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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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.

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

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

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

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

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,

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,

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

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,

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

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

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

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 >

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:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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) -

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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.

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",

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

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

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

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 >>

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

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

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.

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 >>

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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.

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

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

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

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

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. > > >

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

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

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

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 >

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

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