On Sat, 05 Nov 2005 04:12:38 -0500, Chris F.A. Johnson wrote:
> On 2005-11-05, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
>> On Fri, 04 Nov 2005 20:55:48 -0500, Chris F.A. Johnson wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> So that people reading your reply know what you are commenting about.
>>
>> (Now, imagine that you're reading from a ne
On 2005-11-05, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
> On Fri, 04 Nov 2005 20:55:48 -0500, Chris F.A. Johnson wrote:
>
>
>
> So that people reading your reply know what you are commenting about.
>
> (Now, imagine that you're reading from a newsgroup where Chris' post has
> disappeared off the server, or perhaps n
On Fri, 04 Nov 2005 20:55:48 -0500, Chris F.A. Johnson wrote:
So that people reading your reply know what you are commenting about.
(Now, imagine that you're reading from a newsgroup where Chris' post has
disappeared off the server, or perhaps never showed up at all.)
--
Steven.
--
http://
Alex Martelli wrote:
> It would still be easier to respond to your posts if you didn't
> top-post, though (i.e., if you didn't put your comments BEFORE what
> you're commenting on -- that puts the "conversation" in a weirdly
> distorted order, unless one give up on quoting what you're commenting
>
Chris F.A. Johnson wrote:
>If I want to read that way, I just tell my newsreader not to
>display the quoted material (actually it displays the first line of
>each block).
>
>Or I press TAB to jump to the next original material.
My news reader is through Google, web browser. So ther
On 2005-11-04, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> Alex Martelli wrote:
>> It would still be easier to respond to your posts if you didn't
>> top-post, though (i.e., if you didn't put your comments BEFORE what
>> you're commenting on -- that puts the "conversation" in a weirdly
>> distorted order, unless
Björn Lindström wrote:
> Anyway, if you keep more than a pageful of the previous message, you're
> probably not cutting it hard enough. Just keep what's needed to keep the
> context.
>
Sometimes it is easy(like this). Sometimes, it is not easy and cutting
in any part of the original message would
Jorge Godoy wrote:
> I'm more of the type that wouldn't read on if I have no context to what I'm
> reading... Specially if there's a mix of top posts with bottom posts...
>
That just means different people have different reading style. Just
like some find one-liner easier to read, some find step
Jorge Godoy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
>> oops. I developed this habit because I found I like to read it this
>> way. As I usually would read just the first few lines to see if I
>> want to read on. top post serve me well for this purpose. And I
"[EMAIL PROTECTED]" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Alex Martelli wrote:
> > It would still be easier to respond to your posts if you didn't
> > top-post, though (i.e., if you didn't put your comments BEFORE what
> > you're commenting on -- that puts the "conversation" in a weirdly
> > distorted ord
Alex Martelli wrote:
> It would still be easier to respond to your posts if you didn't
> top-post, though (i.e., if you didn't put your comments BEFORE what
> you're commenting on -- that puts the "conversation" in a weirdly
> distorted order, unless one give up on quoting what you're commenting
>
Steve Holden wrote:
>> To put things into perspective, it's important to get beyond the very
>> broad categories of programming languages. It's pointless to judge
>> Python on the merits of Perl or AWK, just because a certain label is
>> sometimes applied to all three. That would be like saying tha
Magnus Lycka wrote:
> Stuart Turner wrote:
>
>>Hi Everyone,
>>
>>I'm working hard trying to get Python 'accepted' in the organisation I work
>>for. I'm making some good in-roads. One chap sent me the text below on
>>his views of Python. I wondered if anyone from the group could give me
>>some a
[EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> But when we talk about organisation(and convincing sometimes not on
> merit sake), banner name helps. I was once in organisation where The
> MS/Intel/IBM combination is a sure thing because even if there is
> anything went wrong, it wouldn't be the re
Thanks to Everyone for replying - it has given me much food for thought.
- Stuart
Stuart Turner wrote:
> Hi Everyone,
>
> I'm working hard trying to get Python 'accepted' in the organisation I
> work
> for. I'm making some good in-roads. One chap sent me the text below on
> his views of Pyth
Stuart Turner wrote:
> Hi Everyone,
>
> I'm working hard trying to get Python 'accepted' in the organisation I work
> for. I'm making some good in-roads. One chap sent me the text below on
> his views of Python. I wondered if anyone from the group could give me
> some advice on how to respond /
But when we talk about organisation(and convincing sometimes not on
merit sake), banner name helps. I was once in organisation where The
MS/Intel/IBM combination is a sure thing because even if there is
anything went wrong, it wouldn't be the reason for scrutiny comparing
with say using a machine w
But when we talk about organisation(and convincing sometimes not on
merit sake), banner name helps. I was once in organisation where The
MS/Intel/IBM combination is a sure thing because even if there is
anything went wrong, it wouldn't be the reason for scrutiny comparing
with say using a machine w
Roy Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > because they do not come with the full range of libraries e.g GDI
> > libraries.
>
> No language has libraries for everything you might ever possibly want to
> do. Python has a wide range of libraries for many common tasks, but my no
> means all. Still,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> How about, Google use python extensively ? This I believe is a very
> strong argument for any concern about python.
I must admit to feeling very good when I read this kind of comment (it
IS nice to see one's employer held up as a good example -- and,
Stuart Turner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
...
> "Python is a scripting language like Perl, awk, tcl, Java etc... it is
> not quite a fully developed OO language, but does support some OO that Perl
> doesn't. To be clear, these scripting languages have their place in our
> environment, but they
I have done the same thing in my organisation.
Show them concrete examples of when they can benefit from Python to
Convince them.
My colleagues and bosses has been conviced and therefore my current
work task is to integrate the interpreter in a VxWorks environment so
"everyone" at the company can
Stuart Turner wrote:
> "Python is a scripting language like Perl, awk, tcl, Java etc... it
> is
> not quite a fully developed OO language, but does support some OO that
> Perl
> doesn't. To be clear, these scripting languages have their place in
> our
> environment, but they are not full repl
Stuart Turner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> "Python is a scripting language like Perl, awk, tcl, Java etc...
It is difficult to say whether Python is a scripting language or not until
you define what you mean by "scripting language". People throw the term
"scripting language" around with wild a
How about, Google use python extensively ? This I believe is a very
strong argument for any concern about python.
However, policy in organisations can be very funny and many of them may
be set long time ago which even though may no longer be relavent are
still "policy".
I would suggest focus on w
Stuart Turner wrote:
> Hi Everyone,
>
> I'm working hard trying to get Python 'accepted' in the organisation I work
> for. I'm making some good in-roads. One chap sent me the text below on
> his views of Python. I wondered if anyone from the group could give me
> some advice on how to respond /
Stefan Arentz wrote:
> Stuart Turner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > I'm already using it for a ton of things - I want to try and get broader
> > acceptance in the organisation for it to be made and 'officially supported
> > product'.
>
> IMO that is what you need to communicate: 'already using
Stuart Turner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I'm already using it for a ton of things - I want to try and get broader
> acceptance in the organisation for it to be made and 'officially supported
> product'.
IMO that is what you need to communicate: 'already using it for a ton of
things' and probab
I'm already using it for a ton of things - I want to try and get broader
acceptance in the organisation for it to be made and 'officially supported
product'.
Stefan Arentz wrote:
> Stuart Turner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
>> Hi Everyone,
>>
>> I'm working hard trying to get Python 'accepted
Stuart Turner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Hi Everyone,
>
> I'm working hard trying to get Python 'accepted' in the organisation I work
> for. I'm making some good in-roads. One chap sent me the text below on
> his views of Python. I wondered if anyone from the group could give me
> some advi
30 matches
Mail list logo
