On 11/6/17 8:05 AM, Jon Ribbens wrote:
On 2017-11-06, Chris Angelico <ros...@gmail.com> wrote:
If you start with the assumption that "intuitively obvious" doesn't
actually mean "intuitively obvious" but actually means something
completely different, then your statement definitely means something
non-contradictory. But if you start with the assumption that
"intuitively obvious" really does mean that the purpose and meaning of
for-else can be understood easily without external information, then
your statement contradicts itself.
I didn't say that 'for...else' was inherently "intutively obvious".
In fact I said the opposite of that. I said that *if* you start from
the right premise then it *becomes* intuitively obvious.
This is comp.lang.python, not alt.english.remedial, so we expect you
to use English competently, or at least accept correction when you
misuse words.
I'm glad your expectations are being met then. You might want to work
on also reading English competently, and then everyone will be happy!
As I said, I've provided a solution to the problem, what more
do you want? This feels very much like you're arguing for
argument's sake, which is a game I'm not willing to play along
with for much longer.
Except that you haven't. Your proposed solution is incorrect and false.
Yes, your logical argument there as to why is undeniable. I must admit
that your little gang's assertion that I'm foolish and mistaken because
I find Python's syntax simple to understand and you find it hard to
understand seems a little contradictory.
Ugh, can't we all just give each other the benefit of the doubt, and use
the principle of charity? It's easy to miscommunicate in a purely
textual medium. Everyone just take your foot off the "i'm right and
you're wrong" gas pedal for moment.
--Ned.
--
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
