Re: Significant whitespace (was Re: Blogging sucks)

On Thu, 13 Oct 2005, Abigail wrote: > One thing that bothers me about Python is that one of things they claim > as a good thing about their language is that "it isn't Perl". And I have > the same problem with both PHP and Ruby. Whenever I read a piece that's > supposed to promote Python, PHP or Ru

Re: Blogging sucks

* A. Pagaltzis [2005-10-13 23:20]: > * Peter da Silva [2005-10-13 22:15]: > > What if I'm indenting something that isn't a code block? > > Who cares? HTML has no generic “indent a block” mechanism, so > that the Wetware is hateful too. This was supposed to say > Who cares? HTML has no gen

Re: Blogging sucks

* Peter da Silva [2005-10-13 22:15]: > What if I'm indenting something that isn't a code block? Who cares? HTML has no generic “indent a block” mechanism, so that the > Not to mention that *all* alternative solutions are *really* > hateful. > > indent << \! > Any non-hateful

Re: Significant whitespace (was Re: Blogging sucks)

On Thu, Oct 13, 2005 at 03:22:26PM -0500, Luke Kanies wrote: > > I sweat, I've found someone able to describe what they _liked_ about python > without comparing it to perl. It makes python-ruby script wars difficult: > > me: ruby is awesome > them: perl sucks! > me: Bartender! Chec

Re: Significant whitespace (was Re: Blogging sucks)

> Yeah, it's not python's whitespace that makes me avoid it like the plague. > "Ooh, we're OO, except that we're functional, except, when we just make > shit up, except... at least we're not perl!" Bah. You think python is bad by itself, you should see what the bastards at ESRI did to the poor th

Re: Significant whitespace (was Re: Blogging sucks)

> Yes, a trailing comma determines whether 'print' adds a carriage return for > you. It's BASIC! > "Ooh, we're OO, except that we're functional, except, when we just make > shit up, except... at least we're not perl!" I hate all object oriented languages that don't even TRY to at least do as goo

Re: Significant whitespace (was Re: Blogging sucks)

On Thu, 13 Oct 2005, Abigail wrote: > When it comes to hating significant whitespace, nothing comes close to Perl6: > > sub square {my $x = shift; return $x * $x} > print square(1) * 2# Prints 2. > print square (1) * 2 # Prints 4. > > > my %hash;# Empt

Re: Significant whitespace (was Re: Blogging sucks)

> When it comes to hating significant whitespace, nothing comes close to Perl6: > sub square {my $x = shift; return $x * $x} > print square(1) * 2# Prints 2. > print square (1) * 2 # Prints 4. Holy screaming sentient inkwells full of boiling blood and maggots. I don't care much

Re: Blogging sucks

It isn???t anything like Python at all. In the way that I personally find Python hateful, this is hateful. There is only one level of indentation. Once a block is indented far enough to be considered a code block, all further indentation is literal. What if I'm indenting somethin

Re: Blogging sucks

> Yes, it is not really. It's a simple nod to the people who might want to > include one certain string in their code. A silly workaround is better > than no workaround. It's not just a silly workaround, it's one that makes slashdot markup incompatible with *ML, so why base it on *ML? > >That's

Re: Significant whitespace (was Re: Blogging sucks)

> When it comes to hating significant whitespace, nothing comes close to Perl6: *boggle* I'd say that the lunatics have taken over the asylum, except that they were always in charge. However, they do seem to have gone off their meds. > I rather take all Pythons significant whitespace rules (whic

Significant whitespace (was Re: Blogging sucks)

On Thu, Oct 13, 2005 at 11:52:16AM -0500, Luke Kanies wrote: > On Thu, 13 Oct 2005, A. Pagaltzis wrote: > > > It isn't anything like Python at all. There is only one level of > > indentation. Once a block is indented far enough to be considered > > a code block, all further indentation is literal.

Re: Blogging sucks

On Thu, 13 Oct 2005, A. Pagaltzis wrote: Have a look at Markdown. Markdown source is plaintext that looks like email and Does What You Mean. If you need more elaborate markup than the constructs it supports you just write HTML straight into the document. Publishing code snippets is trivial too,

Re: Blogging sucks

On Thu, 13 Oct 2005, A. Pagaltzis wrote: > It isn't anything like Python at all. There is only one level of > indentation. Once a block is indented far enough to be considered > a code block, all further indentation is literal. > > Not to mention that *all* alternative solutions are *really* > hat

Re: Blogging sucks

* Peter da Silva [2005-10-13 17:25]: > Reserving indentation for stuff like this is hateful. Period. It isn’t anything like Python at all. There is only one level of indentation. Once a block is indented far enough to be considered a code block, all further indentation is literal. Not to mention

Re: Blogging sucks

On 10/13/05, Peter da Silva wrote: On Oct 13, 2005, at 8:48 AM, A. Pagaltzis wrote: > * Peter da Silva [2005-10-13 13:10]: >> On Oct 13, 2005, at 1:47 AM, A. Pagaltzis wrote: >>> Markdown (yes, yes, I'm cheerleading) has a simple solution: >>> anything indentend as a code block is literal. Peri

Re: Blogging sucks

On Oct 13, 2005, at 8:48 AM, A. Pagaltzis wrote: * Peter da Silva [2005-10-13 13:10]: On Oct 13, 2005, at 1:47 AM, A. Pagaltzis wrote: Markdown (yes, yes, I’m cheerleading) has a simple solution: anything indentend as a code block is literal. Period. [insert tremendous hate for Python here]

Re: Blogging sucks

* Peter da Silva [2005-10-13 13:10]: > On Oct 13, 2005, at 1:47 AM, A. Pagaltzis wrote: > >Markdown (yes, yes, I’m cheerleading) has a simple solution: > >anything indentend as a code block is literal. Period. > > [insert tremendous hate for Python here] Uhm, okay, but what does that have to do

Re: Blogging sucks

On Oct 13, 2005, at 1:47 AM, A. Pagaltzis wrote: Markdown (yes, yes, I’m cheerleading) has a simple solution: anything indentend as a code block is literal. Period. [insert tremendous hate for Python here]

Re: Blogging sucks

On Wed, 12 Oct 2005, Peter da Silva wrote: > > This way may lie madness, but what about an upload filter that > > auto-escapes angle brackets for anything wrapped in or > > tags? Surely some of the blogging toolkits have such abilities, as > > plugins if not as core functionality, no? > > Wh

Re: Blogging sucks

On Wed, Oct 12, 2005 at 11:30:17PM -0500, Peter da Silva wrote: > >You'd see it all. Go on, try it. HTML is less hateful than you > >think. In this case. > > 1. If HTML treats THAT specially, it's more hateful than I think. No, is not special. < in HTML only defines markup if it's followed

Re: Mail.app

* Peter da Silva [2005-10-13 07:00]: > Doesn't that syntax make you think "what if Grace Hopper had > been a contemporary of Steve Jobs"? I know it fills me with > hate... http://daringfireball.net/2005/09/englishlikeness_monster Regards, -- Aristotle Pagaltzis //

Re: Blogging sucks

* Peter da Silva [2005-10-13 06:30]: > I recommend basing it on > .em RUNOFF > markup, with paired delimiters for literal sections. Markdown (yes, yes, I’m cheerleading) has a simple solution: anything indentend as a code block is literal. Period. Even Markdown syntax itself. It doesn’t matter. Y

Re: Blogging sucks

At 23:27 -0500 2005.10.12, Peter da Silva wrote: >Use some format that isn't similar to what you're >going to be working on. > >I recommend basing it on >.em RUNOFF >markup, with paired delimiters for literal sections. >.lit .end >Anything up to a .end is literal. Which is great until you want to

Re: Mail.app

There is no decent keyboard navigation for common operations like 'Go to next unread message'. I understand that if there was a menu item, this is something I could fix myself. I know that all Mac users are mouse-happy, but for things like email, I *need*

Re: Blogging sucks

You'd see it all. Go on, try it. HTML is less hateful than you think. In this case. 1. If HTML treats THAT specially, it's more hateful than I think. 2. I've already been burned by that exact example in existing html-enhanced web markup. I don't actually care if the browser or the server

Re: Blogging sucks

This way may lie madness, but what about an upload filter that auto-escapes angle brackets for anything wrapped in or tags? Surely some of the blogging toolkits have such abilities, as plugins if not as core functionality, no? What if you've got or as part of the code you're entering? Yo

Re: Blogging sucks

At 22:36 -0400 2005.10.12, Chris Devers wrote: >This way may lie madness, but what about an upload filter that >auto-escapes angle brackets for anything wrapped in or >tags? Surely some of the blogging toolkits have such abilities, as >plugins if not as core functionality, no? Slash (Slashdot, u

Re: Blogging sucks

* Chris Devers [2005-10-13 03:05]: > It could be better, sure, but for minimal HTML like this, a > lot of the "solutions" I've heard of seem more cumbersome than > the original problem they were supposed to solve. Have a look at Markdown. Markdown source is plaintext that looks like email and

Re: Blogging sucks

On Wed, 12 Oct 2005, Peter da Silva wrote: if ( you_have_code_to_embed() ) { wrap_it_in_a_pre_block_and_get_on_with_your_life(); } for(i = 0; i < 10; i++) { puts("Hey! Where'd my code go?"); if(!you_can_see_this())

Re: Blogging sucks

for(i = 0; i < 10; i++) { puts("Hey! Where'd my code go?"); if(!you_can_see_this()) break; } if(i>=10) puts("Oh, there it is!"); You'd see it all. Go on, try it. HTML is less hateful than you thin

Re: Blogging sucks

> > >if ( you_have_code_to_embed() ) { > wrap_it_in_a_pre_block_and_get_on_with_your_life(); >} > > for(i = 0; i < 10; i++) { puts("Hey! Where'd my code go?"); if(!you_can_see_this()) break; } if(i>=1

Re: Mail.app

On 12-Oct-05, at 6:52 PM, Robert Spier wrote: That Mail.app tool is quite nifty. It syncs mail fast and accurately Umm, not quite. If you use IMAP, Mail seems to think it is the only MUA that ever talks to your IMAP folders. If you delete messages out of (the middle of) an IMAP m

Re: Blogging sucks

On Wed, 12 Oct 2005, Luke Kanies wrote: Who the hell writes HTML any more? Don't we have, like, 100 simple markup languages that make it 10x easier and better? Really. Oh, I dunno, a minimal, useful set of HTML isn't that painful. I've seen people, with a straight face, say that it's reas

Re: Blogging sucks

* Luke Kanies [2005-10-13 00:25]: > There's lots of hate here, and my options appear to be 1) don't > blog, 2) do the writing but do it in a vacuum with no > connectedness to the rest of the blog world, 3) use shitty > software, 4) host something myself and hack it till it works. I have set mysel

Re: Blogging sucks

On 10/12/05, Luke Kanies wrote: > > First, it seems to be a pretty simple setup -- I write something, it > gets put online. Ok, there are some other features -- comments (can get > quite complicated), categories, pinging (don't ask), and tags. Ok, I > understand. > > Pinging is one of the most hat

Re: Mail.app

On Wed, Oct 12, 2005 at 03:52:23PM -0700, Robert Spier wrote: > That Mail.app tool is quite nifty. It syncs mail fast and > accurately, it's got decent filtering. But you seem to have fast only if given a low latency link. The authors of this and much other hateful software should be l

Mail.app

Dear Apple, You have a very nice operating system. That Mail.app tool is quite nifty. It syncs mail fast and accurately, it's got decent filtering. But you seem to have forgotten two very important things. First - There is no (obvious???) way to tell you not to s

Blogging sucks

How is it that people can be so geeky and so geek-illiterate at the same time? Who the hell writes HTML any more? Don't we have, like, 100 simple markup languages that make it 10x easier and better? Really. I've been writing a software product (deserving of much hate, I am sure) recently, and h