Re: A Moronicity of Guido van Rossum
Fredrik Lundh wrote:
...
> fwiw, they've also been around for ages:
>
> http://foldoc.doc.ic.ac.uk/foldoc/foldoc.cgi?list+comprehension
>
> (the name goes back to the early eighties, the construct is older than
> that)
Ahh... Fair enough. I hadn't come across it as a programming construct until
I hit Python. I'd seen the (presumable) precursor of set comprehension it in
maths & formal methods before though.
To help Xah along, this shows a //more nearly// correct version of his table
function (his doesn't do anything like the spec). It works correctly for
tables of the form:
table("i", ("i",3))
table("i,j", ("i",3), ("j",3))
table("math.cos(i+j)", ("i",3), ("j",-3,3))
It doesn't produce quite the right structure when you have more than
2 iteration rules).
Problems with this implementation:
* mkrange() is not passed along the existing context.
This means tables of the form:
table("i,j", ("i",3), ("j",1,"i"))
Won't work. This would require changing the mkRange function such
that it's passed the most currently built environment. This is a
relatively trivial change, which I'll leave for Xah.
* The structure is incorrect for more than 2 iteration rules. I think
I'm missing a simple/obvious trick in my mkTable._extend_table
function.
I'm not really fussed though. (It's clearly something dumb :)
* It's not really clear which list nests which. It's possible the lists
are nested the wrong way round.
I'm fairly certain that the evalTable code will work fine when the mkTable
code creates the right structure.
I'll leave that to Xah to fix. It's somewhat further along than his
original attempt though. (actually matches his spec for 1 or 2 iteration
rules).
def mkRange(listspec):
if len(listspec)==2:
return xrange(1,listspec[1]+1)
elif len(listspec)==3:
return xrange(listspec[1],listspec[2]+1)
return []
def mkTable(ignore, *listspecs):
def _extend_table(listspecs, result):
if len(listspecs) == 0:
return result
else:
listspec = listspecs[-1]
listspecs = listspecs[:-1]
r2 = []
for R_ in result:
for R in R_: # SMELLY
inner_result = []
for i in mkRange(listspec):
inner_env2 = dict(R[1])
inner_env2[listspec[0]] = i
inner_result.append( (ignore, inner_env2) )
r2.append(inner_result)
result = _extend_table(listspecs, r2)
return result
return _extend_table(listspecs,
[[(ignore,dict(globals()))]]) # SMELLY
def evalTable(table):
if len(table) ==0:
return table
else:
result = []
for evallist in table:
inner_result = []
for eval_args in evallist:
try:
r = eval(*eval_args)
inner_result.append(r)
except TypeError:
inner_result.append(evalTable(eval_args))
result.append(inner_result)
return result
def table(ignore, *listspecs):
abstract_table = mkTable(ignore, *listspecs)
return evalTable(abstract_table)
Example:
>>> import math
>>> table("math.cos(i+j)", ("i",3), ("j",-3,3))
[[-0.41614683654714241, 0.54030230586813977, 1.0], [0.54030230586813977,
1.0, 0.54030230586813977], [1.0, 0.54030230586813977,
-0.41614683654714241], [0.54030230586813977, -0.41614683654714241,
-0.98999249660044542], [-0.41614683654714241, -0.98999249660044542,
-0.65364362086361194], [-0.98999249660044542, -0.65364362086361194,
0.28366218546322625], [-0.65364362086361194, 0.28366218546322625,
0.96017028665036597]]
Regards,
Michael.
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: A Moronicity of Guido van Rossum
"Michael" wrote: > List comprehensions get their name (AFAICT) very clearly from set > comprehensions in mathematics. As a result anyone who has ever seen > a set comprehension in maths goes "oooh, I see". They're not the same, but > IMO they're close enough to warrant that name. fwiw, they've also been around for ages: http://foldoc.doc.ic.ac.uk/foldoc/foldoc.cgi?list+comprehension (the name goes back to the early eighties, the construct is older than that) -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: A Moronicity of Guido van Rossum
Xah Lee wrote: > as i have hinted > ( http://xahlee.org/perl-python/list_comprehension.html ), the > so-called List Comprehension is just a irregular syntax to facilitate > generating lists. The name is a terrible jargon, and the means is also > quite fucked up. The proper name should be something like > ListGenerator, and the proper means should be the plain function. List comprehensions get their name (AFAICT) very clearly from set comprehensions in mathematics. As a result anyone who has ever seen a set comprehension in maths goes "oooh, I see". They're not the same, but IMO they're close enough to warrant that name. > i'm running a project that will code Table in Perl and Python and Java. > You can read about the spec and source code here: > http://xahlee.org/tree/Table.html > (note: the Python version there isn't complete) I just took a look at your python version. I'd agree it's incomplete. Indeed it doesn't implement what you say it does. You seem to have re-invented "apply" since you simply (badly) pass a set of arguments provided by the user to a function provided by the user. The description of the code you are pointing at bears absolutely no resemblance whatsoever to the functionality you describe. And you criticise the way other people name & describe their code, when you can't show the skills you criticise in others? I know naming and documentation are not easy skills, and if people take a *civil* tone in suggested improvements, criticism (and suggestions) can be helpful. However, I'd suggest /finishing/ your glass house /before/ you start throwing stones, or else you'll never be able to smash it up the neighbourhood properly. Michael. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: OT: Phases of the moon [was Re: A Moronicity of Guido van Rossum]
X-Ftn-To: Paul F. Dietz "Paul F. Dietz" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> As a similar example: I've been told by various women independently, >> that "there are more babies born near a full moon." > >That's also a myth. Perhaps not, consider deamon or vampire babies. :) -- Matija -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: [OT] A Moronicity of Guido van Rossum
"Lucas Raab" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message news:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Xah Lee wrote: > > [snip] > >>(they tried, with their limited implementation of lambda and >> shun it like a plaque) > > Can't say I've heard that expression before... > Burns: I'm afraid it's not that simple. As punishment for your desertion, it's company policy to give you the plague. Smithers: Uh, sir, that's the plaque. Matt -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: A Moronicity of Guido van Rossum
Xah Lee wrote: [snip] >(they tried, with their limited implementation of lambda and > shun it like a plaque) Can't say I've heard that expression before... -- -- Lucas Raab lvraab"@"earthlink.net dotpyFE"@"gmail.com AIM:Phoenix11890 MSN:dotpyfe "@" gmail.com IRC:lvraab ICQ:324767918 Yahoo: Phoenix11890 -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: OT: Phases of the moon [was Re: A Moronicity of Guido van Rossum]
Ulrich Hobelmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > When TV is turned off by a power failure, lots of people that > usually never have sex start making love, and lots of people that > usually use contraception lose their minds and forget about it. > > 9 months later more babies are born, unless that's also a myth. http://www.snopes.com/pregnant/blackout.htm "Despite initial reports of New York City hospitals' seeing a dramatic increase in the number of births nine months after the 1965 blackout, later analyses showed the birth rate during that period to be well within the norm." -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: OT: Phases of the moon [was Re: A Moronicity of Guido van Rossum]
Paul F. Dietz wrote: > Bart Lateur wrote: > >> As a similar example: I've been told by various women independently, >> that "there are more babies born near a full moon." > > That's also a myth. Right, everybody knows that it's not natural (moon) light that influences reproductive behavior, it's artificial light -- TV. When TV is turned off by a power failure, lots of people that usually never have sex start making love, and lots of people that usually use contraception lose their minds and forget about it. 9 months later more babies are born, unless that's also a myth. -- We're glad that graduates already know Java, so we only have to teach them how to program. somewhere in a German company (credit to M. Felleisen and M. Sperber) -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: OT: Phases of the moon [was Re: A Moronicity of Guido van Rossum]
Bart Lateur wrote: > As a similar example: I've been told by various women independently, > that "there are more babies born near a full moon." That's also a myth. Paul -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: A Moronicity of Guido van Rossum
(posted c.l.python ONLY) Xah (may i call you Xah?) SOrry to say, but your older posts were much funnier: http://groups.google.com/group/comp.lang.lisp/browse_frm/thread/15f7015d23a6758e/9ee26da60295d7c8?lnk=st&q=&rnum=5&hl=en#9ee26da60295d7c8 (also seems your anti-cult cult really hasn't gotten a lot of followers. You might want to change password on your email account and this time not give it out to all your friends. Anyway, good luck in all your future endeavors. Um, don't have to keep in touch, tho. Xah Lee wrote: > the programers in the industry, including bigwigs such as Guido or that > Larry Wall fuckhead, really don't know shit about computer languages. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: A Moronicity of Guido van Rossum
the programers in the industry, including bigwigs such as Guido or that Larry Wall fuckhead, really don't know shit about computer languages. Sometimes i get pissed by Stephen Wolfram's megalomaniac cries, but in many ways, i think his statements about the fucking moronicities of the academicians and otherwise dignitaries are justified. here i will try to illuminate some miscellaneous things regarding the lambda in Python issue. as i have hinted ( http://xahlee.org/perl-python/list_comprehension.html ), the so-called List Comprehension is just a irregular syntax to facilitate generating lists. The name is a terrible jargon, and the means is also quite fucked up. The proper name should be something like ListGenerator, and the proper means should be the plain function. For instance, Python's range() is such a list generator, only that it is limited in scope. For a example of a powerful list generator, see Mathematica's Table function: http://documents.wolfram.com/mathematica/functions/Table i'm running a project that will code Table in Perl and Python and Java. You can read about the spec and source code here: http://xahlee.org/tree/Table.html (note: the Python version there isn't complete) Note Table's power in generating not just flat lists, but trees. And if one really want flat lists, there's the Flatten function that flats any nested lists. (Python should have this too) Python's reduce() is Mathematica's Fold. See http://documents.wolfram.com/mathematica/functions/Fold Besides Fold, there's FoldList, FixedPoint, FixedPointList, Nest, NestList and others. In Python's terms, FoldList is like reduce() except it returns a list of each steps. FixedPoint recursively applies a function to itself until the result no longer changes (or when a optional function returns true) Nest is similar except it limits the iteration by a number. The NestList and FixedPointList are similar except that they return a list, containing all the steps. All these can be written as a loop, but they make the code condensed and meaning clear. More so, they are important when programing in a functional style. In functional programing, you don't litter lots of variables or temporary functions or intermediate loops here or there on every other line. The code is usually tight and inline. When sequencing a series of functions, you can't stop in the middle and do some loop or auxiliary calculation. All these are made inline into a function. (that is: constructed as lambda) A block of code usually corresponds to a unit of the algorithm used, as opposed to the particular unit of the implementation of the algorithm. You don't read the minute details of the code. You read the algorithmic unit's comments, or just the input and output of a code block. Also, these inline loop constructs are not just for computing numbers as Guido likes to ignorantly think. They are specialized forms of generic loop constructs. Their first argument is a function, and second argument is a list. Their generality lies with the fact that their first argument is a function. If a language does not provide a convenient way to represent the concept of a function, than these functional loop constructs will suffer in usability. The Python morons, did not provide a convenient way to represent a function. (they tried, with their limited implementation of lambda and shun it like a plaque) The way Guido puts it gives us a nice glimpse of their retarded mentality: “Also, once map(), filter() and reduce() are gone, there aren't a whole lot of places where you really need to write very short local functions;” As we can see here, in Pythoner's mind, lambda is for “very short local functions”. Python's limited lambda coupled with their lambda attitude problem among imperative morons, therefore functional programing suffers in Python, and consequently one becomes so stupid as to come up with a bunch of feelings about lambda, map, reduce, filter. For Python's map(), look at Mathematica's Map on how it might be extended. http://documents.wolfram.com/mathematica/functions/Map Note the ability to map to not just flat lists but trees (nested lists). Note the power of expressing the concept of levels of a tree. For Python's filter(), check out the equivalent in Mathematica's Select: http://documents.wolfram.com/mathematica/functions/Select Note how it provides a third option for picking just the first n items. Also note, that Select is just a way to pick elements in a list. Mathematica provides a set to do these: Part, Take, Drop, Select, Cases. All uniformly uses the function syntax and all operate semantically by returning a new list. In Python and other imperative clown's language, usually they provide a limited varieties to do such a task, and also inconsistent like piled on. (e.g. alist[5:9], filter(), alist.remove(...), del alist[...]). Some modify the list in-place, some returns a new list. - one is quite sorry to read a big shot contemplating on petty
Re: OT: Phases of the moon [was Re: A Moronicity of Guido van Rossum]
Steven D'Aprano wrote: >A skeptical policeman who says he doesn't actually believe the moon >affects behaviour nevertheless reports that "last weekend" things were >really crazy, and it was a full moon. Somebody writes in to correct him: >no, the full moon is actually "tomorrow". As a similar example: I've been told by various women independently, that "there are more babies born near a full moon." So... is there a correlation between insanity and babies being born? :) -- Bart. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: A Moronicity of Guido van Rossum
Tony Meyer wrote: > X-Spambayes-Classification: ham; 0.008 > > On 30/09/2005, at 10:56 PM, Gerrit Holl wrote: > > Tony Meyer wrote: > >> X-Spambayes-Classification: ham; 0.048 > > Unless I'm misreading things, that's *my* message that scored 0.048 > (the "from:addr:ihug.co.nz", "from:name:tony meyer", and "spambayes" > tokens make it seem that way)... It is, and that's very surprising, but apparantly it was not really hammy enough. But don't worry, by ham_cutoff is 0.2, and out of the 10 'unsure' messages per week, 2 are spam, 2 are ham, and 6 are, well, unsure. Note that with all my mailinglists, the number of messages handled is more than 2500 per week, so I'm very, very happy with spambayes... Gerrit. -- Temperature in Luleå, Norrbotten, Sweden: | Current temperature 05-10-01 09:49:529.7 degrees Celsius ( 49.5F) | -- Det finns inte dåligt väder, bara dåliga kläder. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: A Moronicity of Guido van Rossum
I have an excellent idea. Create your own programming language and do whatever you want with it. Until then, I'm thinking that Guido can do whatever he wants with his. But I'm guessing that your programming skills will be in the same place as your greatness - in your own head. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: OT: Phases of the moon [was Re: A Moronicity of Guido van Rossum]
Steven D'Aprano wrote: > On Fri, 30 Sep 2005 18:02:14 -0400, Sherm Pendley wrote: > > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: > > > >> I wonder if his postings are related to the phases of the moon? It > >> might explain a lot. > > > > Yes, it would. Note that the word lunatic is derived from the Latin word > > luna, meaning moon. > > Yes, lunatic is derived from luna, but that doesn't mean the two are > connected. The ancients believed a lot of crap (the world is flat, black > people aren't human, thunder is the sound of god's fighting, buying > over-valued dot-com stock is a good investment) and "phases of the moon > affecting behaviour" was one of them. > > People are really bad at connecting cause and effect. See this thread for > a simple example: > > http://msgboard.snopes.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=42;t=000228;p=1 > > A skeptical policeman who says he doesn't actually believe the moon > affects behaviour nevertheless reports that "last weekend" things were > really crazy, and it was a full moon. Somebody writes in to correct him: > no, the full moon is actually "tomorrow". > > This shows how cognitive biases can fool us. Even though he was skeptical, > the cop noticed the extra crazy behaviour on this particular weekend, and > manged to fool himself into thinking it matched a full moon. > > See here for more details, plus references to research: > > http://skepdic.com/fullmoon.html But correlations can exist even if the cause does not. There is a correlation between the equinox and balancing an egg. But not _because_ of the equinox, but because people only try it on the equinox. Hence, egg balancing only happens on the equinox is a true assertion. > > > -- > Steven. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
OT: Phases of the moon [was Re: A Moronicity of Guido van Rossum]
On Fri, 30 Sep 2005 18:02:14 -0400, Sherm Pendley wrote: > [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: > >> I wonder if his postings are related to the phases of the moon? It >> might explain a lot. > > Yes, it would. Note that the word lunatic is derived from the Latin word > luna, meaning moon. Yes, lunatic is derived from luna, but that doesn't mean the two are connected. The ancients believed a lot of crap (the world is flat, black people aren't human, thunder is the sound of god's fighting, buying over-valued dot-com stock is a good investment) and "phases of the moon affecting behaviour" was one of them. People are really bad at connecting cause and effect. See this thread for a simple example: http://msgboard.snopes.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=42;t=000228;p=1 A skeptical policeman who says he doesn't actually believe the moon affects behaviour nevertheless reports that "last weekend" things were really crazy, and it was a full moon. Somebody writes in to correct him: no, the full moon is actually "tomorrow". This shows how cognitive biases can fool us. Even though he was skeptical, the cop noticed the extra crazy behaviour on this particular weekend, and manged to fool himself into thinking it matched a full moon. See here for more details, plus references to research: http://skepdic.com/fullmoon.html -- Steven. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: A Moronicity of Guido van Rossum
On 30/09/2005, at 10:56 PM, Gerrit Holl wrote: > Tony Meyer wrote: > >> X-Spambayes-Classification: ham; 0.048 >> X-Spambayes-Evidence: '*H*': 0.90; '*S*': 0.00; 'bug.': 0.07; >> 'flagged': 0.07; >> "i'd": 0.08; 'bayes': 0.09; 'from:addr:ihug.co.nz': 0.09; >> 'really,': 0.09; 'cc:no real name:2**0': 0.14; >> 'from:addr:t-meyer': 0.16; 'from:name:tony meyer': 0.16; >> 'obvious,': 0.16; 'spambayes': 0.16; 'subject:Guido': 0.16; >> 'trolling,': 0.16; 'regret': 0.82; 'lee,': 0.91; 'viagra': 0.91; >> 'mailings': 0.93; 'probability': 0.93 > >> This is a feature, not a bug. It's the same feature that means that >> messages talking about spam on the spambayes mailing list, or the >> legitimate mail I get about viagra , get through to me. >> > > True. However, most mail to this mailinglist has less than 0.001 spam > probability. As you can see, this one had 0.048 - a vast score, almost > enough to put it in my unsure box. It seems to be just not hammy > enough. > It's interesting to see that no none of the foul language words > used by > Xah Lee ever occurs in any spam I receive - spam is not that stupid. Unless I'm misreading things, that's *my* message that scored 0.048 (the "from:addr:ihug.co.nz", "from:name:tony meyer", and "spambayes" tokens make it seem that way)... =Tony.Meyer -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: A Moronicity of Guido van Rossum
Steve Holden <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > [off-list] > > Peter Hansen wrote: >> Gerrit Holl wrote: >> >>>True. However, most mail to this mailinglist has less than 0.001 spam >>>probability. As you can see, this one had 0.048 - a vast score, almost >>>enough to put it in my unsure box. It seems to be just not hammy enough. >>>It's interesting to see that no none of the foul language words used by >>>Xah Lee ever occurs in any spam I receive - spam is not that stupid. >> "Xah Lee: stupider than spam." (?) >> -neologism-intentional-ly y'rs, >> Peter > I'm responding off-list so's not to give this loony's threads any more > visibility. You seem to have goofed. > FWIW I really like the slogan. Maybe you should register > "stupiderthanspam.com" and make a million? Amused me no end. I smell a google bomb. Add the link "http://xahlee.org/";>stupider than spam" to your favorite web page, and in a while typing "stupider than spam" into google and hitting "I feel lucky" will take you to Xah Lee's home page http://www.mired.org/home/mwm/ Independent WWW/Perforce/FreeBSD/Unix consultant, email for more information. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: A Moronicity of Guido van Rossum
that's lunatic, of course (check spelling is not in my system yet)On 10/1/05, dimitri pater <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Yes, it would. Note that the word lunatic is derived from the Latin wordluna, meaning moon. so, he is a just another lunitac barking at the moon? well, err barking at the python list... greetz, dimitri -- All truth passes through three stages. First, it is ridiculed. Second, it is violently opposed. Third, it is accepted as being self-evident.Arthur Schopenhauer -Please visit dimitri's website: www.serpia.com -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: A Moronicity of Guido van Rossum
Yes, it would. Note that the word lunatic is derived from the Latin wordluna, meaning moon. so, he is a just another lunitac barking at the moon? well, err barking at the python list... greetz, dimitri -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: A Moronicity of Guido van Rossum
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: > I wonder if his postings are related to the phases of the moon? It > might explain a lot. Yes, it would. Note that the word lunatic is derived from the Latin word luna, meaning moon. sherm-- -- Cocoa programming in Perl: http://camelbones.sourceforge.net Hire me! My resume: http://www.dot-app.org -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: A Moronicity of Guido van Rossum
Steve Holden <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > I'm responding off-list No you're not! Sorry if I missed some subtle joke here... John -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: A Moronicity of Guido van Rossum
Jorge Godoy wrote: > His intent was never to convince people or pass information. On comp.lang.lisp Xah Lee is a well known troll... don't feed him :) -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: A Moronicity of Guido van Rossum
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > In comp.lang.perl.misc Kalle Anke <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >>On Thu, 29 Sep 2005 19:44:28 +0200, Matt wrote >>(in article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>): > > > >>>OK... your post seems to indicate a belief that everyone else is >>>somehow incompetent. Sounds a bit like the "I am sane, it is everyone >>>else who is crazy" concept. Can you suggest a technology or >>>technologist who, in your expert opinion, has gotten it right? > > > >>He has posted similar posts about other things to at least one other mailing >>list, the tone and arguments of these post were exactly the same. > > > I wonder if his postings are related to the phases of the moon? It > might explain a lot. > > Axel Or forgetting to take his medication. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: A Moronicity of Guido van Rossum
In comp.lang.perl.misc Kalle Anke <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Thu, 29 Sep 2005 19:44:28 +0200, Matt wrote > (in article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>): >> OK... your post seems to indicate a belief that everyone else is >> somehow incompetent. Sounds a bit like the "I am sane, it is everyone >> else who is crazy" concept. Can you suggest a technology or >> technologist who, in your expert opinion, has gotten it right? > He has posted similar posts about other things to at least one other mailing > list, the tone and arguments of these post were exactly the same. I wonder if his postings are related to the phases of the moon? It might explain a lot. Axel -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: A Moronicity of Guido van Rossum
On Thu, 29 Sep 2005 19:44:28 +0200, Matt wrote (in article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>): > OK... your post seems to indicate a belief that everyone else is > somehow incompetent. Sounds a bit like the "I am sane, it is everyone > else who is crazy" concept. Can you suggest a technology or > technologist who, in your expert opinion, has gotten it right? He has posted similar posts about other things to at least one other mailing list, the tone and arguments of these post were exactly the same. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: A Moronicity of Guido van Rossum
[off-list] Peter Hansen wrote: > Gerrit Holl wrote: > >>True. However, most mail to this mailinglist has less than 0.001 spam >>probability. As you can see, this one had 0.048 - a vast score, almost >>enough to put it in my unsure box. It seems to be just not hammy enough. >>It's interesting to see that no none of the foul language words used by >>Xah Lee ever occurs in any spam I receive - spam is not that stupid. > > > "Xah Lee: stupider than spam." (?) > > -neologism-intentional-ly y'rs, > Peter I'm responding off-list so's not to give this loony's threads any more visibility. Please do not feed the troll (I am passing on a message that was delivered to me, and I too should have known better). FWIW I really like the slogan. Maybe you should register "stupiderthanspam.com" and make a million? Amused me no end. regards Steve -- Steve Holden +44 150 684 7255 +1 800 494 3119 Holden Web LLC www.holdenweb.com PyCon TX 2006 www.python.org/pycon/ -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: A Moronicity of Guido van Rossum
Gerrit Holl wrote: > True. However, most mail to this mailinglist has less than 0.001 spam > probability. As you can see, this one had 0.048 - a vast score, almost > enough to put it in my unsure box. It seems to be just not hammy enough. > It's interesting to see that no none of the foul language words used by > Xah Lee ever occurs in any spam I receive - spam is not that stupid. "Xah Lee: stupider than spam." (?) -neologism-intentional-ly y'rs, Peter -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: A Moronicity of Guido van Rossum
Tony Meyer wrote: > X-Spambayes-Classification: ham; 0.048 > X-Spambayes-Evidence: '*H*': 0.90; '*S*': 0.00; 'bug.': 0.07; 'flagged': > 0.07; > "i'd": 0.08; 'bayes': 0.09; 'from:addr:ihug.co.nz': 0.09; > 'really,': 0.09; 'cc:no real name:2**0': 0.14; > 'from:addr:t-meyer': 0.16; 'from:name:tony meyer': 0.16; > 'obvious,': 0.16; 'spambayes': 0.16; 'subject:Guido': 0.16; > 'trolling,': 0.16; 'regret': 0.82; 'lee,': 0.91; 'viagra': 0.91; > 'mailings': 0.93; 'probability': 0.93 > This is a feature, not a bug. It's the same feature that means that > messages talking about spam on the spambayes mailing list, or the > legitimate mail I get about viagra , get through to me. True. However, most mail to this mailinglist has less than 0.001 spam probability. As you can see, this one had 0.048 - a vast score, almost enough to put it in my unsure box. It seems to be just not hammy enough. It's interesting to see that no none of the foul language words used by Xah Lee ever occurs in any spam I receive - spam is not that stupid. Gerrit. -- Temperature in Luleå, Norrbotten, Sweden: | Current temperature 05-09-30 12:49:54 11.1 degrees Celsius ( 51.9F) | -- Det finns inte dåligt väder, bara dåliga kläder. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: A Moronicity of Guido van Rossum
On Fri, 30 Sep 2005 07:50:45 +1000, rumours say that "Delaney, Timothy (Tim)" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> might have written: >You have to admit though, he's remarkably good at getting past >Spambayes. Despite classifying *every* Xah Lee post as spam, he still >manages to get most of his posts classified as 0% or 1% spam. IIRC this is because spambayes takes account of mostly spelling misteaks; if syntax mistakes mattered as much, he would be classified as spam more easily. -- TZOTZIOY, I speak England very best. "Dear Paul, please stop spamming us." The Corinthians -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: A Moronicity of Guido van Rossum
On 9/29/05, Tim Leslie <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On 29 Sep 2005 07:24:17 -0700, Xah Lee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Of course, you begin to write things like Java, in three thousand words > > just to state you are a moron. > > > > > > +1 QOTW. > > Tim > -1 XLEGQOTW (Xah Lee Ever Getting QOTW'd) Peace Bill Mill bill.mill at gmail.com -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: A Moronicity of Guido van Rossum
> I know nobody wants to do add "white/black-listing", so we can do it > probabilistically. In case it is not obvious, mailings with the words > "jargon" or "moron" and their derrivatives should be flagged as 99.9% > probability for Moronicity Xha Lee, Jargonizer, spam. If spam bayes > can't > figure this out, then either it is not properly implemented or > Bayes himself > was out to lunch. I knew I'd regret my response . The problem here isn't getting an appropriately spammy score for particular tokens, like Xah's name. The problem is that the classifier has to taken into account the entire message, and the hammy clues outweigh the spammy ones (not unexpected, really, considering that other than all the trolling, the messages are reasonably on-topic). This is a feature, not a bug. It's the same feature that means that messages talking about spam on the spambayes mailing list, or the legitimate mail I get about viagra , get through to me. =Tony.Meyer -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: A Moronicity of Guido van Rossum
I know nobody wants to do add "white/black-listing", so we can do it probabilistically. In case it is not obvious, mailings with the words "jargon" or "moron" and their derrivatives should be flagged as 99.9% probability for Moronicity Xha Lee, Jargonizer, spam. If spam bayes can't figure this out, then either it is not properly implemented or Bayes himself was out to lunch. James On Thursday 29 September 2005 16:39, Tony Meyer wrote: > > To fight this sort of message, I think spambayes would have to be > able to understand the context more. -- James Stroud UCLA-DOE Institute for Genomics and Proteomics Box 951570 Los Angeles, CA 90095 http://www.jamesstroud.com/ -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: A Moronicity of Guido van Rossum
On 29 Sep 2005 07:24:17 -0700, Xah Lee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Of course, you begin to write things like Java, in three thousand wordsjust to state you are a moron. +1 QOTW. Tim -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: A Moronicity of Guido van Rossum
[Delaney, Timothy (Tim)] > Tony Meyer wrote: > > It's made worse because he uses so many words that you'd expect to > > find in legitimate c.l.p messages. > It's this last bit that's the problem. I've got no problems filtering > other types of spam messages to the list, but XL adds so many non-spam > terms that the from field gets declared a statistical anomaly :( My email reader automatically marks any message naming him, anywhere, as deleted on entry, here. I opened this one nevertheless, out of curiosity, because the message was from Tim Delaney, who knows better! I made it fairly easy to manage those few cases which escape Bayesian filters. For something I do not want to read, I merely select a small part of the message acting like a clue, then hit Alt-Ctrl-K, which pops up a small menu (author, subject, body, etc.). I select `body', and that's it. Emails are later deleted on entry. The keybinding is known to the window manager (Openbox here), which launches a small Python script to update tables for the mail fetcher (another Python script), and the mail reader (Mutt in my case). All of this is very convenient. -- François Pinard http://pinard.progiciels-bpi.ca -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
RE: A Moronicity of Guido van Rossum
Tony Meyer wrote: > I expect that if you look at the clues for such messages, you'll find > that any 'Xah Lee' clues are swamped by lots of 'c.l.p message' > clues. A big problem with filtering mailing lists at the user end > (rather than before the post is accepted) is that the mailing > software adds so many strongly-correlated clues. It's made worse > because he uses so many words that you'd expect to find in legitimate > c.l.p messages. It's this last bit that's the problem. I've got no problems filtering other types of spam messages to the list, but XL adds so many non-spam terms that the from field gets declared a statistical anomaly :( Tim Delaney -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: A Moronicity of Guido van Rossum
On 30/09/2005, at 9:50 AM, Delaney, Timothy (Tim) wrote: > You have to admit though, he's remarkably good at getting past > Spambayes. Despite classifying *every* Xah Lee post as spam, he still > manages to get most of his posts classified as 0% or 1% spam. I can't believe that people are using c.l.p trolls as justification in their push to add white/black-listing to spambayes now . I expect that if you look at the clues for such messages, you'll find that any 'Xah Lee' clues are swamped by lots of 'c.l.p message' clues. A big problem with filtering mailing lists at the user end (rather than before the post is accepted) is that the mailing software adds so many strongly-correlated clues. It's made worse because he uses so many words that you'd expect to find in legitimate c.l.p messages. To fight this sort of message, I think spambayes would have to be able to understand the context more. =Tony.Meyer -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: A Moronicity of Guido van Rossum
On Thu, 29 Sep 2005 10:44:28 -0700, Matt wrote: > OK... your post seems to indicate a belief that everyone else is > somehow incompetent. Sounds a bit like the "I am sane, it is everyone > else who is crazy" concept. Can you suggest a technology or > technologist who, in your expert opinion, has gotten it right? Folks, Xah Lee is a classic Internet troll, and has been polluting this newsgroup for a long time. Ask yourself, why would anyone rational cross post criticism of Python to perl, lisp and scheme newsgroups? Does he perhaps think that the Lisp and Scheme language developers are about to remove the functional programming features from Lisp and need to be shown Python as a warning? He is the equivalent of one of those bored, spoiled teenagers who urinate on public transport just to see the shocked reactions of other people. You can't engage him in rational debate. Until we find a way to send electric shocks through the Internet, all we can do is ignore him. To argue with him just gives him the sick entertainment he wants. -- Steven. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: A Moronicity of Guido van Rossum
Delaney, Timothy (Tim) wrote: > You have to admit though, he's remarkably good at getting past > Spambayes. Despite classifying *every* Xah Lee post as spam, he still > manages to get most of his posts classified as 0% or 1% spam. Hmm, perhaps he's using steganography. Maybe the emails actually contain an encoded message for an anonymous recipient, and he writes stuff designed to get past filters. If I were a spy, I might do the same thing... but I'd use language less likely to get me booted from the list. ;-) Shane -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: A Moronicity of Guido van Rossum
On Thu, 29 Sep 2005 13:13:51 -0400, Bill Mill wrote: >> But, this post of his shows [Guido's] haughtiness > > +1 IQOTW > > (Ironic Quote Of The Week. Thanks for the laughs, Xah) I swore I wouldn't feed the troll by responding to his post, but the opportunity to quote from "The Princess Bride" is too strong. Describing Guido's so-called haughtiness: "That word you keep using. I do not think it means what you think it means." -- Steven. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
RE: A Moronicity of Guido van Rossum
Sherm Pendley wrote: > "Matt" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > >> OK... your post seems to indicate a belief that everyone else is >> somehow incompetent. > > Xah's just a troll - best to just ignore him. He posts these diatribes > to multiple groups hoping to start a fight. You have to admit though, he's remarkably good at getting past Spambayes. Despite classifying *every* Xah Lee post as spam, he still manages to get most of his posts classified as 0% or 1% spam. It's very annoying - I've maxxed out the rules I can use in Outlook (my work account) so I can't afford to add a specific one to trash his emails... Tim Delaney -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: A Moronicity of Guido van Rossum
"Matt" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > OK... your post seems to indicate a belief that everyone else is > somehow incompetent. Xah's just a troll - best to just ignore him. He posts these diatribes to multiple groups hoping to start a fight. sherm-- -- Cocoa programming in Perl: http://camelbones.sourceforge.net Hire me! My resume: http://www.dot-app.org -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: A Moronicity of Guido van Rossum
Xah Lee wrote: >There are quite a lot f___ing liers and charlatans in the computing >industry, especially the OpenSourcers, from the f___ing >a-dime-a-million students with their "FREE" irresponsible homeworks >on the net to f___heads like James Gosling of Java , Larry Wall of >Perl, Linus Torvolts of Linux kernel, and that f___head C++ Berjo >something, the unix advocating f___ers, and those "gang of four" >Design Patterns shit and the criminals of eXtreme Programing and UML... >with these pundits begets one generation of f___ing tech geeking coding >monkeys, thinking that they know something, while creating a mass of >garbage that crashes and f___s us up everyday in the computing world. OK... your post seems to indicate a belief that everyone else is somehow incompetent. Sounds a bit like the "I am sane, it is everyone else who is crazy" concept. Can you suggest a technology or technologist who, in your expert opinion, has gotten it right? Perhaps the language you have developed and others are using successfully fits all of our needs? -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: A Moronicity of Guido van Rossum
> But, this post of his shows [Guido's] haughtiness +1 IQOTW (Ironic Quote Of The Week. Thanks for the laughs, Xah) Peace Bill Mill bill.mill at gmail.com -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: A Moronicity of Guido van Rossum
addendum: reduce() in fact embodies a form of iteration/recursion on lists, very suitable in a functional language environment. If Python's lambda and other functional facilities are more powerful, reduce() would be a good addition. For instance, in functional programing, it is a paradigm to nest or sequence functions. (most readers will be familiar in the form of unix shell's “pipe”). When you sequence functions, you can't stop in the middle and do a loop construct. So, reduce() and other functional forms of iteration are convenient and necessary. -- For version with slight professionalism (sans “fuck”), see: http://xahlee.org/perl-python/python_3000.html Note: Guido certainly isn't a moron. But, this post of his shows his haughtiness, and rather unfamiliarity with functional programing. (i.e. has he, worked in a functional language in any significant length or project?) However, he's got the audacity to assert things, probably due to bigshot status. Guido's stumble isn't a rare instance in the industry, and i don't take him to be of any sinister nature. (i don't know much about Guido the person or personality.) There are quite a lot fucking liers and charlatans in the computing industry, especially the OpenSourcers, from the fucking a-dime-a-million students with their “FREE” irresponsible homeworks on the net to fuckheads like James Gosling of Java , Larry Wall of Perl, Linus Torvolts of Linux kernel, and that fuckhead C++ Berjo something, the unix advocating fuckers, and those “gang of four” Design Patterns shit and the criminals of eXtreme Programing and UML... with these pundits begets one generation of fucking tech geeking coding monkeys, thinking that they know something, while creating a mass of garbage that crashes and fucks us up everyday in the computing world. (disclaimer: this post is pure opinion.) "The required techniques of effective reasoning are pretty formal, but as long as programming is done by people that don't master them, the software crisis will remain with us and will be considered an incurable disease. And you know what incurable diseases do: they invite the quacks and charlatans in, who in this case take the form of Software Engineering gurus." —Edsger Dijkstra 1930-2002. Xah [EMAIL PROTECTED] ∑ http://xahlee.org/ -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: A Moronicity of Guido van Rossum
Xah Lee wrote: > ...What the fuck is the former? > ...What the fuck would anyone to > ...]”, is rather inane, as you can now see. > > ...What the fuck does it mean... > ...you begin to write things like Java... Can you please alter the tone of your voice? Gerrit. -- Temperature in Luleå, Norrbotten, Sweden: | Current temperature 05-09-29 18:19:556.8 degrees Celsius ( 44.3F) | -- Det finns inte dåligt väder, bara dåliga kläder. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: A Moronicity of Guido van Rossum
Michael Goettsche <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > On Thursday 29 September 2005 16:24, Xah Lee wrote: > > A Moronicity of Guido van Rossum > > > > Xah Lee, 200509 > > > > Assuming you want to reach people to convince them your position is right, > why > don't you try that in proper language? "moron" occured 7 times in your not > too long text, that doesn't let you look like a tech moron or a math moron, > but just like a moron. His intent was never to convince people or pass information. Look for older posts from him, where people here tried showing him some mistakes or made suggestions to enhance his contribution and he simply ignored everything. It looks like he thinks he's omniscient and always righ. Almost (?) a deity. :-) By the way, the doctor said it is dangerous to contradict him... ;-) -- Jorge Godoy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: A Moronicity of Guido van Rossum
Michael Goettsche wrote: > Assuming you want to reach people to convince them your position is right, > why > don't you try that in proper language? "moron" occured 7 times in your not > too long text, that doesn't let you look like a tech moron or a math moron, > but just like a moron. Actually, an angry moron, due to the use of the expletive 'fuck' 4 times in said text. -- Joshua Simpson -- dataw0lf.org Lead Network Administrator/Engineer Aero-Graphics Inc. [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: A Moronicity of Guido van Rossum
On Thursday 29 September 2005 16:24, Xah Lee wrote: > A Moronicity of Guido van Rossum > > Xah Lee, 200509 > Assuming you want to reach people to convince them your position is right, why don't you try that in proper language? "moron" occured 7 times in your not too long text, that doesn't let you look like a tech moron or a math moron, but just like a moron. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
A Moronicity of Guido van Rossum
A Moronicity of Guido van Rossum Xah Lee, 200509 On Guido van Rossum's website: http://www.artima.com/weblogs/viewpost.jsp?thread=98196 dated 20050826, he muses with the idea that he would like to remove lambda, reduce(), filter() and map() constructs in a future version Python 3000. Guido wrote: «filter(P, S) is almost always written clearer as [x for x in S if P(x)], and this has the huge advantage that the most common usages involve predicates that are comparisons, e.g. x==42, and defining a lambda for that just requires much more effort for the reader (plus the lambda is slower than the list comprehension)» the form “[x for x in S if P(x)]” is certainly not more clear than “filter(P, S)”. The latter is clearly a function. What the fuck is the former? A function every programer in any language can understand and appreciate its form and function. What the fuck would anyone to expect everyone to appreciate a Python syntactical idiosyncrasy “[x for ...]”? also, the argument that the from “filter(F,S)” being cumbersome because the first argument is a function and that mostly likely it would be a function that returns true and false thus most people will probably use the form “lambda” and that is quite cumbersome than if the whole thing is written with the syntactical idiosyncrasy “[x for ...]”, is rather inane, as you can now see. The filter(decision_function,list) form is clean, concise, and helps thinking. Why it helps thinking? Because it condenses the whole operation into its mathematical essence with the most clarity. That is, it filters, of a list, and by a yes/no decision function. Nothing is more, and nothing can be less. It is unfortunate that we have the jargon Lambda and Predicate developed by the morons in the tech geekers of the functional programing community. The lambda could be renamed Pure Function and the Predicate could be called True/False function, but the world being the way they are already, it is unwise to rewrite every existing Perl program just because somebody invented another language. If the predicate in lambda in filter() is cumbersome, so would exactly the same thing appear in the syntactical idiosyncrasy “[x for x in S if P(x)]”. Guido added this sting as a afterthought: «(plus the lambda is slower than the list comprehension)» Which is faster is really the whim and capacity of Python implementators. And, just before we were using criterion of simplicity. The concept of a function every programer understands, what the fuck is a List Comprehension? Why don't you scrap list comprehension in Python 3000 and create a table() function that's simpler in syntax and more powerful in semantics? ( See http://xahlee.org/perl-python/list_comprehension.html ) Guido wrote: «Why drop lambda? Most Python users are unfamiliar with Lisp or Scheme, so the name is confusing; also, there is a widespread misunderstanding that lambda can do things that a nested function can't -- I still recall Laura Creighton's Aha!-erlebnis after I showed her there was no difference! Even with a better name, I think having the two choices side-by-side just requires programmers to think about making a choice that's irrelevant for their program; not having the choice streamlines the thought process. Also, once map(), filter() and reduce() are gone, there aren't a whole lot of places where you really need to write very short local functions; Tkinter callbacks come to mind, but I find that more often than not the callbacks should be methods of some state-carrying object anyway (the exception being toy programs).» In the outset Guido here assumes a moronitude about the set of Python users and what they are familiar of. Python users 10 years ago are not the same Python users today, and will certainly not be the same 10 years later if you chop off lambda. Things change, math literacy advances, and what users you have changes with what you are. A pure function (lambda) is the gist of a mathematical idea embodied in computer languages, not something from LISP or Scheme as tech geeking morons wont to think. Guido wrote: «... there is a widespread misunderstanding that lambda can do things that a nested function can't...». One is so insulted by a bigshot in the industry of quoting something so disparate then shot it down as if showing his perspicacity. A lambda is a syntax for function or a name for the concept of function. What the fuck does it mean that a lambda isn't as powerful as nested function?? The lambda in Python is really ill. It is designed with a built-in limitation in the first place, and regarded as some foreign substance in the Imperative crowd such as the Pythoners. If there's any problem with lambda, it is with lambda in Python and Pythoner's attitude. Guido wrote: «Also, once map(), filter() and reduce() are gone, there aren't a whole lot of places where you really need to write very short local functions;» Of course, you begi
