really couldn't have got > > to this point in my life without the help of these people! > > > > Thanks! > > > > --Phil From albert at spenarnc.xs4all.nl Thu Nov 7 06:30:40 2013 From: albert at spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) Date: 07 Nov 2013 11:30:40 GMT Subject: Unlimited canvas painting program References: <5d107d11-0abf-4180-a994-3368f12979c1@googlegroups.com> <9927d3d4-2038-4780-901b-fe3c1251af75@googlegroups.com> Message-ID: <527b79e0$0$1700$e4fe514c@dreader35.news.xs4all.nl> In article , MRAB wrote: >On 24/10/2013 20:32, markotaht at gmail.com wrote: >> So, i`ll take the canvas, somekind of mouse tracker, for each mouse >> location il draw a dot or 2X2 square or something. Main thing i have >> never understood, is how can i get the backround to move. >> >> Lets say ia hve 200X200 window. In the middle of it is the cursor >> that draws. If i move the mouse the cursor doesent move, but the >> canvas moves. So if i move mouse to the left, i get a line that goes >> to the left. So i probably must invert the canvas movement. If mouse >> goes left, canvas goes right. >> >> And if possible i would like to save my piece of art aswell :D >> >I think it'll be confusing because it goes against how every other >program does it! > >In a painting program you can point to other things, such as tools, but >if the cursor never moves... > >It would be simpler, IMHO, if you just moved the canvas and stopped the >cursor going off the canvas when the user is drawing near the edge, so >that the user doesn't need to stop drawing in order to expose more of >the canvas. A trick that is used in the editor I'm currently using is to do normal cursor movement, until you are within a certain range from the border. At that point you move the window over the canvas in order to keep the cursor in the middle part of the canvas. This can be done in discrete steps, and is not too disruptive. Even if you do it continuously, it is more intuitive (but functionally equivalent to) keeping the cursor in the middle. A problem that remains is that a mouse is not intended for an infinite canvas. At some point you will have to lift it and place it back on the pad. Groetjes Albert -- Albert van der Horst, UTRECHT,THE NETHERLANDS Economic growth -- being exponential -- ultimately falters. albert at spe&ar&c.xs4all.nl &=n http://home.hccnet.nl/a.w.m.van.der.horst From rosuav at gmail.com Thu Nov 7 08:04:07 2013 From: rosuav at gmail.com (Chris Angelico) Date: Fri, 8 Nov 2013 00:04:07 +1100 Subject: Unlimited canvas painting program In-Reply-To: <527b79e0$0$1700$e4fe514c@dreader35.news.xs4all.nl> References: <5d107d11-0abf-4180-a994-3368f12979c1@googlegroups.com> <9927d3d4-2038-4780-901b-fe3c1251af75@googlegroups.com> <527b79e0$0$1700$e4fe514c@dreader35.news.xs4all.nl> Message-ID: On Thu, Nov 7, 2013 at 10:30 PM, Albert van der Horst wrote: > A problem that remains is that a mouse is not intended for an infinite > canvas. At some point you will have to lift it and place it back on the > pad. Only if you're talking about the physical grasp mouse, which is probably the most common household mouse, or the touchpad, probably the next most common. With a stick mouse (IBM calls it a TrackPoint), you can carry on to infinity; same with a roller ball. But yes, a lot of mouse designs aren't built for infinity. ChrisA From jsf80238 at gmail.com Sun Nov 3 05:55:08 2013 From: jsf80238 at gmail.com (Jason Friedman) Date: Sun, 3 Nov 2013 03:55:08 -0700 Subject: Debugging decorator In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: > I wrote this decorator: https://gist.github.com/yasar11732/7163528 > > I ran it with Python 2 and thought it was neat. Most of my work is Python 3. I ran 2to3-3.3 against it and I am getting this error: $ ./simple.py Traceback (most recent call last): File "./simple.py", line 3, in @debugger.debugging File "/home/jason/python/debugger.py", line 41, in debugging new_function_body.append(make_print_node("function %s called" % func.__name__)) File "/home/jason/python/debugger.py", line 6, in make_print_node return ast.Print(dest=None, values=[ast.Str(s=s)], nl=True) AttributeError: 'module' object has no attribute 'Print' Comparing http://docs.python.org/2/library/ast.html#module-ast against http://docs.python.org/3.3/library/ast.html#module-ast I see that "Print" has indeed been removed. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From rosuav at gmail.com Sun Nov 3 08:20:03 2013 From: rosuav at gmail.com (Chris Angelico) Date: Mon, 4 Nov 2013 00:20:03 +1100 Subject: Debugging decorator In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Sun, Nov 3, 2013 at 9:55 PM, Jason Friedman wrote: > >> I wrote this decorator: https://gist.github.com/yasar11732/7163528 >> > I ran it with Python 2 and thought it was neat. > Most of my work is Python 3. > I ran 2to3-3.3 against it and I am getting this error: > > $ ./simple.py > Traceback (most recent call last): > File "./simple.py", line 3, in > @debugger.debugging > File "/home/jason/python/debugger.py", line 41, in debugging > new_function_body.append(make_print_node("function %s called" % > func.__name__)) > File "/home/jason/python/debugger.py", line 6, in make_print_node > return ast.Print(dest=None, values=[ast.Str(s=s)], nl=True) > AttributeError: 'module' object has no attribute 'Print' > > Comparing http://docs.python.org/2/library/ast.html#module-ast against > http://docs.python.org/3.3/library/ast.html#module-ast I see that "Print" > has indeed been removed. Ah, that'd be because 'print' is no longer a statement. Check out this function's disassembly: def hello_world(): print("Hello, world!") Python 2.7: 2 0 LOAD_CONST 1 ('Hello, world!') 3 PRINT_ITEM 4 PRINT_NEWLINE 5 LOAD_CONST 0 (None) 8 RETURN_VALUE Python 3.3: 2 0 LOAD_GLOBAL 0 (print) 3 LOAD_CONST 1 ('Hello, world!') 6 CALL_FUNCTION 1 (1 positional, 0 keyword pair) 9 POP_TOP 10 LOAD_CONST 0 (None) 13 RETURN_VALUE As print is now a function, you're going to need to construct a function call element instead of a special 'print' node. I don't know how to do that as I'm not an AST expert, but hopefully you can work it out from there? If you need it to be cross-version, you could probably use sys.stdout.write explicitly (not forgetting to add a newline, which print does and write - obviously - doesn't). Or just demand that "from __future__ import print_function" be used, which will make 2.7 like 3.3. ChrisA From rosuav at gmail.com Sun Nov 3 08:22:08 2013 From: rosuav at gmail.com (Chris Angelico) Date: Mon, 4 Nov 2013 00:22:08 +1100 Subject: Debugging decorator In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Mon, Nov 4, 2013 at 12:20 AM, Chris Angelico wrote: > As print is now a function, you're going to need to construct a > function call element instead of a special 'print' node. I don't know > how to do that as I'm not an AST expert, but hopefully you can work it > out from there? > > If you need it to be cross-version, you could probably use > sys.stdout.write explicitly (not forgetting to add a newline, which > print does and write - obviously - doesn't). Or just demand that "from > __future__ import print_function" be used, which will make 2.7 like > 3.3. Oh, I just noticed that the person using 2to3 wasn't the OP. My apologies, my language was aimed at the decorator's primary developer. Yasar, are you prepared to take on Python 3 support fully? If it's as simple as tweaking the Print nodes, that shouldn't be too hard (I hope). ChrisA From rustompmody at gmail.com Sat Nov 2 05:35:46 2013 From: rustompmody at gmail.com (rusi) Date: Sat, 2 Nov 2013 02:35:46 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Python on a MacBook Pro (not my machine) In-Reply-To: <0799708c-59d5-41c2-9fcc-24b7ca87386e@googlegroups.com> References: <0799708c-59d5-41c2-9fcc-24b7ca87386e@googlegroups.com> Message-ID: <14f678dc-a69c-489d-a120-ea5e0a1b2012@googlegroups.com> On Sunday, October 27, 2013 12:37:40 AM UTC+5:30, John Ladasky wrote: > Hi folks, > My side job as a Python tutor continues to grow. In two weeks, I > will start working with a high-school student who owns a MacBook > Pro. > So, what other free and lightweight editing options do I have for a > Mac? I have found a few (fairly old) discussions on > comp.lang.python which suggest Eric > (http://eric-ide.python-projects.org/) and Editra > (http://editra.org/). Opinions on these and other choices are > appreciated. Just stumbled upon this https://github.com/gabrielelanaro/emacs-for-python Not that I would recommend it if you are not already an emacs user From arya at live.ca Sat Nov 2 12:53:23 2013 From: arya at live.ca (nf7) Date: Sat, 2 Nov 2013 09:53:23 -0700 Subject: Python on a MacBook Pro (not my machine) In-Reply-To: <14f678dc-a69c-489d-a120-ea5e0a1b2012@googlegroups.com> References: <0799708c-59d5-41c2-9fcc-24b7ca87386e@googlegroups.com> <14f678dc-a69c-489d-a120-ea5e0a1b2012@googlegroups.com> Message-ID: MacVim is the best text editor, but the key bindings might get in the way at first. I'd still suggest it though. Also, installing a version of Python from the website is a good idea since Apple has a custom (and usually older) version of Python pre-installed that functions a little differently. "rusi" wrote in message news:14f678dc-a69c-489d-a120-ea5e0a1b2012 at googlegroups.com... On Sunday, October 27, 2013 12:37:40 AM UTC+5:30, John Ladasky wrote: > Hi folks, > My side job as a Python tutor continues to grow. In two weeks, I > will start working with a high-school student who owns a MacBook > Pro. > So, what other free and lightweight editing options do I have for a > Mac? I have found a few (fairly old) discussions on > comp.lang.python which suggest Eric > (http://eric-ide.python-projects.org/) and Editra > (http://editra.org/). Opinions on these and other choices are > appreciated. Just stumbled upon this https://github.com/gabrielelanaro/emacs-for-python Not that I would recommend it if you are not already an emacs user --- This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection is active. http://www.avast.com From paul.nospam at rudin.co.uk Sat Nov 2 12:56:01 2013 From: paul.nospam at rudin.co.uk (paul.nospam at rudin.co.uk) Date: Sat, 02 Nov 2013 16:56:01 +0000 Subject: Python on a MacBook Pro (not my machine) References: <0799708c-59d5-41c2-9fcc-24b7ca87386e@googlegroups.com> <14f678dc-a69c-489d-a120-ea5e0a1b2012@googlegroups.com> Message-ID: <85ob62kaji.fsf@rudin.co.uk> "nf7" writes: > MacVim is the best text editor... fighting talk! :) From rustompmody at gmail.com Sat Nov 2 13:27:55 2013 From: rustompmody at gmail.com (rusi) Date: Sat, 2 Nov 2013 10:27:55 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Python on a MacBook Pro (not my machine) In-Reply-To: <85ob62kaji.fsf@rudin.co.uk> References: <0799708c-59d5-41c2-9fcc-24b7ca87386e@googlegroups.com> <14f678dc-a69c-489d-a120-ea5e0a1b2012@googlegroups.com> <85ob62kaji.fsf@rudin.co.uk> Message-ID: On Saturday, November 2, 2013 10:26:01 PM UTC+5:30, paul.... at rudin.co.uk wrote: > "nf7" writes: > > MacVim is the best text editor... > fighting talk! > :) No I am not muscular enough to return the fighting talk... Except to say that nf7 is top-posting From john_ladasky at sbcglobal.net Wed Nov 6 12:51:29 2013 From: john_ladasky at sbcglobal.net (John Ladasky) Date: Wed, 6 Nov 2013 09:51:29 -0800 (PST) Subject: Python on a MacBook Pro (not my machine) In-Reply-To: <0799708c-59d5-41c2-9fcc-24b7ca87386e@googlegroups.com> References: <0799708c-59d5-41c2-9fcc-24b7ca87386e@googlegroups.com> Message-ID: <86a3e5ae-a0b0-44fe-8a0c-87911d885654@googlegroups.com> I just wanted to say thank you to everyone who posted here with recommendations for programming-friendly text editors. I will follow up on this after I have resolved a more fundamental issue with my new student -- his Python 3.3.2 interpreter segfaults and crashes on the second command! I'll start a new thread to deal with that problem. From cs at zip.com.au Wed Nov 6 16:34:32 2013 From: cs at zip.com.au (Cameron Simpson) Date: Thu, 7 Nov 2013 08:34:32 +1100 Subject: Python on a MacBook Pro (not my machine) In-Reply-To: <86a3e5ae-a0b0-44fe-8a0c-87911d885654@googlegroups.com> References: <86a3e5ae-a0b0-44fe-8a0c-87911d885654@googlegroups.com> Message-ID: <20131106213432.GA53746@cskk.homeip.net> On 06Nov2013 09:51, John Ladasky wrote: > I just wanted to say thank you to everyone who posted here with recommendations for programming-friendly text editors. I will follow up on this after I have resolved a more fundamental issue with my new student -- his Python 3.3.2 interpreter segfaults and crashes on the second command! I'll start a new thread to deal with that problem. I think there was some discussion of this bug with Mavericks very recently on the list. Possibly fixed in more recent builds. Cheers, -- Cameron Simpson Uhlmann's Razor: When stupidity is a sufficient explanation, there is no need to have recourse to any other. - Michael M. Uhlmann, assistant attorney general for legislation in the Ford Administration From jake.angulo at gmail.com Wed Nov 6 19:11:27 2013 From: jake.angulo at gmail.com (Jake Angulo) Date: Thu, 7 Nov 2013 11:11:27 +1100 Subject: Python on a MacBook Pro (not my machine) In-Reply-To: <20131106213432.GA53746@cskk.homeip.net> References: <86a3e5ae-a0b0-44fe-8a0c-87911d885654@googlegroups.com> <20131106213432.GA53746@cskk.homeip.net> Message-ID: I use a Macbook air for programming - yes it has Python 2.x in it. For code editing i use a combination of: 1) Wing IDE 101 (from their website: "is free scaled down Python IDE designed for teaching introductory programming classes") 2) Sublime Text 3) Good old Vi You could try those On Thu, Nov 7, 2013 at 8:34 AM, Cameron Simpson wrote: > On 06Nov2013 09:51, John Ladasky wrote: > > I just wanted to say thank you to everyone who posted here with > recommendations for programming-friendly text editors. I will follow up on > this after I have resolved a more fundamental issue with my new student -- > his Python 3.3.2 interpreter segfaults and crashes on the second command! > I'll start a new thread to deal with that problem. > > I think there was some discussion of this bug with Mavericks very > recently on the list. Possibly fixed in more recent builds. > > Cheers, > -- > Cameron Simpson > > Uhlmann's Razor: When stupidity is a sufficient explanation, there is no > need > to have recourse to any other. > - Michael M. Uhlmann, assistant attorney general > for legislation in the Ford Administration > -- > https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From steve+comp.lang.python at pearwood.info Fri Nov 1 03:16:36 2013 From: steve+comp.lang.python at pearwood.info (Steven D'Aprano) Date: 01 Nov 2013 07:16:36 GMT Subject: trying to strip out non ascii.. or rather convert non ascii References: <526c412a$0$29972$c3e8da3$5496439d@news.astraweb.com> <526f46a2$0$6512$c3e8da3$5496439d@news.astraweb.com> <5272025a$0$29862$c3e8da3$5496439d@news.astraweb.com> <4460346f-c715-42fb-8e94-e20b46f1bbf8@googlegroups.com> Message-ID: <52735554$0$29972$c3e8da3$5496439d@news.astraweb.com> On Thu, 31 Oct 2013 03:33:15 -0700, wxjmfauth wrote: > Le jeudi 31 octobre 2013 08:10:18 UTC+1, Steven D'Aprano a ?crit?: >> I'm glad that you know so much better than Google, Bing, Yahoo, and >> other >> search engines. When I search for "mispealled" Google gives me: [...] > As far as I know, I recognized my mistake. I had more text processing > systems in mind, than search engines. Yes, you have, I acknowledge that now. I see now that at the time I made my response to you, you had already replied recognising your error. Unfortunately I had not seen that. So in that case, I withdraw my comments and apologize. > I can even tell you, I am really stupid. I wrote pure Unicode software > to sort French or German strings. > > Pure unicode == independent from any locale. Unfortunately it is not that simple. The same code point can have different meanings in different languages, and should be treated differently when sorting. The natural Unicode sort order satisfies very few European languages, including English. A few examples: * Swedish ? is a distinct letters of the alphabet, appearing after z: "a b c z ?" is sorted according to Swedish rules. But in German ? is considered to be the letter 'a' plus an umlaut, and is collated after 'a': "a ? b c z" is sorted according to German rules. * In German ? is considered to be a variant of o, equivalent to 'oe', while in Finish ? is a distinct letter which cannot be expanded to 'oe', and which appears at the end of the alphabet. * Similarly, in modern English ? is a ligature of ae, while in Danish and Norwegian is it a distinct letter of the alphabet appearing after z: in English dictionaries, "?sir" will be found with other "A" words, often expanded to "Aesir", while in Norwegian it will be found after "Z" words. * Most European languages convert uppercase I to lowercase i, but Turkish has distinct letters for dotted and dotless I. According to Turkish rules, lowercase(I) is ? and uppercase(i) is ?. While it is true that the Unicode character set is independent of locale, for natural processing of characters, it isn't enough to just use Unicode. -- Steven From wxjmfauth at gmail.com Fri Nov 1 05:00:52 2013 From: wxjmfauth at gmail.com (wxjmfauth at gmail.com) Date: Fri, 1 Nov 2013 02:00:52 -0700 (PDT) Subject: trying to strip out non ascii.. or rather convert non ascii In-Reply-To: <52735554$0$29972$c3e8da3$5496439d@news.astraweb.com> References: <526c412a$0$29972$c3e8da3$5496439d@news.astraweb.com> <526f46a2$0$6512$c3e8da3$5496439d@news.astraweb.com> <5272025a$0$29862$c3e8da3$5496439d@news.astraweb.com> <4460346f-c715-42fb-8e94-e20b46f1bbf8@googlegroups.com> <52735554$0$29972$c3e8da3$5496439d@news.astraweb.com> Message-ID: <39f9588e-d60d-4e34-8b61-33de32a99d08@googlegroups.com> Le vendredi 1 novembre 2013 08:16:36 UTC+1, Steven D'Aprano a ?crit?: > On Thu, 31 Oct 2013 03:33:15 -0700, wxjmfauth wrote: > > > > > Le jeudi 31 octobre 2013 08:10:18 UTC+1, Steven D'Aprano a ?crit?: > > > > >> I'm glad that you know so much better than Google, Bing, Yahoo, and > > >> other > > >> search engines. When I search for "mispealled" Google gives me: > > [...] > > > As far as I know, I recognized my mistake. I had more text processing > > > systems in mind, than search engines. > > > > Yes, you have, I acknowledge that now. I see now that at the time I made > > my response to you, you had already replied recognising your error. > > Unfortunately I had not seen that. So in that case, I withdraw my > > comments and apologize. > > > > > > > I can even tell you, I am really stupid. I wrote pure Unicode software > > > to sort French or German strings. > > > > > > Pure unicode == independent from any locale. > > > > Unfortunately it is not that simple. The same code point can have > > different meanings in different languages, and should be treated > > differently when sorting. The natural Unicode sort order satisfies very > > few European languages, including English. A few examples: > > > > * Swedish ? is a distinct letters of the alphabet, appearing > > after z: "a b c z ?" is sorted according to Swedish rules. > > But in German ? is considered to be the letter 'a' plus an > > umlaut, and is collated after 'a': "a ? b c z" is sorted > > according to German rules. > > > > * In German ? is considered to be a variant of o, equivalent > > to 'oe', while in Finish ? is a distinct letter which > > cannot be expanded to 'oe', and which appears at the end > > of the alphabet. > > > > * Similarly, in modern English ? is a ligature of ae, while in > > Danish and Norwegian is it a distinct letter of the alphabet > > appearing after z: in English dictionaries, "?sir" will be > > found with other "A" words, often expanded to "Aesir", while > > in Norwegian it will be found after "Z" words. > > > > * Most European languages convert uppercase I to lowercase i, > > but Turkish has distinct letters for dotted and dotless I. > > According to Turkish rules, lowercase(I) is ? and uppercase(i) > > is ?. > > > > > > While it is true that the Unicode character set is independent of locale, > > for natural processing of characters, it isn't enough to just use Unicode. > > > > > > -- > > Steven I'm aware of all the points you gave. That's why I wrote "French or German strings". The hard task is not on the side of Unicode or sorting, it is on the creation of key(s) used for sorting. Eg, cote, c?te, cot?, c?t?. French editors are not all sorting these words in the same way (diacritics). jmf PS A *real* case to test the FSR. From breamoreboy at yahoo.co.uk Fri Nov 1 05:18:15 2013 From: breamoreboy at yahoo.co.uk (Mark Lawrence) Date: Fri, 01 Nov 2013 09:18:15 +0000 Subject: trying to strip out non ascii.. or rather convert non ascii In-Reply-To: <39f9588e-d60d-4e34-8b61-33de32a99d08@googlegroups.com> References: <526c412a$0$29972$c3e8da3$5496439d@news.astraweb.com> <526f46a2$0$6512$c3e8da3$5496439d@news.astraweb.com> <5272025a$0$29862$c3e8da3$5496439d@news.astraweb.com> <4460346f-c715-42fb-8e94-e20b46f1bbf8@googlegroups.com> <52735554$0$29972$c3e8da3$5496439d@news.astraweb.com> <39f9588e-d60d-4e34-8b61-33de32a99d08@googlegroups.com> Message-ID: On 01/11/2013 09:00, wxjmfauth at gmail.com wrote: I'll ask again, would you please read, digest and action this https://wiki.python.org/moin/GoogleGroupsPython -- Python is the second best programming language in the world. But the best has yet to be invented. Christian Tismer Mark Lawrence From jsf80238 at gmail.com Sun Nov 3 06:12:37 2013 From: jsf80238 at gmail.com (Jason Friedman) Date: Sun, 3 Nov 2013 04:12:37 -0700 Subject: Parsing multiple lines from text file using regex In-Reply-To: <002d01ced358$e18ab5f0$a4a021d0$@org> References: <002d01ced358$e18ab5f0$a4a021d0$@org> Message-ID: > Hi, > I am having an issue with something that would seem to have an easy > solution, but which escapes me. I have configuration files that I would > like to parse. The data I am having issue with is a multi-line attribute > that has the following structure: > > banner