On May 8, 6:11 am, Benjamin Kaplan wrote:
> On May 7, 2013 5:42 PM, "Neil Hodgson" wrote:
> > jmfauth:
>
> >> 2) More critical, Py 3.3, just becomes non unicode compliant,
> >> (eg European languages or "ascii" typographers !)
> >> ...
>
> > This is not demonstrating non-compliance. It is com
On Tue, 07 May 2013 15:17:52 +0100, Steve Simmons wrote:
> Good to see jmf finally comparing apples with apples :-)
*groans*
Truly the terrible pun that the terrible hijacking deserves.
--
Steven
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
On 08/05/2013 01:34, Neil Hodgson wrote:
jmfauth:
2) More critical, Py 3.3, just becomes non unicode compliant,
(eg European languages or "ascii" typographers !)
...
This is not demonstrating non-compliance. It is comparing
performance, not compliance.
Please show an example where Py
On 05/07/2013 09:11 PM, Benjamin Kaplan wrote:
On May 7, 2013 5:42 PM, "Neil Hodgson" wrote:
jmfauth:
2) More critical, Py 3.3, just becomes non unicode compliant,
(eg European languages or "ascii" typographers !)
...
This is not demonstrating non-compliance. It is comparing performan
On May 7, 2013 5:42 PM, "Neil Hodgson" wrote:
>
> jmfauth:
>
>> 2) More critical, Py 3.3, just becomes non unicode compliant,
>> (eg European languages or "ascii" typographers !)
>> ...
>
>
>This is not demonstrating non-compliance. It is comparing performance,
not compliance.
>
>Please sh
jmfauth:
2) More critical, Py 3.3, just becomes non unicode compliant,
(eg European languages or "ascii" typographers !)
...
This is not demonstrating non-compliance. It is comparing
performance, not compliance.
Please show an example where Python 3.3 is not compliant with Unicode.
On May 7, 2013, at 4:31 PM, Martijn Lievaart wrote:
> On Sun, 05 May 2013 17:07:41 -0400, Roy Smith wrote:
>
>> There *are* programming languages worse than PHP. Have you ever tried
>> britescript?
>
> Have you tried MUMPS? :-)
>
> M4
>
Which one? The original MUMPS (Massachusetts General
On Tue, 07 May 2013 23:32:55 +1000, Chris Angelico wrote:
> On Tue, May 7, 2013 at 11:22 PM, jmfauth wrote:
>> There are plenty of good reasons to use Python. There are also plenty
>> of good reasons to not use (or now to drop) Python and to realize that
>> if you wish to process text seriously,
Chris Angelico於 2013年5月7日星期二UTC+8下午9時32分55秒寫道：
> On Tue, May 7, 2013 at 11:22 PM, jmfauth wrote:
>
> > There are plenty of good reasons to use Python. There are
>
> > also plenty of good reasons to not use (or now to drop)
>
> > Python and to realize that if you wish to process text
>
> > seri
On Sun, 05 May 2013 17:07:41 -0400, Roy Smith wrote:
> There *are* programming languages worse than PHP. Have you ever tried
> britescript?
Have you tried MUMPS? :-)
M4
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
On 5/7/2013 9:22 AM, jmfauth road forth on his dead hobbyhorse to hijack
yet another thread:
# Py 3.3 ascii and non ascii chars
timeit.repeat("a = 'hundred'; 'x' in a")
[0.11426985953005442, 0.10040049292649655, 0.09920834808588097]
timeit.repeat("a = 'maçãé€ẞ'; 'é' in a")
[0.23455951882567
"Fábio Santos" wrote:
>>
>>
>> -
>>
>>
>> 1) The memory gain for many of us (usually non ascii users)
>> just become irrelevant.
>>
>> >>> sys.getsizeof('maçã')
>> 41
>> >>> sys.getsizeof('abcd')
>> 29
>>
>> 2) More critical, Py 3.3, just becomes non unicode compliant,
>> (eg European languag
>
>
> -
>
>
> 1) The memory gain for many of us (usually non ascii users)
> just become irrelevant.
>
> >>> sys.getsizeof('maçã')
> 41
> >>> sys.getsizeof('abcd')
> 29
>
> 2) More critical, Py 3.3, just becomes non unicode compliant,
> (eg European languages or "ascii" typographers !)
>
> >>> i
On Tue, May 7, 2013 at 11:22 PM, jmfauth wrote:
> There are plenty of good reasons to use Python. There are
> also plenty of good reasons to not use (or now to drop)
> Python and to realize that if you wish to process text
> seriously, you are better served by using "corporate
> products" or tools
On 6 mai, 09:49, Fábio Santos wrote:
> On 6 May 2013 08:34, "Chris Angelico" wrote:
>
> > Well you see, it was 70 bytes back in the Python 2 days (I'll defer to
> > Steven for data points earlier than that), but with Python 3, there
> > were two versions: one was 140 bytes representing 70 charact
On 2013-05-06, Henry Law wrote:
> On 05/05/13 18:11, Ignoramus16992 wrote:
>> According to CIO.com
>
> What an amusing thread; lightened my (non-programmer) day.
>
I guess you are from the python newsgroup then. :)
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
On 6 May 2013 13:03, Steven D'Aprano
wrote:
> On Mon, 06 May 2013 17:30:33 +1000, Chris Angelico wrote:
>
> > On Mon, May 6, 2013 at 4:28 PM, Fábio Santos
> > wrote:
> >>> And of course, the Python Programmer's moral code is only 80
> >>> characters wide.
> >>
> >> No! Was it not seventy characte
On Mon, 06 May 2013 17:30:33 +1000, Chris Angelico wrote:
> On Mon, May 6, 2013 at 4:28 PM, Fábio Santos
> wrote:
>>> And of course, the Python Programmer's moral code is only 80
>>> characters wide.
>>
>> No! Was it not seventy characters wide? Was I fooled my entire life?
>
> Well you see, it
In article ,
Fábio Santos wrote:
> > And of course, the Python Programmer's moral code is only 80 characters
> wide.
>
> No! Was it not seventy characters wide? Was I fooled my entire life?
The entire moral code in a semi-tweet. How convenient.
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/pyth
All good points. I should probably blame the smallness of my company aswell.
On 6 May 2013 09:11, "Chris Angelico" wrote:
> On Mon, May 6, 2013 at 5:49 PM, Fábio Santos
> wrote:
> > I may rise the average pay of a Python programmer in Portugal. I have
> asked
> > for a raise back in December, an
On Mon, May 6, 2013 at 5:49 PM, Fábio Santos wrote:
> I may rise the average pay of a Python programmer in Portugal. I have asked
> for a raise back in December, and was told that it wouldn't happen before
> this year. I have done well. I think I deserve better pay than a supermarket
> employee no
Le 06/05/2013 09:49, Fábio Santos a écrit :
have asked for a raise back in December, and was told that it wouldn't
happen before this year. I have done well. I think I deserve better
pay than a supermarket employee now. I am sure that my efforts were
appreciated and I will be rewarded. I am bei
On 6 May 2013 08:55, "Karim" wrote:
>
> Austerity for python programmers in Portugal !?
Actually, lack of a market. I can't seem to find any other job programming
python. It's all php, VB, c#, and I think there is some COBOL in there too.
But who knows. Maybe I'm looking in the wrong places.
--
On 6 May 2013 08:34, "Chris Angelico" wrote:
> Well you see, it was 70 bytes back in the Python 2 days (I'll defer to
> Steven for data points earlier than that), but with Python 3, there
> were two versions: one was 140 bytes representing 70 characters, the
> other 280 bytes representing 70 chara
On Mon, May 6, 2013 at 4:28 PM, Fábio Santos wrote:
>> And of course, the Python Programmer's moral code is only 80 characters
>> wide.
>
> No! Was it not seventy characters wide? Was I fooled my entire life?
Well you see, it was 70 bytes back in the Python 2 days (I'll defer to
Steven for data p
> And of course, the Python Programmer's moral code is only 80 characters
wide.
No! Was it not seventy characters wide? Was I fooled my entire life?
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
On Sunday, May 5, 2013 12:10:47 PM UTC-7, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
>
>
> Also, Perl programmers are an unprincipled, devious bunch, always looking
>
> for an opportunity to blackmail their employers into paying them extra.
>
> Python programmers are a decent, law-abiding people with a strong m
On 05/05/13 18:11, Ignoramus16992 wrote:
According to CIO.com
What an amusing thread; lightened my (non-programmer) day.
--
Henry LawManchester, England
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
On 2013-05-05, Paul Rubin wrote:
> Paul Rubin writes:
>> I see "New York" listed as a location for Perl but not for Python.
>
> Whaat? It's there for Python, though in the #3 position rather than #2.
> I must have flipped through the slides too fast.
My website algebra.com is written in perl, i
On Mon, May 6, 2013 at 7:09 AM, Rainer Weikusat wrote:
> j...@toerring.de (Jens Thoms Toerring) writes:
>> Now you got me badly worried, using both Perl and Python (and
>> other, unspeakable languages, but not VB I promise!) Will I
>> end up as a Python hacker for the mob or worse
>
> https://en.w
In article ,
Dennis Lee Bieber wrote:
> On Sun, 05 May 2013 17:07:41 -0400, Roy Smith declaimed
> the following in gmane.comp.python.general:
>
> > In article <5186af75$0$29997$c3e8da3$54964...@news.astraweb.com>,
> > Steven D'Aprano wrote:
> >
> > > Right now, I'd consider learning PHP fo
In comp.lang.python Roy Smith wrote:
> In article ,
> j...@toerring.de (Jens Thoms Toerring) wrote:
> > Well, that didn't have a happy ending:-( Should have listened to
> > my parents when they told me again and again "Never use Perl, just
> > say no!". Seems I'm doomed - what's the proper way t
In article ,
j...@toerring.de (Jens Thoms Toerring) wrote:
> Well, that didn't have a happy ending:-( Should have listened to
> my parents when they told me again and again "Never use Perl, just
> say no!". Seems I'm doomed - what's the proper way to apply for a
> job with the mob?
I don't think
Steven D'Aprano於 2013年5月6日星期一UTC+8上午3時10分47秒寫道：
> On Sun, 05 May 2013 12:11:11 -0500, Ignoramus16992 wrote:
>
>
>
> > According to CIO.com, Python programmers make only $83,000 per year,
>
> > while Perl programmers make $93,000 per year.
>
> >
>
> > http://www.cio.com/slideshow/detail/97819
In comp.lang.python Rainer Weikusat wrote:
> j...@toerring.de (Jens Thoms Toerring) writes:
> > In comp.lang.python Steven D'Aprano
> > wrote:
> >> On Sun, 05 May 2013 12:11:11 -0500, Ignoramus16992 wrote:
> >
> >> > According to CIO.com, Python programmers make only $83,000 per year,
> >> > whi
Paul Rubin writes:
> I see "New York" listed as a location for Perl but not for Python.
Whaat? It's there for Python, though in the #3 position rather than #2.
I must have flipped through the slides too fast.
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Ignoramus16992 writes:
> I would like to know, what explains the discrepancy.
I see "New York" listed as a location for Perl but not for Python. That
implies: 1) some general skew because of the very high cost of living in
NY (even compared to San Francisco or Silicon Valley); 2) further skew
b
j...@toerring.de (Jens Thoms Toerring) writes:
> In comp.lang.python Steven D'Aprano
> wrote:
>> On Sun, 05 May 2013 12:11:11 -0500, Ignoramus16992 wrote:
>
>> > According to CIO.com, Python programmers make only $83,000 per year,
>> > while Perl programmers make $93,000 per year.
>> >
>> > http
In article <5186af75$0$29997$c3e8da3$54964...@news.astraweb.com>,
Steven D'Aprano wrote:
> Right now, I'd consider learning PHP for an extra $100 a month. Or
> peddling my arse down at the docks for twenty cents a time, which will be
> less embarrassing and much less painful.
Having spent th
On May 5, 2013, at 9:13 PM, Steven D'Aprano
wrote:
> On Sun, 05 May 2013 13:58:51 -0400, Roy Smith wrote:
>
>> In article ,
>> Ignoramus16992 wrote:
>>
>>> According to CIO.com, Python programmers make only $83,000 per year,
>>> while Perl programmers make $93,000 per year.
>>
>> It's amazi
In comp.lang.python Steven D'Aprano
wrote:
> On Sun, 05 May 2013 12:11:11 -0500, Ignoramus16992 wrote:
> > According to CIO.com, Python programmers make only $83,000 per year,
> > while Perl programmers make $93,000 per year.
> >
> > http://www.cio.com/slideshow/detail/97819?source=ifwartcio#sl
On Sun, 05 May 2013 13:58:51 -0400, Roy Smith wrote:
> In article ,
> Ignoramus16992 wrote:
>
>> According to CIO.com, Python programmers make only $83,000 per year,
>> while Perl programmers make $93,000 per year.
>
> It's amazing the depths to which people are willing to sink for an extra
>
On Sun, 05 May 2013 12:11:11 -0500, Ignoramus16992 wrote:
> According to CIO.com, Python programmers make only $83,000 per year,
> while Perl programmers make $93,000 per year.
>
> http://www.cio.com/slideshow/detail/97819?source=ifwartcio#slide10
> http://www.cio.com/slideshow/detail/97819?sourc
On 05/05/2013 18:35, rusi wrote:
On May 5, 10:11 pm, Ignoramus16992 wrote:
According to CIO.com, Python programmers make only $83,000 per year,
while Perl programmers make $93,000 per year.
http://www.cio.com/slideshow/detail/97819?source=ifwartcio#slide10http://www.cio.com/slideshow/detail/97
In article ,
Ignoramus16992 wrote:
> According to CIO.com, Python programmers make only $83,000 per year,
> while Perl programmers make $93,000 per year.
It's amazing the depths to which people are willing to sink for an extra
$10k per year.
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-
> Most likely more legacy Perl code in mission critical systems
Which is unfair because when Python is ever surpassed by an even
better language/technology then we get paid more to work Python and
not move the industry forward by moving to the new technology and
hacking on it.
--
Fábio Santos
--
On May 5, 10:11 pm, Ignoramus16992 wrote:
> According to CIO.com, Python programmers make only $83,000 per year,
> while Perl programmers make $93,000 per year.
>
> http://www.cio.com/slideshow/detail/97819?source=ifwartcio#slide10http://www.cio.com/slideshow/detail/97819?source=ifwartcio#slide11
On Mon, May 6, 2013 at 3:11 AM, Ignoramus16992
wrote:
> According to CIO.com, Python programmers make only $83,000 per year,
> while Perl programmers make $93,000 per year.
>
> http://www.cio.com/slideshow/detail/97819?source=ifwartcio#slide10
> http://www.cio.com/slideshow/detail/97819?source=ifw
And seniority combined with annual cost of living raises, due to Perl being in
use longer
S
Sent from my pocket UNIVAC.
On May 5, 2013, at 10:11 AM, Ignoramus16992
wrote:
> According to CIO.com, Python programmers make only $83,000 per year,
> while Perl programmers make $93,000 per year.
>
I wouldn't touch perl code with a ten foot pole.
On the other hand, python is pleasing to the eye and easy to write,
read and modify.
This means that you can easily be replaced with someone else who also
knows python, so your company doesn't care much about paying you well
and keeping you there.
Most likely more legacy Perl code in mission critical systems
S
Sent from my pocket UNIVAC.
On May 5, 2013, at 10:11 AM, Ignoramus16992
wrote:
> According to CIO.com, Python programmers make only $83,000 per year,
> while Perl programmers make $93,000 per year.
>
> http://www.cio.com/slides
According to CIO.com, Python programmers make only $83,000 per year,
while Perl programmers make $93,000 per year.
http://www.cio.com/slideshow/detail/97819?source=ifwartcio#slide10
http://www.cio.com/slideshow/detail/97819?source=ifwartcio#slide11
I would like to know, what explains the discrep
52 matches
Mail list logo
