Re: How coding in Python is bad for you

On 02/02/17 01:41, Chris Angelico wrote: On Thu, Feb 2, 2017 at 10:49 AM, Erik wrote: Well, _logically_ there is a flag (in as much as it could be thought of like that to make it easy to understand - and in C, that's pretty much what you have to actually do unless you really want to use 'goto')

Re: How coding in Python is bad for you

On 02/02/17 02:05, MRAB wrote: Both suggestions are a little long-winded. Couldn't we just abbreviate them to "else:"? :-) You are not wrong ;) E. -- https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list

Re: How coding in Python is bad for you

On 2017-02-01 23:49, Erik wrote: On 30/01/17 02:14, Steve D'Aprano wrote: On Mon, 30 Jan 2017 10:52 am, Erik wrote: It would be even better if it was "else if not break:" to make the meaning clearer. break is not the only way to exit the for loop Fine - "else if not break or raise or return

Re: How coding in Python is bad for you

On Thu, Feb 2, 2017 at 10:49 AM, Erik wrote: > Well, _logically_ there is a flag (in as much as it could be thought of like > that to make it easy to understand - and in C, that's pretty much what you > have to actually do unless you really want to use 'goto'). The last time I wanted a for-else i

Re: How coding in Python is bad for you

On 30/01/17 02:14, Steve D'Aprano wrote: On Mon, 30 Jan 2017 10:52 am, Erik wrote: It would be even better if it was "else if not break:" to make the meaning clearer. break is not the only way to exit the for loop Fine - "else if not break or raise or return:", then ;) [that is not a seriou

Re: How coding in Python is bad for you

On Mon, 30 Jan 2017 10:52 am, Erik wrote: > On 29/01/17 14:42, Steve D'Aprano wrote: >> 1. for...else is misspelled, and should be for...then; >> >> 2. Same for while...else; > > I don't think I'll ever agree with you on this one. > > "then", to me, implies the code following it is always execut

Re: How coding in Python is bad for you

On 29/01/17 14:42, Steve D'Aprano wrote: 1. for...else is misspelled, and should be for...then; 2. Same for while...else; I don't think I'll ever agree with you on this one. "then", to me, implies the code following it is always executed. "else" implies it's conditional. In those constructs

Re: How coding in Python is bad for you

On Mon, Jan 30, 2017 at 8:54 AM, Gregory Ewing wrote: > Steve D'Aprano wrote: > >> 5. The statistics module is too slow (and if I ever meet the author, I'll >> give him a kick in the head); > > > Wow... ad-hominem take to a physical level! If Steve ever comes face to face with the author of the s

Re: How coding in Python is bad for you

Steve D'Aprano wrote: 5. The statistics module is too slow (and if I ever meet the author, I'll give him a kick in the head); Wow... ad-hominem take to a physical level! -- Greg -- https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list

Re: How coding in Python is bad for you

On Mon, 30 Jan 2017 12:05 am, BartC wrote: > What might be unreasonable is to criticise it in a Python group full > of language aficionados who are going to view every feature and quirk of > the language in a good light; It's all about the trade-offs we choose to make. Its not that we don't unde

Re: How coding in Python is bad for you

On Mon, Jan 30, 2017 at 12:05 AM, BartC wrote: > On 29/01/2017 01:35, pavlovevide...@gmail.com wrote: >> >> On Monday, January 23, 2017 at 9:24:56 AM UTC-8, bream...@gmail.com wrote: >>> >>> The article is here http://lenkaspace.net/index.php/blog/show/111 >>> >>> Kindest regards. >>> >>> Mark Law

Re: How coding in Python is bad for you

On 29/01/2017 01:35, pavlovevide...@gmail.com wrote: On Monday, January 23, 2017 at 9:24:56 AM UTC-8, bream...@gmail.com wrote: The article is here http://lenkaspace.net/index.php/blog/show/111 Kindest regards. Mark Lawrence. I remember the old days of Python when it was just Perl's little b

Re: How coding in Python is bad for you

On Monday, January 23, 2017 at 9:24:56 AM UTC-8, bream...@gmail.com wrote: > The article is here http://lenkaspace.net/index.php/blog/show/111 > > Kindest regards. > > Mark Lawrence. I remember the old days of Python when it was just Perl's little brother. Sometimes I feel moments of amazement

Re: How coding in Python is bad for you

I used to manually reformat unfamiliar C++ by hand, if for no other reason in that it forced me to read the code and somewhat comprehend what was going on. Now, I've lost my patience and use clang-format, a great & highly configurable tool. I also use vim for Python & C++ coding, so I also rely upo

Re: How coding in Python is bad for you

On Friday 27 Jan 2017 05:07 CET, Brandon McCaig wrote: > Hell, considering the code that I have seen in the wild it might > even catch some extra errors that become syntax errors! It's not > at all rare for indentation to not match in languages that don't > require it to at least fit a pattern. I

Re: How coding in Python is bad for you

On Tue, Jan 24, 2017 at 07:54:30PM -0600, Tim Chase wrote: > The editor I use (vim) doesn't even require me to re-select the range > to shift it. Just using > > >'] > > or > > <'] > > will indent/dedent from the cursor to the line where your paste ended. (O_O) You learn something every da

Re: How coding in Python is bad for you

On Tue, Jan 24, 2017 at 07:50:20PM +, Ben Bacarisse wrote: > I suspect that part of the reason these errors occur is > precisely because they don't matter to the interpreter and > students are doing a lot of self-easement based on "does it > work?" tests. I cringe when I hear "it works"! In p

Re: How coding in Python is bad for you

On Tue, Jan 24, 2017 at 07:31:18PM +, Ben Bacarisse wrote: > The trouble is that I've been programming for so long that I > can't remember what it's like to make block and/or indent > errors. Obviously I make typos but they don't survive more > than a few seconds. Agreed. In very rare circums

Re: How an editor can help with block nesting (was Re: How coding in Python is bad for you)

On Wed, Jan 25, 2017 at 6:31 AM, Ben Bacarisse wrote: In Python the editor could, for example, highlight the block you are typing in, so as soon as you leave the body of the 'if' it would stop being marked and the containing code would be highlighted. Just moving th

Re: How coding in Python is bad for you

On Tue, 24 Jan 2017 20:09:45 -0500, Dennis Lee Bieber wrote: > On Tue, 24 Jan 2017 16:03:45 GMT, alister > declaimed the following: > >>On Tue, 24 Jan 2017 14:28:55 +, Jon Ribbens wrote: >> >>> On 2017-01-24, alister wrote: On Mon, 23 Jan 2017 20:39:26 +, Jon Ribbens wrote: > T

Re: How coding in Python is bad for you

in 770220 20170124 070853 Chris Angelico wrote: >On Tue, Jan 24, 2017 at 6:00 PM, Bob Martin wrote: >> in 770207 20170124 005601 Chris Angelico wrote: >> >>>REXX has even less structure than Python - it doesn't even have >>>functions, just labels, so you can actually have two functions that >>>s

Re: How coding in Python is bad for you

Dennis Lee Bieber wrote: While I'm trying to figure out what significance Centrum vitamins have with being "non-GMO"... Possibly they're just complying with some legal requirement or other to declare whether the product has any GMO components. If so, bit of a silly regulation, I'll agre

Re: How coding in Python is bad for you

On 2017-01-24 20:04, Dennis Lee Bieber wrote: >>You don't know that. If this has been pasted from elsewhere, you >>need to match up the indentation level with the current code. > > So? The editor(s) I tend to use have the ability to shift > indent in/out for selected blocks. Do the paste, hi

Re: How coding in Python is bad for you

On 25/01/2017 01:04, Dennis Lee Bieber wrote: On Tue, 24 Jan 2017 17:50:56 +, BartC declaimed the following: If I've accidentally lost a space or tab while messing about with it, and it's significant, I would rather the compiler reported it! As I'm not going to spot it by perusing the 15,

Re: How an editor can help with block nesting (was Re: How coding in Python is bad for you)

On Wed, 25 Jan 2017 12:31:11 +1100, Steve D'Aprano wrote: > But now I type something which cannot possibly be indented there: > > def func(a, b): > if condition: > spam() > elif something: | > > and hit ENTER again. There's nothing ambiguous about this, and th

Re: How an editor can help with block nesting (was Re: How coding in Python is bad for you)

On Wed, Jan 25, 2017 at 12:31 PM, Steve D'Aprano wrote: >> With my JavaScript students, the greatest help is probably a keystroke >> beautifier. You edit your code with sloppy indentation, and then bam, >> it reindents for you. > > Really? I wouldn't want that, or find it helpful to type badly for

Re: How an editor can help with block nesting (was Re: How coding in Python is bad for you)

On Wed, 25 Jan 2017 08:19 am, Chris Angelico wrote: > I kinda like the idea of showing what the innermost active block > heading is for any given line of code. That would be fairly > straight-forward: scroll up till you find a non-blank line with less > indentation than the one you're on, and put

How an editor can help with block nesting (was Re: How coding in Python is bad for you)

On Wed, Jan 25, 2017 at 6:31 AM, Ben Bacarisse wrote: > I'm not talking about detecting errors -- that's for the programmer -- > but the editor can help the programmer to be sure they wrote what they > meant by doing things like matching brackets and auto-indenting code in > {}s. (I'm replying to

Re: How coding in Python is bad for you

Chris Angelico writes: > On Wed, Jan 25, 2017 at 3:21 AM, Ben Bacarisse wrote: >> Chris Angelico writes: >> >>> On Wed, Jan 25, 2017 at 2:51 AM, Ben Bacarisse wrote: Chris Angelico writes: > ... I teach JavaScript as well as Python, and I've seen some > pretty horrendous in

Re: How coding in Python is bad for you

BartC writes: > On 24/01/2017 15:51, Ben Bacarisse wrote: >> Chris Angelico writes: >> >>> ... I teach JavaScript as well as Python, and I've seen some >>> pretty horrendous indentation flaws (examples available if people ask >>> privately, but I will anonymize them because I'm not here to sham

Re: How coding in Python is bad for you

Steve D'Aprano writes: > On Wed, 25 Jan 2017 03:21 am, Ben Bacarisse wrote: > >> Chris Angelico writes: >> >>> On Wed, Jan 25, 2017 at 2:51 AM, Ben Bacarisse >>> wrote: > [...] Can I ask what editor(s) your students have available? I ask because I've not given a moment's thought to

Re: How coding in Python is bad for you

On 24/01/2017 17:07, Steve D'Aprano wrote: On Tue, 24 Jan 2017 10:52 pm, BartC wrote: if condition: statement endif statement endif What's this code meant to do? Can't know. But whatever it does, a language that enforces 'endif' would report an error, so requiring further investigati

Re: How coding in Python is bad for you

On Wed, Jan 25, 2017 at 3:21 AM, Ben Bacarisse wrote: > Chris Angelico writes: > >> On Wed, Jan 25, 2017 at 2:51 AM, Ben Bacarisse wrote: >>> Chris Angelico writes: >>> ... I teach JavaScript as well as Python, and I've seen some pretty horrendous indentation flaws (examples availabl

Re: How coding in Python is bad for you

On Tue, 24 Jan 2017 10:52 pm, BartC wrote: >> if condition: >> statement >> endif >> statement >> endif >> >> What's this code meant to do? Can't know. > > But whatever it does, a language that enforces 'endif' would report an > error, so requiring further investigation. Without the 'endi

Re: How coding in Python is bad for you

On 2017-01-24, Chris Angelico wrote: > No no no. You have two orthogonal styles (indentation and tokens), but > then you added another of the same style (another pair of tokens). You > need a third orthogonal style. I suggest that each nesting level be > heralded by an increase in indentation, an

Re: How coding in Python is bad for you

On 24/01/2017 15:51, Ben Bacarisse wrote: Chris Angelico writes: ... I teach JavaScript as well as Python, and I've seen some pretty horrendous indentation flaws (examples available if people ask privately, but I will anonymize them because I'm not here to shame students) - but there have been

Re: How coding in Python is bad for you

On Wed, 25 Jan 2017 03:21 am, Ben Bacarisse wrote: > Chris Angelico writes: > >> On Wed, Jan 25, 2017 at 2:51 AM, Ben Bacarisse >> wrote: [...] >>> Can I ask what editor(s) your students have available? I ask because >>> I've not given a moment's thought to indentation or what bracket matches

Re: How coding in Python is bad for you

Chris Angelico writes: > On Wed, Jan 25, 2017 at 2:51 AM, Ben Bacarisse wrote: >> Chris Angelico writes: >> >>> ... I teach JavaScript as well as Python, and I've seen some >>> pretty horrendous indentation flaws (examples available if people ask >>> privately, but I will anonymize them becaus

Re: How coding in Python is bad for you

On Tue, 24 Jan 2017 14:28:55 +, Jon Ribbens wrote: > On 2017-01-24, alister wrote: >> On Mon, 23 Jan 2017 20:39:26 +, Jon Ribbens wrote: >>> That's a meaningless statement. *Everything* is a poison in sufficient >>> quantities. >> >> indees when I here someone saying "I won't have any xyz

Re: How coding in Python is bad for you

On Wed, Jan 25, 2017 at 2:51 AM, Ben Bacarisse wrote: > Chris Angelico writes: > >> ... I teach JavaScript as well as Python, and I've seen some >> pretty horrendous indentation flaws (examples available if people ask >> privately, but I will anonymize them because I'm not here to shame >> stude

Re: How coding in Python is bad for you

Chris Angelico writes: > ... I teach JavaScript as well as Python, and I've seen some > pretty horrendous indentation flaws (examples available if people ask > privately, but I will anonymize them because I'm not here to shame > students) - but there have been nearly as many cases where the > ind

Re: How coding in Python is bad for you

On 2017-01-24, alister wrote: > On Mon, 23 Jan 2017 20:39:26 +, Jon Ribbens wrote: >> That's a meaningless statement. *Everything* is a poison in sufficient >> quantities. > > indees when I here someone saying "I won't have any xyz because they have > heard that too much is bad for them" I in

Re: How coding in Python is bad for you

On Mon, 23 Jan 2017 20:39:26 +, Jon Ribbens wrote: > On 2017-01-23, alister wrote: >> On Tue, 24 Jan 2017 07:19:42 +1100, Chris Angelico wrote: >>> I believe that's "bad for you" in the sense that chocolate is bad for >>> you. >>> >>> It isn't. >> >> chocolate is a poison (lethal dose for a

Re: How coding in Python is bad for you

On Tue, 24 Jan 2017 08:11:02 +1100, Chris Angelico wrote: > On Tue, Jan 24, 2017 at 8:04 AM, Adam M > wrote: >> On Monday, January 23, 2017 at 3:41:17 PM UTC-5, Jon Ribbens wrote: >>> On 2017-01-23, alister wrote: >>> > On Tue, 24 Jan 2017 07:19:42 +1100, Chris Angelico wrote: >>> >> I believe t

Re: How coding in Python is bad for you

On 2017-01-24 12:12, BartC wrote: On 24/01/2017 04:22, Steven D'Aprano wrote: On Tuesday 24 January 2017 13:38, Chris Angelico wrote: On Tue, Jan 24, 2017 at 12:47 PM, BartC wrote: if 0 then print ("one") print ("two") endif My point is that you *assume* that showing just "three" is

Re: How coding in Python is bad for you

I have nothing to add to the discussion other than too note that Gmail marks many of the messages as spam. :-) Skip -- https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list

Re: How coding in Python is bad for you

On 24/01/2017 11:58, Chris Angelico wrote: On Tue, Jan 24, 2017 at 10:52 PM, BartC wrote: Remember: If you have only one clock, it might be right and it might be wrong, but it's consistent. If you have two clocks and they disagree, you have no clue what the time is. I've actually got three w

Re: How coding in Python is bad for you

On 24/01/2017 04:22, Steven D'Aprano wrote: On Tuesday 24 January 2017 13:38, Chris Angelico wrote: On Tue, Jan 24, 2017 at 12:47 PM, BartC wrote: if 0 then print ("one") print ("two") endif My point is that you *assume* that showing just "three" is the correct behaviour. Why? Why do

Re: How coding in Python is bad for you

On Tue, Jan 24, 2017 at 10:52 PM, BartC wrote: >> Remember: If you have only one clock, it might be right and it might >> be wrong, but it's consistent. If you have two clocks and they >> disagree, you have no clue what the time is. > > > I've actually got three wall clocks. Usually only one will

Re: How coding in Python is bad for you

On 24/01/2017 04:41, Chris Angelico wrote: On Tue, Jan 24, 2017 at 3:22 PM, Steven D'Aprano wrote: But more seriously, it's easy to typo an extra indent. It's harder to typo "endif" when you actually meant to type, oh, "ending = 1 if condition else 3", say. So faced with ambiguity, and the insi

Re: How coding in Python is bad for you

Am 23.01.17 um 18:24 schrieb breamore...@gmail.com: The article is here http://lenkaspace.net/index.php/blog/show/111 I don't agree with it (unsurprisingly), even though Python is not my favourite language in itself, but a viable compromise for many circumstances. Below is a point-by-point r

Re: How coding in Python is bad for you

On Tue, Jan 24, 2017 at 6:00 PM, Bob Martin wrote: > in 770207 20170124 005601 Chris Angelico wrote: > >>REXX has even less structure than Python - it doesn't even have >>functions, just labels, so you can actually have two functions that >>share a common tail. And yes, you can abuse that horrend

Re: How coding in Python is bad for you

in 770207 20170124 005601 Chris Angelico wrote: >REXX has even less structure than Python - it doesn't even have >functions, just labels, so you can actually have two functions that >share a common tail. And yes, you can abuse that horrendously to >create unreadable code. Is REXX a bad language b

Re: How coding in Python is bad for you

On Tue, Jan 24, 2017 at 4:00 PM, Steven D'Aprano wrote: > On Tuesday 24 January 2017 15:41, Chris Angelico wrote: > >> Remember: If you have only one clock, it might be right and it might >> be wrong, but it's consistent. If you have two clocks and they >> disagree, you have no clue what the time

Re: How coding in Python is bad for you

On Tuesday 24 January 2017 15:41, Chris Angelico wrote: > Remember: If you have only one clock, it might be right and it might > be wrong, but it's consistent. If you have two clocks and they > disagree, you have no clue what the time is. During the golden age of sail, there was a saying, never g

Re: How coding in Python is bad for you

On Tue, Jan 24, 2017 at 3:22 PM, Steven D'Aprano wrote: > But more seriously, it's easy to typo an extra indent. It's harder to typo > "endif" when you actually meant to type, oh, "ending = 1 if condition else 3", > say. So faced with ambiguity, and the insistence that the right way to break > amb

Re: How coding in Python is bad for you

Chris Angelico wrote: On Tue, Jan 24, 2017 at 11:55 AM, Dennis Lee Bieber wrote: On Mon, 23 Jan 2017 22:55:19 +, mm0fmf declaimed the following: 50lbs of coffee beans made into espresso and 22lbs of chocolate to eat with all those tiny cups. How about just 75lbs of chocolate co

Re: How coding in Python is bad for you

On Tuesday 24 January 2017 13:41, Chris Angelico wrote: > On Tue, Jan 24, 2017 at 12:55 PM, Steve D'Aprano > wrote: >> Reading his post, I get the impression he's the sort of programmer who >> believes in never, ever, ever, ever re-using a variable, so he might do >> something like: >> >> raw_dat

Re: How coding in Python is bad for you

On Tuesday 24 January 2017 13:38, Chris Angelico wrote: > On Tue, Jan 24, 2017 at 12:47 PM, BartC wrote: >> Take the same code with block >> delimiters, and take out that same indent: >> >> if 0 then >> print ("one") >> print ("two") >> endif >> print ("three") >> >> It still compiles, it st

Re: How coding in Python is bad for you

On Tue, Jan 24, 2017 at 12:55 PM, Steve D'Aprano wrote: > Reading his post, I get the impression he's the sort of programmer who > believes in never, ever, ever, ever re-using a variable, so he might do > something like: > > raw_data = collect_raw_data() # generates 10GB of data > data_after_step

Re: How coding in Python is bad for you

On Tue, Jan 24, 2017 at 12:47 PM, BartC wrote: > On 24/01/2017 00:56, Chris Angelico wrote: >> >> On Tue, Jan 24, 2017 at 11:44 AM, BartC wrote: > > >>> With C++ or Java, it's possible to tell the indentation is wrong (because >>> of >>> the extra redundancy of having the indentation /and/ block

Re: How coding in Python is bad for you

On Tue, 24 Jan 2017 08:55 am, BartC wrote: > On 23/01/2017 17:34, Chris Angelico wrote: >> On Tue, Jan 24, 2017 at 4:24 AM, wrote: >>> The article is here http://lenkaspace.net/index.php/blog/show/111 >> >> I would respond point-by-point if I thought the author had a clue. > > I thought points

Re: How coding in Python is bad for you

On 24/01/2017 00:56, Chris Angelico wrote: On Tue, Jan 24, 2017 at 11:44 AM, BartC wrote: With C++ or Java, it's possible to tell the indentation is wrong (because of the extra redundancy of having the indentation /and/ block delimiters). That's a bit harder in Python making source more fragi

Re: How coding in Python is bad for you

On Tue, Jan 24, 2017 at 11:55 AM, Dennis Lee Bieber wrote: > On Mon, 23 Jan 2017 22:55:19 +, mm0fmf declaimed the > following: > > >>50lbs of coffee beans made into espresso and 22lbs of chocolate to eat >>with all those tiny cups. >> > How about just 75lbs of chocolate covered espres

Re: How coding in Python is bad for you

On Tue, Jan 24, 2017 at 11:44 AM, BartC wrote: > On 23/01/2017 22:09, Chris Angelico wrote: >> 1 is wrong - there is structure, same as in every language. Or if it's >> true, it's true in every language. > > > Python (I think in common with other scripting languages) allows you to > place statemen

Re: How coding in Python is bad for you

On 23/01/2017 22:09, Chris Angelico wrote: On Tue, Jan 24, 2017 at 8:55 AM, BartC wrote: On 23/01/2017 17:34, Chris Angelico wrote: On Tue, Jan 24, 2017 at 4:24 AM, wrote: The article is here http://lenkaspace.net/index.php/blog/show/111 I would respond point-by-point if I thought the

Re: How coding in Python is bad for you

On 01/23/2017 02:19 PM, Chris Angelico wrote: > On Tue, Jan 24, 2017 at 6:59 AM, Grant Edwards > wrote: >> On 2017-01-23, breamore...@gmail.com wrote: >> >>> The article is here http://lenkaspace.net/index.php/blog/show/111 >> >> I don't really think any of his points are valid, but one way that

Re: How coding in Python is bad for you

On 01/23/2017 11:24 AM, breamore...@gmail.com wrote: > The article is here http://lenkaspace.net/index.php/blog/show/111 > > Kindest regards. > > Mark Lawrence. > Beyond silly. Languages - like all tools - can be used properly or badly. -- https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list

Re: How coding in Python is bad for you

On 23/01/2017 21:04, Adam M wrote: On Monday, January 23, 2017 at 3:41:17 PM UTC-5, Jon Ribbens wrote: On 2017-01-23, alister wrote: On Tue, 24 Jan 2017 07:19:42 +1100, Chris Angelico wrote: I believe that's "bad for you" in the sense that chocolate is bad for you. It isn't. chocolate is a

Re: How coding in Python is bad for you

On 01/23/2017 01:55 PM, BartC wrote: On 23/01/2017 17:34, Chris Angelico wrote: On Tue, Jan 24, 2017 at 4:24 AM, breamoreboy wrote: The article is here http://lenkaspace.net/index.php/blog/show/111 I would respond point-by-point if I thought the author had a clue. I thought points 1 to 4

Re: How coding in Python is bad for you

On Tue, Jan 24, 2017 at 8:55 AM, BartC wrote: > On 23/01/2017 17:34, Chris Angelico wrote: >> >> On Tue, Jan 24, 2017 at 4:24 AM, wrote: >>> >>> The article is here http://lenkaspace.net/index.php/blog/show/111 >> >> >> I would respond point-by-point if I thought the author had a clue. > > > I t

Re: How coding in Python is bad for you

On 23/01/2017 17:34, Chris Angelico wrote: On Tue, Jan 24, 2017 at 4:24 AM, wrote: The article is here http://lenkaspace.net/index.php/blog/show/111 I would respond point-by-point if I thought the author had a clue. I thought points 1 to 4 were valid, in that the assertions were true. Poi

Re: How coding in Python is bad for you

On Mon, 23 Jan 2017 20:39:26 +, Jon Ribbens wrote: > On 2017-01-23, alister wrote: >> On Tue, 24 Jan 2017 07:19:42 +1100, Chris Angelico wrote: >>> I believe that's "bad for you" in the sense that chocolate is bad for >>> you. >>> >>> It isn't. >> >> chocolate is a poison (lethal dose for a

Re: How coding in Python is bad for you

On Tue, Jan 24, 2017 at 8:04 AM, Adam M wrote: > On Monday, January 23, 2017 at 3:41:17 PM UTC-5, Jon Ribbens wrote: >> On 2017-01-23, alister wrote: >> > On Tue, 24 Jan 2017 07:19:42 +1100, Chris Angelico wrote: >> >> I believe that's "bad for you" in the sense that chocolate is bad for >> >> yo

Re: How coding in Python is bad for you

On Monday, January 23, 2017 at 3:41:17 PM UTC-5, Jon Ribbens wrote: > On 2017-01-23, alister wrote: > > On Tue, 24 Jan 2017 07:19:42 +1100, Chris Angelico wrote: > >> I believe that's "bad for you" in the sense that chocolate is bad for > >> you. > >> > >> It isn't. > > > > chocolate is a poison

Re: How coding in Python is bad for you

On 2017-01-23, alister wrote: > On Tue, 24 Jan 2017 07:19:42 +1100, Chris Angelico wrote: >> I believe that's "bad for you" in the sense that chocolate is bad for >> you. >> >> It isn't. > > chocolate is a poison (lethal dose for a human approx 22lb) That's a meaningless statement. *Everything*

Re: How coding in Python is bad for you

sola dosis facit venenum ~ Paracelsus (1493-1541) From: Python-list on behalf of alister Sent: Monday, January 23, 2017 8:32:49 PM To: python-list@python.org Subject: Re: How coding in Python is bad for you On Tue, 24 Jan 2017 07:19:42 +1100, Chris Angelico

Re: How coding in Python is bad for you

On Tue, 24 Jan 2017 07:19:42 +1100, Chris Angelico wrote: > On Tue, Jan 24, 2017 at 6:59 AM, Grant Edwards > wrote: >> On 2017-01-23, breamore...@gmail.com wrote: >> >>> The article is here http://lenkaspace.net/index.php/blog/show/111 >> >> I don't really think any of his points are valid, but

Re: How coding in Python is bad for you

On Tue, Jan 24, 2017 at 6:59 AM, Grant Edwards wrote: > On 2017-01-23, breamore...@gmail.com wrote: > >> The article is here http://lenkaspace.net/index.php/blog/show/111 > > I don't really think any of his points are valid, but one way that > programming in Python is bad for you: > > * It reduc

Re: How coding in Python is bad for you

On 01/23/2017 10:34 AM, Chris Angelico wrote: > I would respond point-by-point if I thought the author had a clue. Yeah a pretty bizarre, flame-bait blog post. Glad I use an ad-blocker as a matter of course. I'm uncertain as to why Mark chose to post that particular little gem to the list. It's

Re: How coding in Python is bad for you

On 2017-01-23, breamore...@gmail.com wrote: > The article is here http://lenkaspace.net/index.php/blog/show/111 I don't really think any of his points are valid, but one way that programming in Python is bad for you: * It reduces your tolerance for progamming in PHP zero. If you end up ass

Re: How coding in Python is bad for you

On 01/23/2017 09:34 AM, Chris Angelico wrote: On Tue, Jan 24, 2017 at 4:24 AM, wrote: The article is here http://lenkaspace.net/index.php/blog/show/111 I would respond point-by-point if I thought the author had a clue. Yeah, arguing with that person will be a waste of time. -- ~Ethan~ --

Re: How coding in Python is bad for you

On Tue, Jan 24, 2017 at 4:24 AM, wrote: > The article is here http://lenkaspace.net/index.php/blog/show/111 I would respond point-by-point if I thought the author had a clue. ChrisA -- https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list

How coding in Python is bad for you

The article is here http://lenkaspace.net/index.php/blog/show/111 Kindest regards. Mark Lawrence. -- https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list