buggy python interpretter or am I missing something here?

[Steven D'Aprano]

On Mon, 27 Jan 2014 09:32:43 +0000, some guy who calls himself "me" wrote:

> On Mon, 27 Jan 2014 20:01:33 +1100, Chris Angelico wrote:
> 
>> On Mon, Jan 27, 2014 at 6:44 PM, me <noone at all.net> wrote:
>>> On Sun, 26 Jan 2014 23:17:29 -0800, Ethan Furman wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 01/26/2014 10:46 PM, me wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> [...]  I'm satisfied that the except: syntax yields undefined
>>>>> behavior,
>>>>> and in my mind it shouldn't be
>>>>>  syntactically allowed then.
>>>>
>>>> Two points:
>>>>
>>>>    1) Python is not C++
>>>>
>>>>    2) You asked for help; you received it.  Coming back
>>>>       with an attitude of "Python must be broken, I'll work around
>>>>       it" is going to quickly lose you the support of those willing
>>>>       to help again.
>>>
>>>
>>> Whatever...lighten up dude!
>> 
>> When you use a language, you should be working with it, not fighting
>> against it. It doesn't do to complain that REXX ought to have IEEE
>> floating-point semantics, or that 8086 assembly language really would
>> benefit from a native hashtable type. Python works a certain way, and
>> part of that is its use of exceptions - which are integral to the
>> language, rather than being (as in C++) somewhat tacked-on. Assuming
>> that anything that isn't the way you expect it is inherently broken,
>> and saying so on a mailing list, is a good way to alienate those who
>> are offering you help for no reimbursement... and "lighten up dude"
>> doesn't help.
>> 
>> ChrisA
> 
> You feel better now that you too have vented?  I had a productive
> discussion with a couple of top level posters who helped me solve my
> problem and they receive appropriate kuddos.  Now it seems that some
> lonely individuals who maybe just want some attention are coming out of
> the woodwork.

A word to the wise: Chris is one of the most frequent and helpful posters 
here. So is Ethan. Both of them know what they're talking about, so when 
they give you advice, you could do a lot worse than to listen.

Some examples of "a lot worse": you could arrogantly dismiss them by 
saying "whatever". Or you could make assumptions about their personal 
lives ("lonely individuals"). 

[Aside: you seem to be making a habit of jumping to wrong conclusions 
based on incorrect and illogical interpretations of minimal evidence. 
That's a poor habit to get into, and especially poor for a programmer.]


> The thread is done so lets give it a rest.  The condescending attitude
> about proper USENET tech help is just as annoying as perhaps my
> "opinions" seem.  If someone is so sensitive as to not be able to
> discuss a technical matter without making it personal or seeing it as an
> attack against their religion then I neither want nor need their input. 
> There are plenty of technical resources in the world that don't require
> idol worship.

What does idol worship have to do with anything? Oh wait, do you think 
Ethan and Chris are pissed off because you're not genuflecting at 
Python's awesomeness? That's another comically wrong conclusion.


-- 
Steven