Re: Python is not a good name, should rename to Athon
Op Mon, 03 Dec 2007 14:20:52 +1300, schreef greg: If you want a really appropriate name for a programming language, I'd suggest Babbage. (not for Python, though!) Konrad Zuse wrote the first high-level programming language, so I think his name would be a better candidate... -- JanC -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Python is not a good name, should rename to Athon
--- Jan Claeys [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Op Mon, 03 Dec 2007 14:20:52 +1300, schreef greg: If you want a really appropriate name for a programming language, I'd suggest Babbage. (not for Python, though!) Konrad Zuse wrote the first high-level programming language, so I think his name would be a better candidate... If you renamed the language Z in honor of Mr. Zuse, there would be a certain symmetry given the role of ABC in Python's history: http://www.artima.com/intv/pythonP.html Looking for last minute shopping deals? Find them fast with Yahoo! Search. http://tools.search.yahoo.com/newsearch/category.php?category=shopping -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Python is not a good name, should rename to Athon
Piet van Oostrum [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]: Adrian Cherry [EMAIL PROTECTED] (AC) wrote: AC For that matter C# is no better, I thought that # was pronounced AC hash, I still refer to C# as C-hash. Are you musically illiterate? Yup! The limits of my musically ability is Spam, spam, spam, spam. Lovely spam! Wonderful spaaam! Lovely spam! Wonderful spam. Spa-a-a-a-a-a-a-am! Spa-a-a-a-a-a-a-am! Is that a problem? It's still a hash sign to me. Adrian -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Python is not a good name, should rename to Athon
Piet van Oostrum wrote: Adrian Cherry [EMAIL PROTECTED] (AC) wrote: AC For that matter C# is no better, I thought that # was pronounced AC hash, I still refer to C# as C-hash. Are you musically illiterate? Note that the notation for the note (!) isn't universal. French speakers for instance write that one do# and call it do dièze. C# reads as unpronounceable linenoise to them. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Python is not a good name, should rename to Athon
Adrian Cherry [EMAIL PROTECTED] (AC) wrote: AC Piet van Oostrum [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in AC news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]: Adrian Cherry [EMAIL PROTECTED] (AC) wrote: AC For that matter C# is no better, I thought that # was pronounced AC hash, I still refer to C# as C-hash. Are you musically illiterate? AC Yup! The limits of my musically ability is AC Spam, spam, spam, spam. AC Lovely spam! Wonderful spaaam! AC Lovely spam! Wonderful spam. AC Spa-a-a-a-a-a-a-am! Spa-a-a-a-a-a-a-am! AC Is that a problem? It's still a hash sign to me. No problem, but if you know music notation, C# will ring a bell. -- Piet van Oostrum [EMAIL PROTECTED] URL: http://www.cs.uu.nl/~piet [PGP 8DAE142BE17999C4] Private email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Python is not a good name, should rename to Athon
Boris Borcic wrote: Piet van Oostrum wrote: Adrian Cherry [EMAIL PROTECTED] (AC) wrote: AC For that matter C# is no better, I thought that # was pronounced AC hash, I still refer to C# as C-hash. Are you musically illiterate? Note that the notation for the note (!) isn't universal. French speakers for instance write that one do# and call it do dièze. C# reads as unpronounceable linenoise to them. In a german text it would be Cis. And in real musical notation the sharpener doesn't look like '#', only similar. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Python is not a good name, should rename to Athon
Boris Borcic a écrit : Piet van Oostrum wrote: Adrian Cherry [EMAIL PROTECTED] (AC) wrote: AC For that matter C# is no better, I thought that # was pronounced AC hash, I still refer to C# as C-hash. Are you musically illiterate? Note that the notation for the note (!) isn't universal. French speakers for instance write that one do# and call it do dièze. C# reads as unpronounceable linenoise to them. Strange as it might be, some french speakers also know the english notation... -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Python is not a good name, should rename to Athon
Monty Python pioneered (or at least pioneered the organized televising of) a form of humor where there is no punchline or reason something is funny, it just is (or isn't). I find about half of it very funny, and the rest very unfunny. I used to find it more hilarious than I do now. It's an extremely subjective humor. It's not that the jokes aren't funny (or meant to be) it's that there is nothing to get. If you are trying to understand it (get the joke), it's a lost cause :) When they do have a joke which has a reason it loses its impact if the rest of the silliness didn't affect you. This form of humor continues in shows like Saturday Night Live. They do have actual jokes on that show for instance, but many of the skits are just silly characters doing silly things that often don't make sense, and actual punchlines at the end of a skit are fairly rare. On Dec 6, 2007 10:14 PM, James Stroud [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Terry Reedy wrote: Tóth Csaba [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message news:[EMAIL PROTECTED] | | Python name is not funny for me. Even the Monty Python, because its hard | to translate their jokes, and in my country they are not so popular. The jokes translate just fine in my country, but dare I admit that python (or Monty Python, rather) is not funny for me either. I think I've actually heard someone say that the jokes aren't funny is part of the humor. I guess some of us will never get it. Now Benny Hill--that's another story! -- 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 -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Python is not a good name, should rename to Athon
Terry Reedy wrote: Tóth Csaba [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message news:[EMAIL PROTECTED] | | Python name is not funny for me. Even the Monty Python, because its hard | to translate their jokes, and in my country they are not so popular. The jokes translate just fine in my country, but dare I admit that python (or Monty Python, rather) is not funny for me either. I think I've actually heard someone say that the jokes aren't funny is part of the humor. I guess some of us will never get it. Now Benny Hill--that's another story! -- 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: Python is not a good name, should rename to Athon
Gabriel Genellina [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: En Tue, 04 Dec 2007 14:49:36 -0300, Dennis Lee Bieber [EMAIL PROTECTED] escribió: How about the cognate: Kulkukan? You meant Kukulkan. If you got it wrong from Apocalypto (Mel Gibson), well, it's just one of many errors in the film... Either way its no good - sounds too much like Kalkul - Hendrik -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Python is not a good name, should rename to Athon
Dennis Lee Bieber [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Euler? (most non-tech types would probably think that's a reference to someone who squirts lubricants into the workings of a steam engine) You have just destroyed a long held image in my mind with this horrible homophone - I used to conjure up images of a wise owl. - Hendrik -- For the linguistically challenged: Eule is German for Owl -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Python is not a good name, should rename to Athon
Russ P. wrote: If I had invented Python, I would have called it Newton or Euler, arguably the greatest scientist and mathematician ever, respectively. This makes your taste on the matter dubious. Such choice of a name implies either a claim to the fame of the Person that's devoid of substance. Or else a degree of carelessness about name capture that casts doubt on the quality of the language design. Or else a claim by the language designers/namers to themselves borrow from the Person while destining the language to grunt practitioners not expected to have any (further) need to refer to said Person. Not serious - not even serious marketing, IMHO. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Python is not a good name, should rename to Athon
Russ P. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in news:[EMAIL PROTECTED] ups.com: Speaking of stupid names, what does C++ mean? I think it's the grade you get when you just barely missed a B--. But I can't deny that it *is* good for searching. For that matter C# is no better, I thought that # was pronounced hash, I still refer to C# as C-hash. Adrian -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Python is not a good name, should rename to Athon
On 04/12/2007, Hendrik van Rooyen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Dotan Cohen dotanail.com wrote: Newton was the bridge between science and superstition. Without him, we would not have science. For that he is notable. He is both magician and scientist. It was Newton's belief in the occult that led to his discovery of gravity: the fact that distant objects could influence one another. Even today, science has a hard time accepting that. And gravity _still_ has not been incorporated into a theory of everything / grand unified theory. You live in exciting times - google for surfer dude and E8 for a paper that purports to be a theory of everything. I stumbled across it last week and downloaded a pdf but true to form I have lost the link. It was written by A. Garrett Lisi. Even if his theory pans out, I would oppose changing the language name to Garrett, or Lisi, on the grounds that John Cleese was funnier. I read the paper a few weeks ago when it appeared on /.. It was quite a bit over my head, but to tell you the truth, I think that it has a fighting chance. It explains the family relationship between particles, and even predicts new particles. So it can be tested. Until some of those particles are found, however, I'm still in the string camp. Maybe we could rename Python to String? Dotan Cohen http://what-is-what.com http://gibberish.co.il א-ב-ג-ד-ה-ו-ז-ח-ט-י-ך-כ-ל-ם-מ-ן-נ-ס-ע-ף-פ-ץ-צ-ק-ר-ש-ת A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text. Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing? -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Python is not a good name, should rename to Athon
Adrian Cherry [EMAIL PROTECTED] (AC) wrote: AC For that matter C# is no better, I thought that # was pronounced AC hash, I still refer to C# as C-hash. Are you musically illiterate? -- Piet van Oostrum [EMAIL PROTECTED] URL: http://www.cs.uu.nl/~piet [PGP 8DAE142BE17999C4] Private email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Python is not a good name, should rename to Athon
On Dec 4, 2007 10:02 AM, George Sakkis [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Dec 3, 12:50 pm, Russ P. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I know this because I've been through it myself. When I tell people that I use Python, I often qualify it by pointing out that it is used extensively at Google. In other words, I'm banking on the reputation of Google to offset the goofiness of the Python name. Come to think of it, maybe it should be called Googlang or Googon? I see, so Python has to somehow offset the goofiness of its name while Google can rest on its reputation. Never occured to you that the goofiness of the name Google is at least an order of magnitude greater than Python. And it never occurred to him that Guido could have named the programming language Google, and later, the search-engine guys could have founded a company named Python. He'd be defending his choice of programming in the Google language by pointing to the reputation of the Python company, while complaining to a list that Google was a goofy name. I'll bet he uses the word google as a verb yet doesn't realize how goofy that sounds to someone unfamiliar with Google? Oh well, I suppose he'll never try programming in Caml, he'd be too embarrassed to tell anyone. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Python is not a good name, should rename to Athon
Piet van Oostrum wrote: Adrian Cherry [EMAIL PROTECTED] (AC) wrote: For that matter C# is no better, I thought that # was pronounced hash, I still refer to C# as C-hash. Are you musically illiterate? I wonder what Cb (C-flat) would be. Ada? :) Regards, Björn -- BOFH excuse #351: PEBKAC (Problem Exists Between Keyboard And Chair) -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Python is not a good name, should rename to Athon
Dennis Lee Bieber wrote: I wouldn't be that harsh... Though I've never heard # as hash... Python programmer and never heard of the hashbang? :) Also see: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Number_sign Regards, Björn -- BOFH excuse #170: popper unable to process jumbo kernel -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Python is not a good name, should rename to Athon
Russ P. wrote: Speaking of stupid names, what does C++ mean? According to Special Relativity, C++ is a contradiction in terms :) -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Python is not a good name, should rename to Athon
On Sat, 1 Dec 2007 13:40:10 -0800 (PST), Russ P. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Dec 1, 12:47 pm, J. Clifford Dyer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Sat, 2007-12-01 at 12:10 -0800, Russ P. wrote: On Dec 1, 2:10 am, Bjoern Schliessmann usenet- [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Russ P. wrote: I agree that Python is not a good name for a programming language, Why not? Think about proposing its use to someone who has never heard of it (which I did not too long ago). As the OP pointed out, a Python is a snake. Why should a programming language be named after a snake? That's not a persuasive argument. First of all, Python is named for a comedy troupe from England. For comparison, Perl is named for a knitting technique, Lisp is named for a speech impediment, Ruby is named for a rock, Smalltalk is named for a not-so-useful form of communication, and Java is named after a beverage or an island. Which of those is a good name for a programming language by your criterion? None. None of them are good names by my criteria. But then, a name is only a name. One of the few names I like is Pascal, because he was a great mathematician and scientist. After thinking about it a bit, here are examples of what I would consider a good name for a programming language: Newton# Newton* Newton+ Newton was a great scientist, and his name is easy to spell and pronounce. The trailing character serves to disambiguate it from Newton in online searches. For shorthand in online discussions, N#, N*, or N+ could be used as aliases. Names of other great scientists, mathematicians, or computer scientists could also be used, of course. Take your pick. How about renaming Python3000? I would never use the name of a mathematician for a procedural language. Mathemathician names should be for funtional languages (such as Haskell). Procedural languages are flexible, they keep on tangling and getting out of it, they like publicity: Houdini or, as suggested in other messages: Houdini3 Best regards, Zara -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Python is not a good name, should rename to Athon
On Dec 4, 11:36 am, MarkE [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Ithon Pie - Fun -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Python is not a good name, should rename to Athon
Ithon -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Python is not a good name, should rename to Athon
Dennis Lee Bieber írta: Changing the name of the language, at this stage, means giving up over ten years of history and rebuilding name recognition from scratch... Along with having to rename Jython, IronPython, CherryPy, probably Boa Constructor, the pysqlite DB adapter, numpy, scipy, pythonwin, PythonCard, etc. Why should they rename their project too? Their is very big chance they wont be compatible with Python3000, just if they rewrite their program too! They should rename their project when they feel the name is not so good for the project. Not because _one_ (even if it is the main) of the depencency project renames itself. in my humble opinion its nonsense thinking. tsabi -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Python is not a good name, should rename to Athon
On Dec 4, 11:53 am, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Dec 4, 11:36 am, MarkE [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Ithon Pie - Fun Pie-a-thon? http://montypython.tribe.net/thread/fd519910-25e3-4102-b898-8815d6ece32a http://www.flickr.com/photos/kirstywombat/1862165664/ -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Python is not a good name, should rename to Athon
On Tue, 04 Dec 2007 08:31:55 +0100, Zara wrote: On Sat, 1 Dec 2007 16:51:35 +0200, Dotan Cohen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 30/11/2007, Gerardo Herzig [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: You will be eaten by the Snake-Ra god tonight! Wasn't Ra the Sun god? He meant quetzatcoatl. We could rename the language. That name is already taken in the programming language domain. There's a Tiny C compiler for 6510 based targets: http://www.kdef.com/geek/vic/quetz.html Ciao, Marc 'BlackJack' Rintsch -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Python is not a good name, should rename to Athon
Marc 'BlackJack' Rintsch wrote: On Tue, 04 Dec 2007 08:31:55 +0100, Zara wrote: He meant quetzatcoatl. We could rename the language. That name is already taken in the programming language domain. There's a Tiny C compiler for 6510 based targets: Uh, why don't take one of his aliases? Let's call Python from now on Tlahuizcalpantecuhtli. The scripts' extension could be .tlapanli. Regards, Björn -- BOFH excuse #362: Plasma conduit breach -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Python is not a good name, should rename to Athon
On Dec 3, 12:50 pm, Russ P. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I know this because I've been through it myself. When I tell people that I use Python, I often qualify it by pointing out that it is used extensively at Google. In other words, I'm banking on the reputation of Google to offset the goofiness of the Python name. Come to think of it, maybe it should be called Googlang or Googon? I see, so Python has to somehow offset the goofiness of its name while Google can rest on its reputation. Never occured to you that the goofiness of the name Google is at least an order of magnitude greater than Python. And FYI, Google didn't start out with the popularity it enjoys today, it gained it *despite* the silly name. Thanks God it was created by geeks and not clueless PHBs like those that dismiss Python for its name. George -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Python is not a good name, should rename to Athon
On 4 Dec 2007 13:40:47 GMT, Marc 'BlackJack' Rintsch declaimed the following in comp.lang.python: On Tue, 04 Dec 2007 08:31:55 +0100, Zara wrote: He meant quetzatcoatl. We could rename the language. That name is already taken in the programming language domain. There's a Tiny C compiler for 6510 based targets: How about the cognate: Kulkukan? -- Wulfraed Dennis Lee Bieber KD6MOG [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] HTTP://wlfraed.home.netcom.com/ (Bestiaria Support Staff: [EMAIL PROTECTED]) HTTP://www.bestiaria.com/ -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list This amazing program will change social networking! Where to get referrals for your programs ! MY POWER MALL free 2 join ! - Be a better pen pal. Text or chat with friends inside Yahoo! Mail. See how.-- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Python is not a good name, should rename to Athon
En Tue, 04 Dec 2007 14:49:36 -0300, Dennis Lee Bieber [EMAIL PROTECTED] escribió: How about the cognate: Kulkukan? You meant Kukulkan. If you got it wrong from Apocalypto (Mel Gibson), well, it's just one of many errors in the film... -- Gabriel Genellina -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Python is not a good name, should rename to Athon
On Dec 2, 4:47 am, Steven D'Aprano [EMAIL PROTECTED] cybersource.com.au wrote: On Sat, 01 Dec 2007 23:55:32 -0800, Russ P. wrote: I neither know nor care much about Newton's personality and social graces, but I can assure you that he was more than a technician (no offense to technicians). If you just read the Wikipedia preamble about him you will realize that he is arguably the greatest scientist who ever lived. Arguably is right. Please, stop with the fanboy squeeing over Newton. Enough is enough. Newton has already received far more than his share of honours. He might have been a great intellectual but he was no scientist. It's only by ignoring the vast bulk of his work -- work which Newton himself considered *far* more important and interesting than his work on physics and mathematics -- that we can even *pretend* he was a scientist. Newton was arrogant, deceitful, secretive, and hostile to other peoples ideas. Arrogance sometimes goes hand in hand with intellectual brilliance, and there's no doubt that Newton was brilliant, but the last three are especially toxic for good science. His feuds against two of his intellectual equals, Leibniz and Hooke, held mathematics and the sciences back significantly. They weren't the only two: he feuded with Astronomer Royal John Flamsteed, John Locke, and apparently more tradesmen than anyone has counted. He held grudges, and did his best to ruin those who crossed him. Historians of science draw a fairly sharp line in the history of what used to be called natural philosophy (what we now call science). That line is clearly drawn *after* Newton: as John Maynard Smith has said, Newton was the last and greatest of the magicians, not the first of the scientists. He was first and foremost a theologian and politician, an alchemist, a religious heretic obsessed with End Times, and (when he wasn't being secretive and isolating himself from others) a shameless self-promoter unwilling to share the spotlight. The myth of Newton the scientist is pernicious. Even those who recognise his long periods of unproductive work, his wasted years writing about the end of the world, his feuds, his secrecy and his unprofessional grudges against other natural philosophers, still describe him as a great scientist -- despite the fact that Newton's way of working is anathema to science. The myth of science being about the lone genius dies hard, especially in popular accounts of science. Science is a collaborative venture, like Open Source, and it relies on openness and cooperation, two traits almost entirely missing in Newton. There is no doubt that Newton was a great intellect. His influence on mechanics (including astronomy) was grand and productive; that on optics was mixed, but his alchemical writings have had no influence on modern chemistry. Newton's calculus has been virtually put aside in favour of Leibniz's terminology and notation. The great bulk of his work, his theological writings, had little influence at the time and no lasting influence at all. Being fair, the bulk of Liebniz' writings have also been rejected by those in related fields. Most modern metaphysicians hold a view closer to Boston Personalism or at least post-Kantian Personalism (a la Buber), than monadic unity and pre-established harmony, a la Liebniz. It is an instance of the genetic fallacy to reject the achievements of a person in one field, simply because of their failures in another. Newton was lucky to live at a time of great intellectual activity. Had he lived thirty years earlier, his secrecy would almost certainly have meant that his discoveries, such as they were, would have died with him. Had he lived thirty years later, others like Leibniz, Hooke, the Bernoullis, or others, would have made his discoveries ahead of him -- perhaps a few years or a decade later, but they would have done so, as Leibniz independently came up with calculus. There's no doubt that Newton was a genius and an important figure in the history of science, but to describe him as a scientist is to distort both the way Newton worked and the way science works. By all means give him credit for what he did and what he was, but don't pretend he was something that he was not. -- Steven That said, I think this whole rename python thing is silly. Regards, Jordan -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Python is not a good name, should rename to Athon
On Mon, 03 Dec 2007 02:12:17 -0800, MonkeeSage wrote: Being fair, the bulk of Liebniz' writings have also been rejected by those in related fields. Most modern metaphysicians hold a view closer to Boston Personalism or at least post-Kantian Personalism (a la Buber), than monadic unity and pre-established harmony, a la Liebniz. It is an instance of the genetic fallacy to reject the achievements of a person in one field, simply because of their failures in another. I'm not suggesting that Leibniz was any more of a scientist than Newton was, nor am I suggesting that Newton's achievements should be *rejected* (er, except for those pesky Quantum Mechanics and Relativity things...). I'm just saying that we should understand Newton for what he actually was, and not based on the 18th Century revisionism. -- Steven -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Python is not a good name, should rename to Athon
On Dec 3, 7:23 am, Steven D'Aprano [EMAIL PROTECTED] cybersource.com.au wrote: On Mon, 03 Dec 2007 02:12:17 -0800, MonkeeSage wrote: Being fair, the bulk of Liebniz' writings have also been rejected by those in related fields. Most modern metaphysicians hold a view closer to Boston Personalism or at least post-Kantian Personalism (a la Buber), than monadic unity and pre-established harmony, a la Liebniz. It is an instance of the genetic fallacy to reject the achievements of a person in one field, simply because of their failures in another. I'm not suggesting that Leibniz was any more of a scientist than Newton was, nor am I suggesting that Newton's achievements should be *rejected* (er, except for those pesky Quantum Mechanics and Relativity things...). I'm just saying that we should understand Newton for what he actually was, and not based on the 18th Century revisionism. -- Steven Fair enough. Understanding a person in their own context, especially given the modern tendency to appropriate anything remotely similar to the modern view as their own, is a rare quality (at least among philosophers). I'm not a 'Newtonian fanboy' as it were, I just dislike the uniformitarian push for a one right view of physics/metaphysics, as if there were no room for innovation! Regards, Jordan -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Python is not a good name, should rename to Athon
On Dec 3, 5:23 am, Steven D'Aprano I'm not suggesting that Leibniz was any more of a scientist than Newton was, nor am I suggesting that Newton's achievements should be *rejected* (er, except for those pesky Quantum Mechanics and Relativity things...). I'm just saying that we should understand Newton for what he actually was, and not based on the 18th Century revisionism. Your claim that Newton was not a scientist says more about you than it does about him. He is widely regarded -- by physicists and many other scientists -- not only as a scientist, but as the most important one who ever lived. That is obviously a matter of opinion, so it would be rather silly to argue the matter. But the idea that he was not even a scientist is one that I have never heard from anyone but you. Why anyone would hold a personal grudge against someone who lived centuries ago is beyond me. I suspect it is perhaps because you don't care for Newton's theology. As for that pesky relativity thing, some physicists claim that Newton's physics (as opposed to interpretations, simplifications, and revisions by others) were actually consistent with relativity. I think Newton was smarter than you realize. His name would be a great honor for a programming to have. But, alas, it appears that many in the Python community prefer a snake that is half the name of a comedy team. So be it. As I said before, a name is just a name. It might as well be called cockroach as far as I am concerned. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Python is not a good name, should rename to Athon
On 2007-12-03, Russ P. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Dec 3, 5:23 am, Steven D'Aprano I'm not suggesting that Leibniz was any more of a scientist than Newton was, nor am I suggesting that Newton's achievements should be *rejected* (er, except for those pesky Quantum Mechanics and Relativity things...). I'm just saying that we should understand Newton for what he actually was, and not based on the 18th Century revisionism. Your claim that Newton was not a scientist says more about you than it does about him. He is widely regarded -- by physicists and many other scientists -- not only as a scientist, but as the most important one who ever lived. To paraphrase Bertrand Russell, Newton was too successful. Over-veneration of Newton was eventually an impediment to progress--this was not, of course, his fault. -- Neil Cerutti -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Python is not a good name, should rename to Athon
On Dec 3, 2007 4:40 PM, Russ P. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: As I said before, a name is just a name. It might as well be called cockroach as far as I am concerned. Unluckily the Beatles was already taken :-) francesco -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Python is not a good name, should rename to Athon
The only reason to change the name would be because of some serious bad PR that came onto Python, thus causing its branding name to be catagorized as something bad. However this is not the case, presently, and the brand name is well established and accepted. There is no reason to change its name and while this conversation has now turned completely off this, I do not know why you dislike it so much. It is a rather catchy, easy to spell and say name, that rolls off the tongue. Frankly all the other suggested names just do not fit to me. Why change what isn't broken? -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Python is not a good name, should rename to Athon
On Dec 3, 8:22 am, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The only reason to change the name would be because of some serious bad PR that came onto Python, thus causing its branding name to be catagorized as something bad. However this is not the case, presently, and the brand name is well established and accepted. There is no reason to change its name and while this conversation has now turned completely off this, I do not know why you dislike it so much. It is a rather catchy, easy to spell and say name, that rolls off the tongue. Frankly all the other suggested names just do not fit to me. Why change what isn't broken? You are probably right, but let me just explain one more time why I think a name change is worth considering, then I'll drop it. I'm thinking about the first impression people get when they hear the name. Python is a funny name -- in both senses of the word. No? Then why did a comedy team adopt it? You and the others here don't think it's funny because you are used to it, but when someone hears it for the first time as the name of a programming language, they thinks it's just a bit funny. Many other programming languages have funny names too, so it is considered normal -- by software people, but not necessarily by the general public. When someone proposes that Python be considered for use by an organization that has little or no knowledge of it, first impressions can make a difference. When managers hear Python for the first time, I'm afraid they are not inclined to consider it a serious language. And they usually need a serious language for a serious problem. The barrier to initial consideration is therefore just a bit higher than it needs to be. And that barrier can be subconscious, so that no one even realizes it exists. I know this because I've been through it myself. When I tell people that I use Python, I often qualify it by pointing out that it is used extensively at Google. In other words, I'm banking on the reputation of Google to offset the goofiness of the Python name. Come to think of it, maybe it should be called Googlang or Googon? -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Python is not a good name, should rename to Athon
Russ P. wrote: On Dec 3, 8:22 am, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The only reason to change the name would be because of some serious bad PR that came onto Python, thus causing its branding name to be catagorized as something bad. However this is not the case, presently, and the brand name is well established and accepted. There is no reason to change its name and while this conversation has now turned completely off this, I do not know why you dislike it so much. It is a rather catchy, easy to spell and say name, that rolls off the tongue. Frankly all the other suggested names just do not fit to me. Why change what isn't broken? You are probably right, but let me just explain one more time why I think a name change is worth considering, then I'll drop it. Good! (On the drop it part. Not so good on the one more time part.) If we ignore it, maybe this thread will dry up and blow away. I'm thinking about the first impression people get when they hear the name. Python is a funny name -- in both senses of the word. No? Then why did a comedy team adopt it? You and the others here don't think it's funny because you are used to it, but when someone hears it for the first time as the name of a programming language, they thinks it's just a bit funny. Many other programming languages have funny names too, so it is considered normal -- by software people, but not necessarily by the general public. When someone proposes that Python be considered for use by an organization that has little or no knowledge of it, first impressions can make a difference. When managers hear Python for the first time, I'm afraid they are not inclined to consider it a serious language. And they usually need a serious language for a serious problem. The barrier to initial consideration is therefore just a bit higher than it needs to be. And that barrier can be subconscious, so that no one even realizes it exists. I know this because I've been through it myself. When I tell people that I use Python, I often qualify it by pointing out that it is used extensively at Google. In other words, I'm banking on the reputation of Google to offset the goofiness of the Python name. Come to think of it, maybe it should be called Googlang or Googon? -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Python is not a good name, should rename to Athon
Russ P. írta: Python is a funny name -- in both senses of the word. No? Then why did a comedy team adopt it? Python name is not funny for me. Even the Monty Python, because its hard to translate their jokes, and in my country they are not so popular. Just a few ppl knows them. Newton is a well knowed name in the world, and it is more serious than a comedy's name. For the past years a comedy's and a funny name maybe was ok for the language, but now we arrived into a serious era. more bank and high risk company starts to use it. Its really time to have a better name than anything what is comes from funny. Think to Pascal. The idea to use a genius's name is well knowed and used. If Newton is not ok (btw i think it is, he was a genius that time. and i dont care about personalities, like arrogant.. or what kind of scientist. that time phisics and math was very close, it hasnt got so tight border than today.), than look for another great scientist what is not reserved. But newton is very good: small, sounds well, great scientist or with another word: genius, already died, etc. tsabi -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Python is not a good name, should rename to Athon
Python name is not funny for me. Even the Monty Python, because its hard to translate their jokes, and in my country they are not so popular. Just a few ppl knows them. I've heard it helps to be stoned out of your mind (i.e., under the influence of illegal drugs), but I don't necessarily recommend it. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Python is not a good name, should rename to Athon
Russ P. írta: Python name is not funny for me. Even the Monty Python, because its hard to translate their jokes, and in my country they are not so popular. Just a few ppl knows them. I've heard it helps to be stoned out of your mind (i.e., under the influence of illegal drugs), but I don't necessarily recommend it. back from jokes, im _really_ interested what is core developers, mainly Guido's opinion about the name change. tsabi -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Python is not a good name, should rename to Athon
Tóth Csaba wrote: back from jokes, im _really_ interested what is core developers, mainly Guido's opinion about the name change. I'm pretty sure it's, Not a chance. -- Robert Kern I have come to believe that the whole world is an enigma, a harmless enigma that is made terrible by our own mad attempt to interpret it as though it had an underlying truth. -- Umberto Eco -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Python is not a good name, should rename to Athon
On Dec 3, 2007, at 2:04 PM, Tóth Csaba wrote: Russ P. írta: Python name is not funny for me. Even the Monty Python, because its hard to translate their jokes, and in my country they are not so popular. Just a few ppl knows them. I've heard it helps to be stoned out of your mind (i.e., under the influence of illegal drugs), but I don't necessarily recommend it. back from jokes, im _really_ interested what is core developers, mainly Guido's opinion about the name change. I can;t speak for Guido, but believe me when I say that a name change will not happen Python is a successful and entrenched name brand. It makes not sense in the world to change it. As mentioned before, searching for Python in google returns 7 of the top 10 links to be Python programming links. This is just a dead horse, stop beating it! Cheers TG -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Python is not a good name, should rename to Athon
On Mon, 03 Dec 2007 16:11:19 +, Neil Cerutti wrote: To paraphrase Bertrand Russell, Newton was too successful. Over-veneration of Newton was eventually an impediment to progress--this was not, of course, his fault. Given that the veneration of Newton was very much a product of Newton's efforts at self-promotion, there's a good case to make that it was his fault. He was a man of contradictions (as we all are, but he more so than normal): on the one hand he was secretive and uncommunicative, on the other he insisted on being given priority whenever possible, even in doubtful cases, and absolutely refused to share the stage with anyone. -- Steven -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Python is not a good name, should rename to Athon
[EMAIL PROTECTED] a écrit : Python is a good programming language, but Python is not a good name. First, python also means snake, Monty Python. If we search python in google, emule, many results are not programming resource. If we search PHP, all results are programming resource. Second, python also means snake, snake is not a good thing in western culture. Many people dislike any things relevant to snake. We must have high regard for the custom. Now, python3000 is coming. It's the best time to rename! Athon is a good candidate, you could provide better names. In Athon, the first letter A could pronounce as [ e ] . I'm amazed that anyone here answered this obvious troll... -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Python is not a good name, should rename to Athon
On Sun, 02 Dec 2007 13:29:58 -0800, Russ P. wrote: He might have been a great intellectual but he was no scientist. It's only by ignoring the vast bulk of his work -- work which Newton himself considered *far* more important and interesting than his work on physics and mathematics -- that we can even *pretend* he was a scientist. The fact that someone studies theology does not mean that he cannot also be considered a scientist. He didn't just study theology, he considered his work on theology and alchemy vastly more important than his work in natural philosophy. To Newton, perhaps the most important thing a natural philosopher could do was rediscover the wisdom of the ancients -- an attitude diametrically opposed to the rationalist, scientific viewpoint of the Enlightenment. History judges Newton's work completely the opposite he did: his work on mechanics had lasting impact on physics, while his work on eschatology (the end of the world) and the Trinity had little influence on his contemporaries and even less on later generations. And if the person who discovered the inverse-square law of universal gravitation is not a scientist, I don't know who is. Science is defined by the process followed, not the result. The lone genius toiling away in secrecy is not science. It is anathema to science, *even if the genius turns out to be right*. Newton's secrecy *held back* science and mathematics for decades. The process that we call science hadn't been invented while Newton was alive. Newton played an important part of the invention of that process, but that doesn't make him a scientist. Describing him as a scientist is an anachronism: to use an ugly word, it is presentism. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Presentism_(literary_and_historical_analysis) Newton was to the science of physics what the alchemists were to the science of chemistry -- an analogy that is especially apt, as Newton was himself an alchemist. Newton was there at the paradigm shift from the old magical ways to the new rationalist ways, and to some extent he straddled the interface, but he was very much a part of the old ways. We do him a disservice to pretend he was something he wasn't. John Maynard Keynes, who bought -- and read -- the largest collection of Newton's writings in the world, described him thusly: Newton was not the first of the age of reason. He was the last of the magicians, the last of the Babylonians and Sumerians, the last great mind which looked out on the visible and intellectual world with the same eyes as those who began to build our intellectual inheritance rather less than 10,000 years ago. Newton was one of the creators of the Enlightenment. But he was a pre- Enlightenment man: he belonged to the world left behind. http://www.slate.com/id/2108438/ We can't understand Newton if we interpret him in post-Enlightenment terms: all that gives us is the 19th Century triumphalist caricature of Newton-as-rationalist-scientist. That's not the man, that's just the image -- and an image that Newton himself would have hated. Unfortunately, there is a tradition in physics of treating that caricature as real. Scientists themselves are especially prone to it: even the hard sciences need their myths. -- Steven. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Python is not a good name, should rename to Athon
I'm amazed that anyone here answered this obvious troll... I doubt the original post was a troll, but the statement above clearly is. You are entitled to your opinion about the idea of changing the name of the language, but calling it a troll is just arrogance on display. Python3000 is expected to break compatibility with the current Python anyway, and starting with a new name is not a radical idea. Yes, it would cause some minor problems, but it is not without merit. People who are familiar with Python are smart enough to remember a new name (I hope), and people who are not will take it more seriously when they hear its name for the first time. Computer geeks often fail to appreciate how they are viewed by the outside world. They come up with a great language and give it a joke for a name, not realizing that the joke is ultimately on them. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Python is not a good name, should rename to Athon
Russ P. a écrit : I'm amazed that anyone here answered this obvious troll... I doubt the original post was a troll, but the statement above clearly is. Then your trollometer is broken. Got and get yourself a working one. You are entitled to your opinion about the idea of changing the name of the language, but calling it a troll is just arrogance on display. Yes, I'm pretty arrogant. Now what to say about people wanting to trash more than 10 years of Python advocacy when there starting to pay off just because they think that Python is not a serious name ? Python3000 is expected to break compatibility with the current Python anyway, and starting with a new name is not a radical idea. Yes, it would cause some minor problems, but it is not without merit. It would cause major problems and is totally devoid of any merit. For the record, C, C++, and C# are all *jokes* - geek jokes FWIW. People who are familiar with Python are smart enough to remember a new name (I hope), and people who are not will take it more seriously when they hear its name for the first time. Yadda yadda. Computer geeks often fail to appreciate how they are viewed by the outside world. They come up with a great language and give it a joke for a name, not realizing that the joke is ultimately on them. Bullshit. Nowadays, anyone serious (since you seem to worry quite a lot about being serious) about IT knows what Python is and who uses it. Heck, even MSVS now has support for Python and there's an official CLR port of it. Can't get much more serious (lol), isn't it ? Now me stop feeding the troll ---[] -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Python is not a good name, should rename to Athon
On Dec 3, 1:04 pm, Steven D'Aprano [EMAIL PROTECTED] cybersource.com.au wrote: On Mon, 03 Dec 2007 16:11:19 +, Neil Cerutti wrote: To paraphrase Bertrand Russell, Newton was too successful. Over-veneration of Newton was eventually an impediment to progress--this was not, of course, his fault. Given that the veneration of Newton was very much a product of Newton's efforts at self-promotion, there's a good case to make that it was his fault. He was a man of contradictions (as we all are, but he more so than normal): on the one hand he was secretive and uncommunicative, on the other he insisted on being given priority whenever possible, even in doubtful cases, and absolutely refused to share the stage with anyone. My understanding is that Newton was a quiet, reflective guy who computed mathematical power series by hand to kill time. He was the college guy studying by himself in the library on Saturday night while everyone else was out partying. If he was perceived as arrogant, he was probably just sure he was right. And more often than not, he was. Newton may or may not be overrated, but I don't know who do you think you're fooling by claiming that he was not a scientist. That's just silly. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Python is not a good name, should rename to Athon
On Dec 3, 2007 4:34 PM, Russ P. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I'm amazed that anyone here answered this obvious troll... I doubt the original post was a troll, but the statement above clearly is. You are entitled to your opinion about the idea of changing the name of the language, but calling it a troll is just arrogance on display. If the OP had made reasonable arguments (many others have covered why they're not particularly reasonable) or a reasonable suggestion for a new name, maybe. Such as it is, I'm not convinced it wasn't a troll... Computer geeks often fail to appreciate how they are viewed by the outside world. They come up with a great language and give it a joke for a name, not realizing that the joke is ultimately on them. ...and thus, maybe the joke is on you? Just to play devil's advocate... -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Python is not a good name, should rename to Athon
On Dec 3, 1:47 pm, Bruno Desthuilliers [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Bullshit. Nowadays, anyone serious (since you seem to worry quite a lot about being serious) about IT knows what Python is and who uses it. Heck, even MSVS now has support for Python and there's an official CLR port of it. Can't get much more serious (lol), isn't it ? Not so. I know professional programmers and computer scientists with PhDs who have barely heard of Python and who assumed it was something roughly like Basic -- until I explained that it is a serious language that can be used for serious work. Then there are the managers ... who tend to prefer serious names. Sometimes they can see past a joke of a name ... and sometimes they can't. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Python is not a good name, should rename to Athon
On 2007-12-03, Bruno Desthuilliers [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: [EMAIL PROTECTED] a écrit : Second, python also means snake, snake is not a good thing in western culture. Many people dislike any things relevant to snake. We must have high regard for the custom. Now, python3000 is coming. It's the best time to rename! Athon is a good candidate, you could provide better names. In Athon, the first letter A could pronounce as [ e ] . I'm amazed that anyone here answered this obvious troll... I didn't think of it as a troll, but as a humor piece. So I tried to think of a funny response, but failed. Others jumped in to fill the gap, and well... things progressed from there. But your opinion is noted. ;) -- Neil Cerutti -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Python is not a good name, should rename to Athon
On Dec 3, 2:12 pm, Chris Mellon [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Dec 3, 2007 4:02 PM, Russ P. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Dec 3, 1:47 pm, Bruno Desthuilliers [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Bullshit. Nowadays, anyone serious (since you seem to worry quite a lot about being serious) about IT knows what Python is and who uses it. Heck, even MSVS now has support for Python and there's an official CLR port of it. Can't get much more serious (lol), isn't it ? Not so. I know professional programmers and computer scientists with PhDs who have barely heard of Python and who assumed it was something roughly like Basic -- until I explained that it is a serious language that can be used for serious work. Then there are the managers ... who tend to prefer serious names. Sometimes they can see past a joke of a name ... and sometimes they can't. The vast majority of languages in use today have joke names. Languages with serious names are pretty much limited to the humorless environments of military and government contracting. There's not a single competent manager out there who'll dismiss Python just because it's called Python. The fact that incompetent managers exists does not change that fact, They won't be able to create good software no matter what language they choose, so there's no particular reason to cater to them. Also, you yourself are starting to emit spikes on the trollmeter, as does anyone who blathers about how serious we need to be in order to ingrate ourselves with hypothetical gray faced bureaucrats. Look what's going on here, folks. The OP *dared *to suggest that perhaps the name of Python could be changed in the next major release. I said it's a long shot, but I think its worth considering. And what do I get in return. Some reasonable replies, but mostly people who assert that the idea is absoutely absurd and completely without merit. You'd think the OP had suggested that God's name be changed to dog. Open your minds and let in some fresh air, folks. The name of a snake is not sacred ... for crying out loud! Try to think outside the box for a few seconds if you can. Yes, it frightening at first, but you can overcome the fear. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Python is not a good name, should rename to Athon
On 2007-12-03, Michael Terry [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: !!! Folks admire Newton for some of his breathtaking insights, not because of his methods. The scientific method is a tool. The results are far more important than the tool. Right. The biggest weakness in the scientific method is that it doesn't explain how to come up with theories. You need luck, genius, or both. The same applies to language naming. There's no theory of good language names (except for a short list of don'ts); you have to attempt it and see what happens. -- Neil Cerutti -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Python is not a good name, should rename to Athon
On Dec 3, 1:58 pm, Dan Upton [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: ...and thus, maybe the joke is on you? Just to play devil's advocate... Yes, the joke *is* on me -- every time I have to explain to someone why I am using this funny-sounding language. That's the point. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Python is not a good name, should rename to Athon
On Dec 3, 2007 4:02 PM, Russ P. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Dec 3, 1:47 pm, Bruno Desthuilliers [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Bullshit. Nowadays, anyone serious (since you seem to worry quite a lot about being serious) about IT knows what Python is and who uses it. Heck, even MSVS now has support for Python and there's an official CLR port of it. Can't get much more serious (lol), isn't it ? Not so. I know professional programmers and computer scientists with PhDs who have barely heard of Python and who assumed it was something roughly like Basic -- until I explained that it is a serious language that can be used for serious work. Then there are the managers ... who tend to prefer serious names. Sometimes they can see past a joke of a name ... and sometimes they can't. The vast majority of languages in use today have joke names. Languages with serious names are pretty much limited to the humorless environments of military and government contracting. There's not a single competent manager out there who'll dismiss Python just because it's called Python. The fact that incompetent managers exists does not change that fact, They won't be able to create good software no matter what language they choose, so there's no particular reason to cater to them. Also, you yourself are starting to emit spikes on the trollmeter, as does anyone who blathers about how serious we need to be in order to ingrate ourselves with hypothetical gray faced bureaucrats. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Python is not a good name, should rename to Athon
!!! Folks admire Newton for some of his breathtaking insights, not because of his methods. The scientific method is a tool. The results are far more important than the tool. Also, it's not a game. His wacky ideas don't cancel out his brilliant ones. If you want to say that he technically wasn't a scientist, great. But to suggest that Newton is a myth of the hard sciences kind of misses the point of his fame. Michael On Dec 3, 2007 1:31 PM, Steven D'Aprano [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Sun, 02 Dec 2007 13:29:58 -0800, Russ P. wrote: He might have been a great intellectual but he was no scientist. It's only by ignoring the vast bulk of his work -- work which Newton himself considered *far* more important and interesting than his work on physics and mathematics -- that we can even *pretend* he was a scientist. The fact that someone studies theology does not mean that he cannot also be considered a scientist. He didn't just study theology, he considered his work on theology and alchemy vastly more important than his work in natural philosophy. To Newton, perhaps the most important thing a natural philosopher could do was rediscover the wisdom of the ancients -- an attitude diametrically opposed to the rationalist, scientific viewpoint of the Enlightenment. History judges Newton's work completely the opposite he did: his work on mechanics had lasting impact on physics, while his work on eschatology (the end of the world) and the Trinity had little influence on his contemporaries and even less on later generations. And if the person who discovered the inverse-square law of universal gravitation is not a scientist, I don't know who is. Science is defined by the process followed, not the result. The lone genius toiling away in secrecy is not science. It is anathema to science, *even if the genius turns out to be right*. Newton's secrecy *held back* science and mathematics for decades. The process that we call science hadn't been invented while Newton was alive. Newton played an important part of the invention of that process, but that doesn't make him a scientist. Describing him as a scientist is an anachronism: to use an ugly word, it is presentism. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Presentism_(literary_and_historical_analysis) Newton was to the science of physics what the alchemists were to the science of chemistry -- an analogy that is especially apt, as Newton was himself an alchemist. Newton was there at the paradigm shift from the old magical ways to the new rationalist ways, and to some extent he straddled the interface, but he was very much a part of the old ways. We do him a disservice to pretend he was something he wasn't. John Maynard Keynes, who bought -- and read -- the largest collection of Newton's writings in the world, described him thusly: Newton was not the first of the age of reason. He was the last of the magicians, the last of the Babylonians and Sumerians, the last great mind which looked out on the visible and intellectual world with the same eyes as those who began to build our intellectual inheritance rather less than 10,000 years ago. Newton was one of the creators of the Enlightenment. But he was a pre- Enlightenment man: he belonged to the world left behind. http://www.slate.com/id/2108438/ We can't understand Newton if we interpret him in post-Enlightenment terms: all that gives us is the 19th Century triumphalist caricature of Newton-as-rationalist-scientist. That's not the man, that's just the image -- and an image that Newton himself would have hated. Unfortunately, there is a tradition in physics of treating that caricature as real. Scientists themselves are especially prone to it: even the hard sciences need their myths. -- Steven. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Python is not a good name, should rename to Athon
Tóth Csaba [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message news:[EMAIL PROTECTED] | | Python name is not funny for me. Even the Monty Python, because its hard | to translate their jokes, and in my country they are not so popular. | Just a few ppl knows them. || back from jokes, im _really_ interested what is core developers, mainly | Guido's opinion about the name change. Until the OP posted his lastest 'why', I assumed this proposal was an April Fools' post that he just could not wait to post. In fact, given that the effective cost would be in the $millions, I an still not sure he is sanely serious. Fun discussion of 'what if' is a different matter. tjr -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Python is not a good name, should rename to Athon
Russ P. schrieb: On Dec 3, 1:58 pm, Dan Upton [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: ...and thus, maybe the joke is on you? Just to play devil's advocate... Yes, the joke *is* on me -- every time I have to explain to someone why I am using this funny-sounding language. That's the point. Yeah, but today you drank Java, your favourite Coffe blend, while telling your best buddy you plan to get Groovy tonight with Ada, buying her a Ruby collier explaining her some Basic concepts of computer science - because that always makes her express her astonishment about your mad coding skillz with that cute little Lisp she has. Just don't forget to not use a Clipper in front of her again. She only forgave you for that because you tooke her to the Eiffel Tower, meeting Pascal there. He just got his degree from Haskell university - which is a major break-through, because all of his professors working on a Scheme to expel him from there. But he showed it to these little Brainfucks. Sorry, but if people are joking on you - there must be other reasons for that than a name of a programming language. And I'm beginning to think I know it Diez -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Python is not a good name, should rename to Athon
Michael Terry wrote: Folks admire Newton for some of his breathtaking insights, not because of his methods. The scientific method is a tool. As was Newton, according to many of his contemporaries. The results are far more important than the tool. Yep. Jim -- I loathe people who say, 'I always read the ending of the book first.' That really irritates me. It's like someone coming to dinner, just opening the fridge and eating pudding, while you're standing there still working on the starter. It's not on. -- JK Rowling -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Python is not a good name, should rename to Athon
On Dec 3, 3:09 pm, Chris Mellon [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: People who claim that everyone would agree with them if they'd only open their minds or think out of the box are worth more than a few Never said anything like it. It's a red herring that you either imagined or made up. points on the trollmeter. Consequentially, this will be (my) last post on the subject, although apparently I have already been trolled. Good riddance. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Python is not a good name, should rename to Athon
On Dec 3, 2007 4:26 PM, Russ P. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Dec 3, 2:12 pm, Chris Mellon [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Dec 3, 2007 4:02 PM, Russ P. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Dec 3, 1:47 pm, Bruno Desthuilliers [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Bullshit. Nowadays, anyone serious (since you seem to worry quite a lot about being serious) about IT knows what Python is and who uses it. Heck, even MSVS now has support for Python and there's an official CLR port of it. Can't get much more serious (lol), isn't it ? Not so. I know professional programmers and computer scientists with PhDs who have barely heard of Python and who assumed it was something roughly like Basic -- until I explained that it is a serious language that can be used for serious work. Then there are the managers ... who tend to prefer serious names. Sometimes they can see past a joke of a name ... and sometimes they can't. The vast majority of languages in use today have joke names. Languages with serious names are pretty much limited to the humorless environments of military and government contracting. There's not a single competent manager out there who'll dismiss Python just because it's called Python. The fact that incompetent managers exists does not change that fact, They won't be able to create good software no matter what language they choose, so there's no particular reason to cater to them. Also, you yourself are starting to emit spikes on the trollmeter, as does anyone who blathers about how serious we need to be in order to ingrate ourselves with hypothetical gray faced bureaucrats. Look what's going on here, folks. The OP *dared *to suggest that perhaps the name of Python could be changed in the next major release. I said it's a long shot, but I think its worth considering. And what do I get in return. Some reasonable replies, but mostly people who assert that the idea is absoutely absurd and completely without merit. You'd think the OP had suggested that God's name be changed to dog. Open your minds and let in some fresh air, folks. The name of a snake is not sacred ... for crying out loud! Try to think outside the box for a few seconds if you can. Yes, it frightening at first, but you can overcome the fear. I do think the idea is absolutely absurd and without merit. That doesn't mean that I think the current name is some sort of sacred cow (if I may mix metaphors). People who claim that everyone would agree with them if they'd only open their minds or think out of the box are worth more than a few points on the trollmeter. Consequentially, this will be (my) last post on the subject, although apparently I have already been trolled. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Python is not a good name, should rename to Athon
On Dec 3, 2:40 pm, Terry Reedy [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Until the OP posted his lastest 'why', I assumed this proposal was an April Fools' post that he just could not wait to post. In fact, given that the effective cost would be in the $millions, I an still not sure he is sanely serious. I doubt you really thought that. I think you just want to make the OP feel like a fool. Do you feel better now? Where are the sensitivity police when they are needed? I find it interesting that someone can claim that Newton was not a scientist and be taken seriously on this site, but someone who suggests changing the name of a programming language is ridiculed. That's ridiculous. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Python is not a good name, should rename to Athon
On Dec 3, 5:39 pm, Russ P. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Dec 3, 2:40 pm, Terry Reedy [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Until the OP posted his lastest 'why', I assumed this proposal was an April Fools' post that he just could not wait to post. In fact, given that the effective cost would be in the $millions, I an still not sure he is sanely serious. I doubt you really thought that. I think you just want to make the OP feel like a fool. Do you feel better now? Where are the sensitivity police when they are needed? I find it interesting that someone can claim that Newton was not a scientist and be taken seriously on this site, but someone who suggests changing the name of a programming language is ridiculed. That's ridiculous. Whether Newton was a scientist is a matter of opinion (mainly regarding one's philosophy of science, and more specifically, the demarcation problem); whether to change the name of python is a matter of pragmatics. It's much easier to show that something is pragmatically wrong (e.g., costs extra money with no overall gain), than to show that someone's opinion about a complex matter is wrong. On my view of science, Newton was a scientist (as is anyone using the tools of discursive reasoning and empirical observation; even if they don't strictly follow the scientific method). That's all great. But my opinions have nothing to do with the fact that it makes no pragmatic sense to change the name of python. It is a foolish (or unwise if you want a more sensitive euphemism) suggestion. The suggestion, in syllogism (w/ conjunctions of the first premise broken into separate premises 1-N): 1 Python is not taken seriously because of its joke name 2 great people of the past deserve honor 3 it would get better publicity with a different name N ... N' we want to be taken seriously, c Ergo, the name python should be changed to name X It is easy to prove that premises 1-N are either true or false (or pragmatically irrelevant, which can be considered as false to preserve bivalence). So far, no compelling reasons have been given to think them true, while several counter-examples and contradicting facts have been given for thinking them false. Thus, a name change is pragmatically stupid. QED. Regards, Jordan -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Python is not a good name, should rename to Athon
Dotan Cohen dotanail.com wrote: Newton was the bridge between science and superstition. Without him, we would not have science. For that he is notable. He is both magician and scientist. It was Newton's belief in the occult that led to his discovery of gravity: the fact that distant objects could influence one another. Even today, science has a hard time accepting that. And gravity _still_ has not been incorporated into a theory of everything / grand unified theory. You live in exciting times - google for surfer dude and E8 for a paper that purports to be a theory of everything. I stumbled across it last week and downloaded a pdf but true to form I have lost the link. It was written by A. Garrett Lisi. Even if his theory pans out, I would oppose changing the language name to Garrett, or Lisi, on the grounds that John Cleese was funnier. - Hendrik -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Python is not a good name, should rename to Athon
On Sat, 1 Dec 2007 16:51:35 +0200, Dotan Cohen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 30/11/2007, Gerardo Herzig [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: You will be eaten by the Snake-Ra god tonight! Wasn't Ra the Sun god? He meant quetzatcoatl. We could rename the language. Now try qith Quetzatcoatl and its derivatives: - QuetzatcoatlGTK - QuetzatcoatlTest - Quetzatcoatl_argfs_ughs_IlostMybreath And some equally funny and easy to pronounce others... Regards, Zara -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Python is not a good name, should rename to Athon
On Dec 1, 11:34 pm, Hendrik van Rooyen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Russ P. Ru...gmail.com wrote: I am surprised to see that Newton is not taken. I urge Guido to take it while it is still available. Sir Isaac certainly deserves the honor. Does he? Are you aware of how he treated Hooke? He was a great technician, but as a person, you would not have had him marry your sister. - 1 on this silly Newton idea. - Hendrik I neither know nor care much about Newton's personality and social graces, but I can assure you that he was more than a technician (no offense to technicians). If you just read the Wikipedia preamble about him you will realize that he is arguably the greatest scientist who ever lived. Sorry for the inefficient use of bandwidth, but I just couldn't refrain from copying it here: Sir Isaac Newton FRS (pronounced /ˈnjuːtən/) (4 January 1643 – 31 March 1727) [ OS: 25 December 1642 – 20 March 1727][1] was an English physicist, mathematician, astronomer, natural philosopher, and alchemist. His treatise Philosophiae Naturalis Principia Mathematica, published in 1687, described universal gravitation and the three laws of motion, laying the groundwork for classical mechanics, which dominated the scientific view of the physical universe for the next three centuries and is the basis for modern engineering. He showed that the motions of objects on Earth and of celestial bodies are governed by the same set of natural laws by demonstrating the consistency between Kepler's laws of planetary motion and his theory of gravitation, thus removing the last doubts about heliocentrism and advancing the scientific revolution. In mechanics, Newton enunciated the principles of conservation of momentum and angular momentum. In optics, he invented the reflecting telescope and developed a theory of colour based on the observation that a prism decomposes white light into a visible spectrum. He also formulated an empirical law of cooling and studied the speed of sound. In mathematics, Newton shares the credit with Gottfried Leibniz for the development of the calculus. He also demonstrated the generalized binomial theorem, developed the so-called Newton's method for approximating the zeroes of a function, and contributed to the study of power series. In a 2005 poll of the Royal Society of who had the greatest effect on the history of science, Newton was deemed more influential than Albert Einstein.[2] -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Python is not a good name, should rename to Athon
On 01/12/2007, Russ P. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: So what dou you think about D language? :) Or F or F#? I think that one-letter names are even worse for languages than they are for variables. And they are impossible to google. Update: well, they were when _I_ needed to... I just tried, and both C and C++ gave relevant results. A few years ago, C would not return anything programming-related, and C++ returned exactly the same results as C. Google has improved (I say that weekly). Dotan Cohen http://what-is-what.com http://gibberish.co.il א-ב-ג-ד-ה-ו-ז-ח-ט-י-ך-כ-ל-ם-מ-ן-נ-ס-ע-ף-פ-ץ-צ-ק-ר-ש-ת A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text. Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing? -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Python is not a good name, should rename to Athon
On 02/12/2007, Hendrik van Rooyen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Russ P. Ru...gmail.com wrote: I am surprised to see that Newton is not taken. I urge Guido to take it while it is still available. Sir Isaac certainly deserves the honor. Does he? Are you aware of how he treated Hooke? He was a great technician, but as a person, you would not have had him marry your sister. I'm still convinced that Leibniz _threw_ the apple at Newton's head. Dotan Cohen http://what-is-what.com http://gibberish.co.il א-ב-ג-ד-ה-ו-ז-ח-ט-י-ך-כ-ל-ם-מ-ן-נ-ס-ע-ף-פ-ץ-צ-ק-ר-ש-ת A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text. Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing? -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Python is not a good name, should rename to Athon
On 02/12/2007, Russ P. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I neither know nor care much about Newton's personality and social graces, but I can assure you that he was more than a technician (no offense to technicians). If you just read the Wikipedia preamble about him you will realize that he is arguably the greatest scientist who ever lived. Sorry for the inefficient use of bandwidth, but I just couldn't refrain from copying it here: You might want to read a bit about Archemedes, Gauss, Leonardo, Euler, and Tesla. Along with Newton, these were some of the most amazing and talented people that have been recognized. And even though Leonardo may seem out of place on that particular list, I assure you that he is not. Dotan Cohen http://what-is-what.com http://gibberish.co.il א-ב-ג-ד-ה-ו-ז-ח-ט-י-ך-כ-ל-ם-מ-ן-נ-ס-ע-ף-פ-ץ-צ-ק-ר-ש-ת A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text. Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing? -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Python is not a good name, should rename to Athon
Russ P. wrote: Python is an acceptable name, but Newton1 (or Newton3) would be a great name. Nah, I like Monty and Snakes. Newton already has his name as unit for kg*m/s^2. :) Regards, Björn -- BOFH excuse #74: You're out of memory -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Python is not a good name, should rename to Athon
On Sat, 01 Dec 2007 23:55:32 -0800, Russ P. wrote: I neither know nor care much about Newton's personality and social graces, but I can assure you that he was more than a technician (no offense to technicians). If you just read the Wikipedia preamble about him you will realize that he is arguably the greatest scientist who ever lived. Arguably is right. Please, stop with the fanboy squeeing over Newton. Enough is enough. Newton has already received far more than his share of honours. He might have been a great intellectual but he was no scientist. It's only by ignoring the vast bulk of his work -- work which Newton himself considered *far* more important and interesting than his work on physics and mathematics -- that we can even *pretend* he was a scientist. Newton was arrogant, deceitful, secretive, and hostile to other peoples ideas. Arrogance sometimes goes hand in hand with intellectual brilliance, and there's no doubt that Newton was brilliant, but the last three are especially toxic for good science. His feuds against two of his intellectual equals, Leibniz and Hooke, held mathematics and the sciences back significantly. They weren't the only two: he feuded with Astronomer Royal John Flamsteed, John Locke, and apparently more tradesmen than anyone has counted. He held grudges, and did his best to ruin those who crossed him. Historians of science draw a fairly sharp line in the history of what used to be called natural philosophy (what we now call science). That line is clearly drawn *after* Newton: as John Maynard Smith has said, Newton was the last and greatest of the magicians, not the first of the scientists. He was first and foremost a theologian and politician, an alchemist, a religious heretic obsessed with End Times, and (when he wasn't being secretive and isolating himself from others) a shameless self-promoter unwilling to share the spotlight. The myth of Newton the scientist is pernicious. Even those who recognise his long periods of unproductive work, his wasted years writing about the end of the world, his feuds, his secrecy and his unprofessional grudges against other natural philosophers, still describe him as a great scientist -- despite the fact that Newton's way of working is anathema to science. The myth of science being about the lone genius dies hard, especially in popular accounts of science. Science is a collaborative venture, like Open Source, and it relies on openness and cooperation, two traits almost entirely missing in Newton. There is no doubt that Newton was a great intellect. His influence on mechanics (including astronomy) was grand and productive; that on optics was mixed, but his alchemical writings have had no influence on modern chemistry. Newton's calculus has been virtually put aside in favour of Leibniz's terminology and notation. The great bulk of his work, his theological writings, had little influence at the time and no lasting influence at all. Newton was lucky to live at a time of great intellectual activity. Had he lived thirty years earlier, his secrecy would almost certainly have meant that his discoveries, such as they were, would have died with him. Had he lived thirty years later, others like Leibniz, Hooke, the Bernoullis, or others, would have made his discoveries ahead of him -- perhaps a few years or a decade later, but they would have done so, as Leibniz independently came up with calculus. There's no doubt that Newton was a genius and an important figure in the history of science, but to describe him as a scientist is to distort both the way Newton worked and the way science works. By all means give him credit for what he did and what he was, but don't pretend he was something that he was not. -- Steven -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Python is not a good name, should rename to Athon
On Dec 1, 9:51 am, Dotan Cohen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 30/11/2007, Gerardo Herzig [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: You will be eaten by the Snake-Ra god tonight! Wasn't Ra the Sun god? Dotan Cohen http://what-is-what.comhttp://gibberish.co.il א-ב-ג-ד-ה-ו-ז-ח-ט-י-ך-כ-ל-ם-מ-ן-נ-ס-ע-ף-פ-ץ-צ-ק-ר-ש-ת A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text. Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing? use my name : clement programming languge .. nice la. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Python is not a good name, should rename to Athon
On 02/12/2007, Steven D'Aprano [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Sat, 01 Dec 2007 23:55:32 -0800, Russ P. wrote: I neither know nor care much about Newton's personality and social graces, but I can assure you that he was more than a technician (no offense to technicians). If you just read the Wikipedia preamble about him you will realize that he is arguably the greatest scientist who ever lived. Arguably is right. Please, stop with the fanboy squeeing over Newton. Enough is enough. Newton has already received far more than his share of honours. He might have been a great intellectual but he was no scientist. It's only by ignoring the vast bulk of his work -- work which Newton himself considered *far* more important and interesting than his work on physics and mathematics -- that we can even *pretend* he was a scientist. The work of Newton that is ignored is no different than the work of others that has been ignored (with the notable exception of Gauss). In studying Leonardo's contributions to science, for instance, one must ignore his contributions to music, art, and other fields. Shall I go on about Pythagoras? Newton was arrogant, deceitful, secretive, and hostile to other peoples ideas. Arrogance sometimes goes hand in hand with intellectual brilliance, and there's no doubt that Newton was brilliant, but the last three are especially toxic for good science. His feuds against two of his intellectual equals, Leibniz and Hooke, held mathematics and the sciences back significantly. They weren't the only two: he feuded with Astronomer Royal John Flamsteed, John Locke, and apparently more tradesmen than anyone has counted. He held grudges, and did his best to ruin those who crossed him. Historians of science draw a fairly sharp line in the history of what used to be called natural philosophy (what we now call science). That line is clearly drawn *after* Newton: as John Maynard Smith has said, Newton was the last and greatest of the magicians, not the first of the scientists. He was first and foremost a theologian and politician, an alchemist, a religious heretic obsessed with End Times, and (when he wasn't being secretive and isolating himself from others) a shameless self-promoter unwilling to share the spotlight. Newton was the bridge between science and superstition. Without him, we would not have science. For that he is notable. He is both magician and scientist. It was Newton's belief in the occult that led to his discovery of gravity: the fact that distant objects could influence one another. Even today, science has a hard time accepting that. And gravity _still_ has not been incorporated into a theory of everything / grand unified theory. The myth of Newton the scientist is pernicious. Even those who recognise his long periods of unproductive work, his wasted years writing about the end of the world, his feuds, his secrecy and his unprofessional grudges against other natural philosophers, still describe him as a great scientist -- despite the fact that Newton's way of working is anathema to science. The myth of science being about the lone genius dies hard, especially in popular accounts of science. Science is a collaborative venture, like Open Source, and it relies on openness and cooperation, two traits almost entirely missing in Newton. There is no doubt that Newton was a great intellect. His influence on mechanics (including astronomy) was grand and productive; that on optics was mixed, but his alchemical writings have had no influence on modern chemistry. Newton's calculus has been virtually put aside in favour of Leibniz's terminology and notation. The great bulk of his work, his theological writings, had little influence at the time and no lasting influence at all. Newton's calculus has most certainly _not_ been put aside in favour of Leibniz's calculus! Leibniz's calculus methods are all but forgotten. All that remains used today is his notation. We are essentially using Leibniz's notation with Newton's methods. Newton was lucky to live at a time of great intellectual activity. Had he lived thirty years earlier, his secrecy would almost certainly have meant that his discoveries, such as they were, would have died with him. Had he lived thirty years later, others like Leibniz, Hooke, the Bernoullis, or others, would have made his discoveries ahead of him -- perhaps a few years or a decade later, but they would have done so, as Leibniz independently came up with calculus. If we are already imagining that Newton had lived 30 years earlier, imagine what he could have done for Kepler. Have you ever tried proving the 3 Kepler laws _without_ calculus? I've seen it done. And Kepler wasn't proving his laws, he was devising them from measurements of the sky. From scratch. There's no doubt that Newton was a genius and an important figure in the history of science, but to describe him as a scientist is to distort both the way Newton
Re: Python is not a good name, should rename to Athon
He might have been a great intellectual but he was no scientist. It's only by ignoring the vast bulk of his work -- work which Newton himself considered *far* more important and interesting than his work on physics and mathematics -- that we can even *pretend* he was a scientist. The fact that someone studies theology does not mean that he cannot also be considered a scientist. And if the person who discovered the inverse-square law of universal gravitation is not a scientist, I don't know who is. At the time, no one else had even made the connection between things falling on earth and the motion of the stars and planets. Sure, it seems obvious to you and me, but it was far from obvious then. In any case, Newton is just one example of a great mathematician/ scientist whose name could be used for a programming language. Euler was an amazing mathematician (and also a nice guy with a large family). His name would be great too, except that it's apparently already taken. I don't know how widely used the Euler language is, but if it is just some obscure language, then the name could perhaps still be used. The other problem with Euler is that its pronunciation is not obvious from the spelling. Here's another interesting possibility: Pythagoras. It starts off with the same first four letters as Python. Everyone's heard of the theorem named after him (although he apparently did not discover it himself). The main drawback here is that the name is a bit long at ten characters. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Python is not a good name, should rename to Athon
Russ P. wrote: I am surprised to see that Newton is not taken. Not for a language, but there is a physics simulation library called Newton -- which is a more appropriate use of the name, I think. To me, he's more associated with physics than mathematics. If you want a really appropriate name for a programming language, I'd suggest Babbage. (not for Python, though!) -- Greg -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Python is not a good name, should rename to Athon
At one stage, Monty Python's Flying Circus was going to be called Owl Stretching Time. If that had eventuated, then presumably we would all be disussing the Owl programming language on comp.lang.owl -- Real email address? Rule 1. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Python is not a good name, should rename to Athon
Russ P. wrote: I agree that Python is not a good name for a programming language, Why not? BTW, is Windows a great name for an operating system? If I had invented Python, I would have called it Newton or Euler, arguably the greatest scientist and mathematician ever, respectively. Then again, if pigs could fly ... Really unique names; the OP wouldn't be happy about it when using google ;) Speaking of stupid names, what does C++ mean? It's C incremented. I think it's the grade you get when you just barely missed a B--. So what dou you think about D language? :) Or F or F#? Regards, Björn -- BOFH excuse #302: microelectronic Riemannian curved-space fault in write-only file system -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Python is not a good name, should rename to Athon
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: New name Pytn may be better, do you think so ? No. How would you pronounce it? Pai-tn? Why don't you create a fork where the only difference is the name? Regards, Björn -- BOFH excuse #194: We only support a 1200 bps connection. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Python is not a good name, should rename to Athon
On Dec 1, 4:11 am, Bjoern Schliessmann usenet- [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: New name Pytn may be better, do you think so ? No. How would you pronounce it? Pai-tn? Why don't you create a fork where the only difference is the name? Regards, Björn -- BOFH excuse #194: We only support a 1200 bps connection. My vote is for Pyrotron [1] 10,000, heh. ;) [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Disintegrator_ray Regards, Jordan -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Python is not a good name, should rename to Athon
In article [EMAIL PROTECTED], greg [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Not necessarily. A python is a sleek and powerful creature, which are good associations for a programming language. The word also hints at a bit of danger and excitement. On the whole, I think it's a good name. I remember reading an interview with a young woman who danced with a python across her shoulders and down her arms. The interviewer asked if she was afraid when she danced. She replied that she was afraid that the python would go to sleep if she didn't keep him moving. -- David Wild using RISC OS on broadband www.davidhwild.me.uk -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Python is not a good name, should rename to Athon
I agree that Python is not a good name for a programming language, but I'm afraid we're stuck with it. Well, the language was going to be called One of the cross beams has gone out askew on the treadle but that was a little unwieldy and hard to understand when mumbled in a hury. Searching for the runtime ootcbhgoaott returns zero hits on Google. That would have guaranteed that the only hits that came back related to the language. However typing things like sh$ ootcbhgoaott myprog.ootcbhgoaott became too cumbersome. So they decided on Python instead. Besides...nobody expected a kind of Spanish Inquisition... Just-making-stuff-up'ly yers, -tkc -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Python is not a good name, should rename to Athon
On 30/11/2007, Gerardo Herzig [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: You will be eaten by the Snake-Ra god tonight! Wasn't Ra the Sun god? Dotan Cohen http://what-is-what.com http://gibberish.co.il א-ב-ג-ד-ה-ו-ז-ח-ט-י-ך-כ-ל-ם-מ-ן-נ-ס-ע-ף-פ-ץ-צ-ק-ר-ש-ת A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text. Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing? -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Python is not a good name, should rename to Athon
On 01/12/2007, Aaron Watters [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Nov 30, 9:58 am, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Now, python3000 is coming. It's the best time to rename! Yes, but Thong would be a better name, due to the minimalist syntax and the attraction/repulsion/catatonic revulsion effect it has with different people from different cultural backgrounds. Better yet, call the language sex. Do you have any idea what kind of publicity we'd get? Not to mention how many google searches. Dotan Cohen http://what-is-what.com http://gibberish.co.il א-ב-ג-ד-ה-ו-ז-ח-ט-י-ך-כ-ל-ם-מ-ן-נ-ס-ע-ף-פ-ץ-צ-ק-ר-ש-ת A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text. Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing? -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Python is not a good name, should rename to Athon
Dotan Cohen írta: On 01/12/2007, Aaron Watters [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Nov 30, 9:58 am, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Now, python3000 is coming. It's the best time to rename! Yes, but Thong would be a better name, due to the minimalist syntax and the attraction/repulsion/catatonic revulsion effect it has with different people from different cultural backgrounds. Better yet, call the language sex. Do you have any idea what kind of publicity we'd get? Not to mention how many google searches. man.. :)) the biggest point in this thread :DD btw in my country not much, because we write it szex :DD tsabi -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Python is not a good name, should rename to Athon
On 01/12/2007, Russ P. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Speaking of stupid names, what does C++ mean? I think it's the grade you get when you just barely missed a B--. But I can't deny that it *is* good for searching. C was named after the B programming language, as it was inspired and meant to replace it. C++ is obviously C+1, ie, what comes after C. Dotan Cohen http://what-is-what.com http://gibberish.co.il א-ב-ג-ד-ה-ו-ז-ח-ט-י-ך-כ-ל-ם-מ-ן-נ-ס-ע-ף-פ-ץ-צ-ק-ר-ש-ת A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text. Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing? -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Python is not a good name, should rename to Athon
On 01/12/2007, Tóth Csaba [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: man.. :)) the biggest point in this thread :DD btw in my country not much, because we write it szex :DD tsabi We got you beat: סקס. Try that on a Latin keyboard! Actually, szex might be a great name, as it implies the meaning without actually saying it (as far as English speakers are concerned). That will be the name of my band if I ever have one... Dotan Cohen http://what-is-what.com http://gibberish.co.il א-ב-ג-ד-ה-ו-ז-ח-ט-י-ך-כ-ל-ם-מ-ן-נ-ס-ע-ף-פ-ץ-צ-ק-ר-ש-ת A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text. Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing? -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Python is not a good name, should rename to Athon
Dotan Cohen wrote: C was named after the B programming language, as it was inspired and meant to replace it. C++ is obviously C+1 Strictly speaking, C++ evalutes to C, but C is incremented afterwards. Regards, Björn -- BOFH excuse #307: emissions from GSM-phones -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Python is not a good name, should rename to Athon
Well in the future we will ask the internet god Google to guide us in making the name! On Dec 1, 2007 6:02 PM, Dotan Cohen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 01/12/2007, Tóth Csaba [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: man.. :)) the biggest point in this thread :DD btw in my country not much, because we write it szex :DD tsabi We got you beat: סקס. Try that on a Latin keyboard! Actually, szex might be a great name, as it implies the meaning without actually saying it (as far as English speakers are concerned). That will be the name of my band if I ever have one... Dotan Cohen http://what-is-what.com http://gibberish.co.il א-ב-ג-ד-ה-ו-ז-ח-ט-י-ך-כ-ל-ם-מ-ן-נ-ס-ע-ף-פ-ץ-צ-ק-ר-ש-ת A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text. Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing? -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list -- http://search.goldwatches.com/?Search=Movado+Watches http://www.jewelerslounge.com http://www.goldwatches.com -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Python is not a good name, should rename to Athon
On Dec 1, 2007 12:34 PM, Bjoern Schliessmann [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Dotan Cohen wrote: C was named after the B programming language, as it was inspired and meant to replace it. C++ is obviously C+1 Strictly speaking, C++ evalutes to C, but C is incremented afterwards. I guess plus-plus-C just doesn't roll off the tongue as well... -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Python is not a good name, should rename to Athon
On 01/12/2007, Bjoern Schliessmann [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Strictly speaking, C++ evalutes to C, but C is incremented afterwards. :) I will remember that! Dotan Cohen http://what-is-what.com http://gibberish.co.il א-ב-ג-ד-ה-ו-ז-ח-ט-י-ך-כ-ל-ם-מ-ן-נ-ס-ע-ף-פ-ץ-צ-ק-ר-ש-ת A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text. Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing? -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Python is not a good name, should rename to Athon
On 2007-12-01, Bjoern Schliessmann [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Dotan Cohen wrote: C was named after the B programming language, as it was inspired and meant to replace it. C++ is obviously C+1 Strictly speaking, C++ evalutes to C, but C is incremented afterwards. Bjarne was only interested in the side-effect. Anyhow, Pythonistas know it should've been called C+=1. -- Neil Cerutti -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Python is not a good name, should rename to Athon
On Dec 1, 2:10 am, Bjoern Schliessmann usenet- [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Russ P. wrote: I agree that Python is not a good name for a programming language, Why not? Think about proposing its use to someone who has never heard of it (which I did not too long ago). As the OP pointed out, a Python is a snake. Why should a programming language be named after a snake? BTW, is Windows a great name for an operating system? No. Speaking of stupid names, what does C++ mean? It's C incremented. I know that. But C was already a dumb name, and C++ compounded the dumbness. Actually, C was probably intended as a temporary name for internal use, but not for a widely used, standard language. I think it's the grade you get when you just barely missed a B--. So what dou you think about D language? :) Or F or F#? I think that one-letter names are even worse for languages than they are for variables. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Python is not a good name, should rename to Athon
On Sat, 2007-12-01 at 12:10 -0800, Russ P. wrote: On Dec 1, 2:10 am, Bjoern Schliessmann usenet- [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Russ P. wrote: I agree that Python is not a good name for a programming language, Why not? Think about proposing its use to someone who has never heard of it (which I did not too long ago). As the OP pointed out, a Python is a snake. Why should a programming language be named after a snake? That's not a persuasive argument. First of all, Python is named for a comedy troupe from England. For comparison, Perl is named for a knitting technique, Lisp is named for a speech impediment, Ruby is named for a rock, Smalltalk is named for a not-so-useful form of communication, and Java is named after a beverage or an island. Which of those is a good name for a programming language by your criterion? I like the name Python. It has a nice ring to it, and has connotations that are simultaneously badass and humorous. For that matter, why name sneakers after a goddess of justice? Why name a car after a planet/resort town/rodent/mountain? Because brand names are supposed to be memorable, not meaningful. Cheers, Cliff -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Python is not a good name, should rename to Athon
On Dec 1, 12:47 pm, J. Clifford Dyer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Sat, 2007-12-01 at 12:10 -0800, Russ P. wrote: On Dec 1, 2:10 am, Bjoern Schliessmann usenet- [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Russ P. wrote: I agree that Python is not a good name for a programming language, Why not? Think about proposing its use to someone who has never heard of it (which I did not too long ago). As the OP pointed out, a Python is a snake. Why should a programming language be named after a snake? That's not a persuasive argument. First of all, Python is named for a comedy troupe from England. For comparison, Perl is named for a knitting technique, Lisp is named for a speech impediment, Ruby is named for a rock, Smalltalk is named for a not-so-useful form of communication, and Java is named after a beverage or an island. Which of those is a good name for a programming language by your criterion? None. None of them are good names by my criteria. But then, a name is only a name. One of the few names I like is Pascal, because he was a great mathematician and scientist. After thinking about it a bit, here are examples of what I would consider a good name for a programming language: Newton# Newton* Newton+ Newton was a great scientist, and his name is easy to spell and pronounce. The trailing character serves to disambiguate it from Newton in online searches. For shorthand in online discussions, N#, N*, or N+ could be used as aliases. Names of other great scientists, mathematicians, or computer scientists could also be used, of course. Take your pick. How about renaming Python3000? -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Python is not a good name, should rename to Athon
J. Clifford Dyer [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: ...Perl is named for a knitting technique, Lisp is named for a speech impediment... I can't figure out whether you're being serious or not but, for the record, those are not where the names of those two languages come from. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perl#Name http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lisp_programming_language -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Python is not a good name, should rename to Athon
On Dec 2, 8:40 am, Russ P. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: None. None of them are good names by my criteria. But then, a name is only a name. One of the few names I like is Pascal, because he was a great mathematician and scientist. After thinking about it a bit, here are examples of what I would consider a good name for a programming language: Newton# Newton* Newton+ Newton was a great scientist, and his name is easy to spell and pronounce. Should be, but a large proportion of the population pronounce it so that it rhymes with hootin as in hootin n hollerin :-) -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Python is not a good name, should rename to Athon
Newton was a great scientist, and his name is easy to spell and pronounce. Should be, but a large proportion of the population pronounce it so that it rhymes with hootin as in hootin n hollerin :-) You can count me in that large proportion. 8^) By the way, after thinking about it a bit, here's a good name for Python3000: Newton1 The appended 1 serves to disambiguate the name from that of a late, great scientist. It could be called N1 for short. The 1 also serves to identify the major version. If it ever undergoes a major revision (as in Python3000), it could then be called Newton2, but that would not be done more than once per decade or so. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Python is not a good name, should rename to Athon
Russ P. írta: Newton was a great scientist, and his name is easy to spell and pronounce. Should be, but a large proportion of the population pronounce it so that it rhymes with hootin as in hootin n hollerin :-) You can count me in that large proportion. 8^) The 1 also serves to identify the major version. If it ever undergoes a major revision (as in Python3000), it could then be called Newton2, but that would not be done more than once per decade or so. Lets evaluate from the Python3000: Newton3 (N3). +1 vote from me :) tsabi -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Python is not a good name, should rename to Athon
Dotan Cohen wrote: C++ is obviously C+1, ie, what comes after C. Although it was a bit rude to choose the destructive form C++ instead of C+1. Many programmers are quite happy with C as it is and don't want their language overwritten! Also there's the rather confusing fact that the value of the expression C++ is actually C. So when using C++ you only get to take away the old language, and you have to leave the new one behind in its place... -- Greg -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
