Re: QWERTY was not designed to intentionally slow typists down (was: Unicode normalisation [was Re: [beginner] What's wrong?])

On Monday 18 April 2016 12:01, Random832 wrote: > On Sun, Apr 17, 2016, at 21:39, Steven D'Aprano wrote: >> Oh no, it's the thread that wouldn't die! *wink* >> >> Actually, yes it is. At least, according to this website: >> >> http://www.mit.edu/~jcb/Dvorak/history.html > > I'd really rather

Re: QWERTY was not designed to intentionally slow typists down (was: Unicode normalisation [was Re: [beginner] What's wrong?])

On Mon, Apr 18, 2016 at 11:39 AM, Steven D'Aprano wrote: > With QWERTY, the eight home keys only cover a fraction over a quarter of > all key presses: ASDF JKL; have frequencies of > > 8.12% 6.28% 4.32% 2.30% 0.10% 0.69% 3.98% and effectively 0% > > making a total of 25.79%.

Re: QWERTY was not designed to intentionally slow typists down (was: Unicode normalisation [was Re: [beginner] What's wrong?])

On Sun, Apr 17, 2016, at 21:39, Steven D'Aprano wrote: > Oh no, it's the thread that wouldn't die! *wink* > > Actually, yes it is. At least, according to this website: > > http://www.mit.edu/~jcb/Dvorak/history.html I'd really rather see an instance of the claim not associated with Dvorak

Re: QWERTY was not designed to intentionally slow typists down (was: Unicode normalisation [was Re: [beginner] What's wrong?])

Oh no, it's the thread that wouldn't die! *wink* On Sun, 10 Apr 2016 01:53 am, Random832 wrote: > On Fri, Apr 8, 2016, at 23:28, Steven D'Aprano wrote: >> This is the power of the "slowing typists down is a myth" meme: same >> Wikipedia contributor takes an article which *clearly and obviously*

Re: QWERTY was not designed to intentionally slow typists down (was: Unicode normalisation [was Re: [beginner] What's wrong?])

Ian Kelly on Sun, 10 Apr 2016 07:43:13 -0600 typed in comp.lang.python the following: >On Sat, Apr 9, 2016 at 9:09 PM, pyotr filipivich wrote: >> ASINTOER are the top eight English letters (not in any order, it >> is just that "A Sin To Err"

Re: QWERTY was not designed to intentionally slow typists down (was: Unicode normalisation [was Re: [beginner] What's wrong?])

On Sat, Apr 9, 2016 at 9:09 PM, pyotr filipivich wrote: > ASINTOER are the top eight English letters (not in any order, it > is just that "A Sin To Err" is easy to remember. What's so hard to remember about ETA OIN SHRDLU? Plus that even gives you the top twelve.

Re: Unicode normalisation [was Re: [beginner] What's wrong?]

Steven D'Aprano : But when you get down to fundamentals, character sets and alphabets have always blurred the line between presentation and meaning. W ("double-u") was, once upon a time, UU And before that, it was VV, because the Romans used V the way we now use U, and

Re: Unicode normalisation [was Re: [beginner] What's wrong?]

Ben Bacarisse wrote: The problem with that theory is that 'er/re' (this is e and r in either order) is the 3rd most common pair in English but have been placed together. No, they haven't. The order of the characters in the type basket goes down the slanted columns of keys, so E and R are

Re: QWERTY was not designed to intentionally slow typists down (was: Unicode normalisation [was Re: [beginner] What's wrong?])

Dennis Lee Bieber on Sat, 09 Apr 2016 14:52:50 -0400 typed in comp.lang.python the following: >On Sat, 09 Apr 2016 11:44:48 -0400, Random832 >declaimed the following: > >>I don't understand where this idea that alternating hands makes you >>slows

Re: Unicode normalisation [was Re: [beginner] What's wrong?]

On Sat, Apr 9, 2016, at 12:25 PM, Mark Lawrence via Python-list wrote: > Again, where is the relevance to Python in this discussion, as we're on > the main Python mailing list? Please can the moderators take this stuff > out, it is getting beyond the pale. You need to come to grip with the

RE: [E] QWERTY was not designed to intentionally slow typists down (was: Unicode normalisation [was Re: [beginner] What's wrong?])

-Original Message- From: Ben Finney >> This is an often-repeated myth, with citations back as far as the 1970s. >> It is false. >> The design is intended to reduce jamming the print heads together, but the >> goal of this is not to reduce speed, but to enable *fast* typing. >> It

Re: Unicode normalisation [was Re: [beginner] What's wrong?]

On 09/04/2016 17:08, Rustom Mody wrote: On Saturday, April 9, 2016 at 7:14:05 PM UTC+5:30, Ben Bacarisse wrote: The problem with that theory is that 'er/re' (this is e and r in either order) is the 3rd most common pair in English but have been placed together. ou and et (in either order) are

Re: Unicode normalisation [was Re: [beginner] What's wrong?]

Rustom Mody writes: > On Saturday, April 9, 2016 at 7:14:05 PM UTC+5:30, Ben Bacarisse wrote: >> The problem with that theory is that 'er/re' (this is e and r in either >> order) is the 3rd most common pair in English but have been placed >> together. ou and et (in either

Re: Unicode normalisation [was Re: [beginner] What's wrong?]

On Saturday, April 9, 2016 at 7:14:05 PM UTC+5:30, Ben Bacarisse wrote: > The problem with that theory is that 'er/re' (this is e and r in either > order) is the 3rd most common pair in English but have been placed > together. ou and et (in either order) are the 15th and 22nd most common > and

Re: QWERTY was not designed to intentionally slow typists down (was: Unicode normalisation [was Re: [beginner] What's wrong?])

On Fri, Apr 8, 2016, at 23:28, Steven D'Aprano wrote: > This is the power of the "slowing typists down is a myth" meme: same > Wikipedia contributor takes an article which *clearly and obviously* > repeats the conventional narrative that QWERTY was designed to > decrease the number of key presses

Re: QWERTY was not designed to intentionally slow typists down (was: Unicode normalisation [was Re: [beginner] What's wrong?])

On Fri, Apr 8, 2016, at 23:28, Steven D'Aprano wrote: > And how did it enable fast typing? By *slowing down the typist*, and thus > having fewer jams. Er, no? The point is that type bars that are closer together collide more easily *at the same actual typing speed* than ones that are further

Re: Unicode normalisation [was Re: [beginner] What's wrong?]

Ben Bacarisse writes: > alister writes: > >> >> the design of qwerty was not to "Slow" the typist bu to ensure that the >> hammers for letters commonly used together are spaced widely apart, >> reducing the portion of trier travel arc were

Re: Unicode normalisation [was Re: [beginner] What's wrong?]

alister writes: > > the design of qwerty was not to "Slow" the typist bu to ensure that the > hammers for letters commonly used together are spaced widely apart, > reducing the portion of trier travel arc were the could jam. > I and E are actually such a pair which

Re: Unicode normalisation [was Re: [beginner] What's wrong?]

On Fri, 08 Apr 2016 20:20:02 -0400, Dennis Lee Bieber wrote: > On Fri, 8 Apr 2016 11:04:53 -0700 (PDT), Rustom Mody > declaimed the following: > >>Its reasonably likely that all our keyboards start QWERT... >> Doesn't make it a sane design. >> > It was a sane design

Re: QWERTY was not designed to intentionally slow typists down (was: Unicode normalisation [was Re: [beginner] What's wrong?])

On Sat, 9 Apr 2016 10:43 am, Ben Finney wrote: > Dennis Lee Bieber writes: > >> [The QWERTY keyboard layout] was a sane design -- for early mechanical >> typewrites. It fulfills its goal of slowing down a typist to reduce >> jamming print-heads at the platen. > > This is

QWERTY was not designed to intentionally slow typists down (was: Unicode normalisation [was Re: [beginner] What's wrong?])

Dennis Lee Bieber writes: > [The QWERTY keyboard layout] was a sane design -- for early mechanical > typewrites. It fulfills its goal of slowing down a typist to reduce > jamming print-heads at the platen. This is an often-repeated myth, with citations back as far as the

Re: [beginner] What's wrong?

On 08/04/2016 23:59, sohcahto...@gmail.com wrote: On Friday, April 1, 2016 at 3:57:40 PM UTC-7, Mark Lawrence wrote: On 01/04/2016 23:44, sohcahto...@gmail.com wrote: On Friday, April 1, 2016 at 3:10:51 PM UTC-7, Michael Okuntsov wrote: Nevermind. for j in range(1,8) should be for j in

Re: [beginner] What's wrong?

On Friday, April 1, 2016 at 3:57:40 PM UTC-7, Mark Lawrence wrote: > On 01/04/2016 23:44, sohcahto...@gmail.com wrote: > > On Friday, April 1, 2016 at 3:10:51 PM UTC-7, Michael Okuntsov wrote: > >> Nevermind. for j in range(1,8) should be for j in range(8). > > > > I can't tell you how many times

Re: Unicode normalisation [was Re: [beginner] What's wrong?]

Steven D'Aprano : > But when you get down to fundamentals, character sets and alphabets have > always blurred the line between presentation and meaning. W ("double-u") > was, once upon a time, UU But as every Finnish-speaker now knows, "w" is only an old-fashioned

Re: Unicode normalisation [was Re: [beginner] What's wrong?]

On Sat, 9 Apr 2016 03:21 am, Peter Pearson wrote: > On Fri, 08 Apr 2016 16:00:10 +1000, Steven D'Aprano > wrote: >> On Fri, 8 Apr 2016 02:51 am, Peter Pearson wrote: >>> >>> The Unicode consortium was certifiably insane when it went into the >>> typesetting business. >> >>

Re: Unicode normalisation [was Re: [beginner] What's wrong?]

Adding link On Friday, April 8, 2016 at 11:48:07 PM UTC+5:30, Rustom Mody wrote: > 5.12 Deprecation > > In the Unicode Standard, the term deprecation is used somewhat differently > than it is in some other standards. Deprecation is used to mean that a > character or other feature is strongly

Re: Unicode normalisation [was Re: [beginner] What's wrong?]

On Friday, April 8, 2016 at 11:33:38 PM UTC+5:30, Peter Pearson wrote: > On Sat, 9 Apr 2016 03:50:16 +1000, Chris Angelico wrote: > > On Sat, Apr 9, 2016 at 3:44 AM, Marko Rauhamaa wrote: > [snip] > >> (As for ligatures, I understand that there might be quite a bit of > >> legacy software that

Re: Unicode normalisation [was Re: [beginner] What's wrong?]

On Friday, April 8, 2016 at 11:14:21 PM UTC+5:30, Marko Rauhamaa wrote: > Peter Pearson : > > > On Fri, 08 Apr 2016 16:00:10 +1000, Steven D'Aprano wrote: > >> They are not, and never have been, in the typesetting business. > >> Perhaps characters are not the only things easily confused *wink* >

Re: Unicode normalisation [was Re: [beginner] What's wrong?]

On Sat, 9 Apr 2016 03:50:16 +1000, Chris Angelico wrote: > On Sat, Apr 9, 2016 at 3:44 AM, Marko Rauhamaa wrote: [snip] >> (As for ligatures, I understand that there might be quite a bit of >> legacy software that dedicated code points and code pages for

Re: Unicode normalisation [was Re: [beginner] What's wrong?]

On Friday, April 8, 2016 at 10:24:17 AM UTC+5:30, Chris Angelico wrote: > On Fri, Apr 8, 2016 at 2:43 PM, Rustom Mody wrote: > > No I am not clever/criminal enough to know how to write a text that is > > visually > > close to > > print "Hello World" > > but is internally closer to > > rm -rf / >

Re: Unicode normalisation [was Re: [beginner] What's wrong?]

On Sat, Apr 9, 2016 at 3:44 AM, Marko Rauhamaa wrote: > Unicode heroically and definitively solved the problems ASCII had posed > but introduced a bag of new, trickier problems. > > (As for ligatures, I understand that there might be quite a bit of > legacy software that

Re: Unicode normalisation [was Re: [beginner] What's wrong?]

Peter Pearson : > On Fri, 08 Apr 2016 16:00:10 +1000, Steven D'Aprano > wrote: >> They are not, and never have been, in the typesetting business. >> Perhaps characters are not the only things easily confused *wink* > > Defining codepoints that

Re: Unicode normalisation [was Re: [beginner] What's wrong?]

On Fri, 08 Apr 2016 16:00:10 +1000, Steven D'Aprano wrote: > On Fri, 8 Apr 2016 02:51 am, Peter Pearson wrote: >> >> The Unicode consortium was certifiably insane when it went into the >> typesetting business. > > They are not, and never have been, in the typesetting

Re: From email addresses sometimes strange on this list - was Re: [beginner] What's wrong?

On 05Apr2016 08:58, Chris Angelico wrote: On Tue, Apr 5, 2016 at 8:55 AM, Michael Torrie wrote: Usenet-orginating posts look fine. For example: From: Marko Rauhamaa Newsgroups: comp.lang.python Whereas email ones are sometimes looking

Re: Unicode normalisation [was Re: [beginner] What's wrong?]

On Fri, Apr 8, 2016 at 4:00 PM, Steven D'Aprano wrote: > Or for that matter: > > a = akjhvciwfdwkejfc2qweoduycwldvqspjcwuhoqwe9fhlcjbqvcbhsiauy37wkg() + 100 > b = 100 + akjhvciwfdwkejfc2qweoduycwldvqspjcwuhoqew9fhlcjbqvcbhsiauy37wkg() > > How easily can you tell them apart at

Re: Unicode normalisation [was Re: [beginner] What's wrong?]

On Fri, 8 Apr 2016 02:51 am, Peter Pearson wrote: > Seriously, it's cute how neatly normalisation works when you're > watching closely and using it in the circumstances for which it was > intended, but that hardly proves that these practices won't cause much > trouble when they're used more

Re: Unicode normalisation [was Re: [beginner] What's wrong?]

On Fri, Apr 8, 2016 at 2:43 PM, Rustom Mody wrote: > No I am not clever/criminal enough to know how to write a text that is > visually > close to > print "Hello World" > but is internally closer to > rm -rf / > > For me this: > >>> Α = 1 A = 2 Α + 1 == A > True

Re: Unicode normalisation [was Re: [beginner] What's wrong?]

On Friday, April 8, 2016 at 10:13:16 AM UTC+5:30, Rustom Mody wrote: > No I am not clever/criminal enough to know how to write a text that is > visually > close to > print "Hello World" > but is internally closer to > rm -rf / > > For me this: > >>> Α = 1 > >>> A = 2 > >>> Α + 1 == A > True >

Re: Unicode normalisation [was Re: [beginner] What's wrong?]

On Thursday, April 7, 2016 at 10:22:18 PM UTC+5:30, Peter Pearson wrote: > On Thu, 07 Apr 2016 11:37:50 +1000, Steven D'Aprano wrote: > > On Thu, 7 Apr 2016 05:56 am, Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn wrote: > >> Rustom Mody wrote: > > > >>> So here are some examples to illustrate what I am saying: > >>>

Re: Unicode normalisation [was Re: [beginner] What's wrong?]

On Fri, Apr 8, 2016 at 2:51 AM, Peter Pearson wrote: > The pile-of-poo character was just frosting on > the cake. > > (Sorry to leave you with that image.) No. You're not even a little bit sorry. You're an evil, evil man. And funny. ChrisA who knows that its

Re: Unicode normalisation [was Re: [beginner] What's wrong?]

On Thu, 07 Apr 2016 11:37:50 +1000, Steven D'Aprano wrote: > On Thu, 7 Apr 2016 05:56 am, Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn wrote: >> Rustom Mody wrote: > >>> So here are some examples to illustrate what I am saying: >>> >>> Example 1 -- Ligatures: >>> >>> Python3 gets it right >> flag = 1 >>

Re: Unicode normalisation [was Re: [beginner] What's wrong?]

Steven D'Aprano : > So even in English, capitalisation can make a semantic difference. It can even make a pronunciation difference: polish vs Polish. Marko -- https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list

Unicode normalisation [was Re: [beginner] What's wrong?]

On Thu, 7 Apr 2016 05:56 am, Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn wrote: > Rustom Mody wrote: >> So here are some examples to illustrate what I am saying: >> >> Example 1 -- Ligatures: >> >> Python3 gets it right > flag = 1 > flag >> 1 Python identifiers are intentionally normalised to reduce

Re: [beginner] What's wrong?

On Thu, Apr 7, 2016 at 5:56 AM, Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn wrote: >> Example 1 -- Ligatures: >> >> Python3 gets it right > flag = 1 > flag >> 1 > > Fascinating; confirmed with > > | $ python3 > | Python 3.4.4 (default, Jan 5 2016, 15:35:18) > | [GCC 5.3.1 20160101] on

Re: [beginner] What's wrong?

Rustom Mody wrote: > On Sunday, April 3, 2016 at 5:17:36 PM UTC+5:30, Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn > wrote: >> Rustom Mody wrote: >> > When python went to full unicode identifers it should have also added >> > pragmas for which blocks the programmer intended to use -- something >> > like a charset

Re: From email addresses sometimes strange on this list - was Re: [beginner] What's wrong?

On 04/04/2016 04:58 PM, Chris Angelico wrote: > O That probably explains it. It's because of Yahoo and mailing > lists. Yahoo did stuff that breaks stuff, so Mailman breaks stuff > differently to make sure that only Yahoo people get messed up a bit. > It means their names and addresses get

Re: From email addresses sometimes strange on this list - was Re: [beginner] What's wrong?

On Tue, Apr 5, 2016 at 8:55 AM, Michael Torrie wrote: > Usenet-orginating posts look fine. For example: > > From: Marko Rauhamaa > Newsgroups: comp.lang.python > > Whereas email ones are sometimes looking like this: > > From: Mark Lawrence via Python-list

From email addresses sometimes strange on this list - was Re: [beginner] What's wrong?

On 04/04/2016 08:04 AM, Mark Lawrence via Python-list wrote: > On 02/04/2016 23:49, Michael Torrie wrote: >> Mark, your messages are showing up to the list as being from "python," >> at least on my email. Any reason for this? >> > > Assuming that you're referring to me, frankly I haven't a clue.

Re: [beginner] What's wrong?

On 04/04/2016 15:04, Mark Lawrence wrote: On 02/04/2016 23:49, Michael Torrie wrote: Mark, your messages are showing up to the list as being from "python," at least on my email. Any reason for this? Assuming that you're referring to me, frankly I haven't a clue. I read this list with

Re: [beginner] What's wrong?

On 02/04/2016 23:49, Michael Torrie wrote: Mark, your messages are showing up to the list as being from "python," at least on my email. Any reason for this? Assuming that you're referring to me, frankly I haven't a clue. I read this list with Thunderbird on Windows, I hit "reply" to

Re: [beginner] What's wrong?

On Sun, 03 Apr 2016 09:49:03 -0700, Rustom Mody wrote: > On Sunday, April 3, 2016 at 9:41:11 PM UTC+5:30, Dan Sommers wrote: >> On Sun, 03 Apr 2016 08:46:59 -0700, Rustom Mody wrote: >> >> > On Sunday, April 3, 2016 at 8:58:59 PM UTC+5:30, Dan Sommers wrote: >> >> Yes, it's marginally annoying,

Re: [beginner] What's wrong?

On Sun, 03 Apr 2016 10:18:45 -0700, Rustom Mody wrote: > On Sunday, April 3, 2016 at 9:56:24 PM UTC+5:30, Dan Sommers wrote: >> On Sun, 03 Apr 2016 08:39:02 -0700, Rustom Mody wrote: >> >> > On Sunday, April 3, 2016 at 8:58:59 PM UTC+5:30, Dan Sommers wrote: >> >> On Sun, 03 Apr 2016 07:30:47

Re: [beginner] What's wrong?

On Mon, Apr 4, 2016 at 3:18 AM, Rustom Mody wrote: > While I personally dont know enough about security to be able to demonstrate a > full sequence of events, here's a little fun I had with Chris: > > https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-list/2014-May/672413.html > > Do

Re: [beginner] What's wrong?

On Sunday, April 3, 2016 at 9:56:24 PM UTC+5:30, Dan Sommers wrote: > On Sun, 03 Apr 2016 08:39:02 -0700, Rustom Mody wrote: > > > On Sunday, April 3, 2016 at 8:58:59 PM UTC+5:30, Dan Sommers wrote: > >> On Sun, 03 Apr 2016 07:30:47 -0700, Rustom Mody wrote: > >> > >> > So here are some examples

Re: [beginner] What's wrong?

On Sunday, April 3, 2016 at 9:30:40 PM UTC+5:30, Chris Angelico wrote: > Exactly why did you have root ssh access with a password? Umm... Dont exactly remember. Probably it was not strictly necessary. Combination of carelessness, stupidity, hurry Brings me to... On Sunday, April 3, 2016 at

Re: [beginner] What's wrong?

On Mon, Apr 4, 2016 at 2:22 AM, Dan Sommers wrote: > What about the A vs a case, which comes up even with ASCII-only > characters? If those are the same, then I, as a reader of Python code, > have to understand all the rules about ß (which I think have changed > over

Re: [beginner] What's wrong?

On Sun, 03 Apr 2016 08:39:02 -0700, Rustom Mody wrote: > On Sunday, April 3, 2016 at 8:58:59 PM UTC+5:30, Dan Sommers wrote: >> On Sun, 03 Apr 2016 07:30:47 -0700, Rustom Mody wrote: >> >> > So here are some examples to illustrate what I am saying: >> >> [A vs a, A vs A, flag vs flag, etc.] >

Re: [beginner] What's wrong?

On Mon, Apr 4, 2016 at 2:24 AM, Michael Okuntsov wrote: > As an OP, can I participate in the discussion? Here in Russia we have a > monstrous bookkeeping system called 1C-Predpriyatiye that is used by almost > all firms and organizations, from kiosks to huge factories.

Re: [beginner] What's wrong?

03.04.2016 20:52, Rustom Mody пишет: To really localize python one would have to 1. Localize the keywords 2. Localize all module names 3. Localize all the help strings 4. Localize the entire stuff up at https://docs.python.org/3/ 5. ... That is probably one or two orders of magnitude more work

Re: [beginner] What's wrong?

On Sun, 03 Apr 2016 08:46:59 -0700, Rustom Mody wrote: > On Sunday, April 3, 2016 at 8:58:59 PM UTC+5:30, Dan Sommers wrote: >> Yes, it's marginally annoying, and a security hole waiting to happen, >> that A and A often look very much alike. > > "A security hole waiting to happen" = "Marginally

Re: [beginner] What's wrong?

On Mon, Apr 4, 2016 at 1:46 AM, Rustom Mody wrote: > On Sunday, April 3, 2016 at 8:58:59 PM UTC+5:30, Dan Sommers wrote: >> Yes, it's marginally annoying, and a security hole waiting to happen, >> that A and A often look very much alike. > > > "A security hole waiting to

Re: [beginner] What's wrong?

On Sun, Apr 3, 2016 at 11:46 AM, Rustom Mody wrote: > Personal note: I once was idiot enough to have root with password root123 I changed my password to "incorrect," so whenever I forget it the computer will say, "Your password is incorrect." --

Re: [beginner] What's wrong?

On Sunday, April 3, 2016 at 8:58:59 PM UTC+5:30, Dan Sommers wrote: > Yes, it's marginally annoying, and a security hole waiting to happen, > that A and A often look very much alike. "A security hole waiting to happen" = "Marginally annoying" Frankly I find this juxtaposition alarming Personal

Re: [beginner] What's wrong?

On Sunday, April 3, 2016 at 8:58:59 PM UTC+5:30, Dan Sommers wrote: > On Sun, 03 Apr 2016 07:30:47 -0700, Rustom Mody wrote: > > > So here are some examples to illustrate what I am saying: > > [A vs a, A vs A, flag vs flag, etc.] > I understand that in some use cases, flag and flag represent the

Re: [beginner] What's wrong?

On Sun, 03 Apr 2016 07:30:47 -0700, Rustom Mody wrote: > So here are some examples to illustrate what I am saying: [A vs a, A vs A, flag vs flag, etc.] Are identifiers text or bytes? or something else entirely that takes natural language rules and the appearance of the glyphs into account? I,

Re: [beginner] What's wrong?

On Sunday, April 3, 2016 at 5:19:33 AM UTC+5:30, Steven D'Aprano wrote: > On Sun, 3 Apr 2016 03:12 am, Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn wrote: > > > Marko Rauhamaa wrote: > > > >> Steven D'Aprano : > >>> So you're saying that learning to be a fluent speaker of English is a > >>> pre-requisite of being

Re: [beginner] What's wrong?

On Sunday, April 3, 2016 at 5:17:36 PM UTC+5:30, Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn wrote: > Rustom Mody wrote: > > > On Saturday, April 2, 2016 at 10:42:27 PM UTC+5:30, Thomas 'PointedEars' > > Lahn wrote: > >> Marko Rauhamaa wrote: > >> > Steven D'Aprano : > >> >> So you're saying that learning to be a

Re: [beginner] What's wrong?

On Sun, 03 Apr 2016 02:04:05 +0100, Mark Lawrence wrote: > On 03/04/2016 01:48, Steven D'Aprano wrote: >> On Sun, 3 Apr 2016 07:42 am, Michael Selik wrote: >> >>> Gaming also helps your reaction time. Normally 0.3 ms, but 0.1 ms for >>> top gamers. And fighter pilots. >> >> Does gaming help

Re: [beginner] What's wrong?

Rustom Mody wrote: > On Saturday, April 2, 2016 at 10:42:27 PM UTC+5:30, Thomas 'PointedEars' > Lahn wrote: >> Marko Rauhamaa wrote: >> > Steven D'Aprano : >> >> So you're saying that learning to be a fluent speaker of English is a >> >> pre-requisite of being a programmer? >> > >> > No more

Re: [beginner] What's wrong?

Michael Torrie wrote: > Mark, your messages are showing up to the list as being from "python," > at least on my email. Any reason for this? Depends on which Mark you are addressing and how you are reading e-mail. The messages of Mark Lawrence, for example, appear to me as technically correct

Re: [beginner] What's wrong?

Mark, your messages are showing up to the list as being from "python," at least on my email. Any reason for this? -- https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list

Re: [beginner] What's wrong?

On Sun, 3 Apr 2016 02:57 pm, Gregory Ewing wrote: > Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn wrote: >> even though the French often still disagree, >> preferring words like « ordinateur » and « octet » over “computer” and >> “byte”, respectively > > To be fair, "octet" is a slightly more precise term than >

Re: [beginner] What's wrong?

Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn wrote: even though the French often still disagree, preferring words like « ordinateur » and « octet » over “computer” and “byte”, respectively To be fair, "octet" is a slightly more precise term than "byte", meaning exactly 8 bits (whereas "byte" could theoretically

Re: [beginner] What's wrong?

Chris Angelico wrote: Yep! And the letters (thorn and eth) survive in a very few languages (Icelandic, notably). Fortunately, Python 3 lets you use it in identifiers. This suggests an elegant solution to the problem of whether "python" should refer to Python 2 or Python 3. The Python 3 link

Re: [beginner] What's wrong?

On 03/04/2016 01:48, Steven D'Aprano wrote: On Sun, 3 Apr 2016 07:42 am, Michael Selik wrote: Gaming also helps your reaction time. Normally 0.3 ms, but 0.1 ms for top gamers. And fighter pilots. Does gaming help reaction time, or do only people with fast reaction times become top gamers?

Re: [beginner] What's wrong?

On Sun, 3 Apr 2016 07:42 am, Michael Selik wrote: > Gaming also helps your reaction time. Normally 0.3 ms, but 0.1 ms for top > gamers. And fighter pilots. Does gaming help reaction time, or do only people with fast reaction times become top gamers? Personally, in my experience gaming hurts

Re: [beginner] What's wrong?

On 03/04/2016 00:49, Steven D'Aprano wrote: On Sun, 3 Apr 2016 03:12 am, Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn wrote: Marko Rauhamaa wrote: Steven D'Aprano : So you're saying that learning to be a fluent speaker of English is a pre-requisite of being a programmer? No more than

Re: [beginner] What's wrong?

On 02/04/2016 17:31, Dennis Lee Bieber wrote: On Sat, 2 Apr 2016 19:15:36 +1100, Chris Angelico declaimed the following: On Sat, Apr 2, 2016 at 3:27 PM, Random832 wrote: On Fri, Apr 1, 2016, at 19:29, Michael Selik wrote: Humans have always had

Re: [beginner] What's wrong?

On Sun, 3 Apr 2016 03:12 am, Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn wrote: > Marko Rauhamaa wrote: > >> Steven D'Aprano : >>> So you're saying that learning to be a fluent speaker of English is a >>> pre-requisite of being a programmer? >> >> No more than learning Latin is a

Re: [beginner] What's wrong?

On Sat, Apr 2, 2016, 3:40 PM Marko Rauhamaa wrote: > Terry Reedy : > > > On 4/2/2016 12:44 PM, Marko Rauhamaa wrote: > > > >> Nowadays software companies and communities are international. > > > > Grade school classrooms, especially pre-high school, are not. >

Re: [beginner] What's wrong?

Terry Reedy : > On 4/2/2016 12:44 PM, Marko Rauhamaa wrote: > >> Nowadays software companies and communities are international. > > Grade school classrooms, especially pre-high school, are not. Parenthetically, English teachers in Finland have been happy with how teenage boys'

Re: [beginner] What's wrong?

On 4/2/2016 12:44 PM, Marko Rauhamaa wrote: Nowadays software companies and communities are international. Grade school classrooms, especially pre-high school, are not. > You never know who needs to maintain your code. For one-off school assignments, nobody other than the author. > At

Re: [beginner] What's wrong?

On 4/2/2016 11:07 AM, Marko Rauhamaa wrote: While it is fine for Python to support Unicode to its fullest, I don't think it's a good idea for a programmer to use non-English identifiers. Non-English identifiers can written, at least in romanized versions, in ascii. The (few) keywords are

Re: [beginner] What's wrong?

Rustom Mody : > When python went to full unicode identifers it should have also added > pragmas for which blocks the programmer intended to use -- something > like a charset declaration of html. You are being silly. Marko --

Re: [beginner] What's wrong?

On Saturday, April 2, 2016 at 10:42:27 PM UTC+5:30, Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn wrote: > Marko Rauhamaa wrote: > > > Steven D'Aprano : > >> So you're saying that learning to be a fluent speaker of English is a > >> pre-requisite of being a programmer? > > > > No more than learning Latin is a

Re: [beginner] What's wrong?

Marko Rauhamaa wrote: > Steven D'Aprano : >> So you're saying that learning to be a fluent speaker of English is a >> pre-requisite of being a programmer? > > No more than learning Latin is a prerequisite of being a doctor. Full ACK. Probably starting with the Industrial

Re: [beginner] What's wrong?

Steven D'Aprano : > I'd rather read: > > for oppilas in luokka: > if oppilas.hylätty(): > oppilas.ilmoita(oppilas.koetulokset) > > [...] > > Google translate suggests Marko's code means: > > for pupil in class: > if pupil.abandoned(): >

Re: [beginner] What's wrong?

On Sun, 3 Apr 2016 02:07 am, Marko Rauhamaa wrote: > I don't think it's a good idea for a programmer to use non-English > identifiers. So you're saying that learning to be a fluent speaker of English is a pre-requisite of being a programmer? I'd rather read: for oppilas in luokka:

Re: [beginner] What's wrong?

On Sun, Apr 3, 2016 at 2:07 AM, Marko Rauhamaa wrote: > Chris Angelico : > >> Yep! And the letters (thorn and eth) survive in a very few languages >> (Icelandic, notably). Fortunately, Python 3 lets you use it in >> identifiers. > > While it is fine for Python

Re: [beginner] What's wrong?

Chris Angelico : > Yep! And the letters (thorn and eth) survive in a very few languages > (Icelandic, notably). Fortunately, Python 3 lets you use it in > identifiers. While it is fine for Python to support Unicode to its fullest, I don't think it's a good idea for a programmer

Re: [beginner] What's wrong?

On Sun, Apr 3, 2016 at 1:48 AM, Michael Selik wrote: > If they'd only used Unicode, they could have said "þou" in prayer and > "ðousand" for the year. > > BTW, I finally know why there are all those "Ye Olde ...". > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thorn_(letter) Yep! And

Re: [beginner] What's wrong?

On Sat, Apr 2, 2016 at 4:16 AM Chris Angelico wrote: > On Sat, Apr 2, 2016 at 3:27 PM, Random832 wrote: > > On Fri, Apr 1, 2016, at 19:29, Michael Selik wrote: > >> Humans have always had trouble with this, in many contexts. I remember > >> being

Re: [beginner] What's wrong?

On Sat, Apr 2, 2016 at 3:27 PM, Random832 wrote: > On Fri, Apr 1, 2016, at 19:29, Michael Selik wrote: >> Humans have always had trouble with this, in many contexts. I remember >> being annoyed at folks saying the year 2000 was the first year of the new >> millennium,

Re: [beginner] What's wrong?

> On Apr 1, 2016, at 6:57 PM, Mark Lawrence via Python-list > wrote: > >> On 01/04/2016 23:44, sohcahto...@gmail.com wrote: >>> On Friday, April 1, 2016 at 3:10:51 PM UTC-7, Michael Okuntsov wrote: >>> Nevermind. for j in range(1,8) should be for j in range(8). >> >> I

Re: [beginner] What's wrong?

On Sat, Apr 2, 2016, 12:28 AM Random832 wrote: > On Fri, Apr 1, 2016, at 19:29, Michael Selik wrote: > > Humans have always had trouble with this, in many contexts. I remember > > being annoyed at folks saying the year 2000 was the first year of the new > > millennium,

Re: [beginner] What's wrong?

On Fri, Apr 1, 2016, at 19:29, Michael Selik wrote: > Humans have always had trouble with this, in many contexts. I remember > being annoyed at folks saying the year 2000 was the first year of the new > millennium, rather than 2001. They'd forgotten the Gregorian calendar > starts from AD 1.

Re: [beginner] What's wrong?

Humans have always had trouble with this, in many contexts. I remember being annoyed at folks saying the year 2000 was the first year of the new millennium, rather than 2001. They'd forgotten the Gregorian calendar starts from AD 1. On Fri, Apr 1, 2016, 6:58 PM Mark Lawrence via Python-list <

Re: [beginner] What's wrong?

On 01/04/2016 23:44, sohcahto...@gmail.com wrote: On Friday, April 1, 2016 at 3:10:51 PM UTC-7, Michael Okuntsov wrote: Nevermind. for j in range(1,8) should be for j in range(8). I can't tell you how many times I've gotten bit in the ass with that off-by-one mistake whenever I use a range

Re: [beginner] What's wrong?

On Friday, April 1, 2016 at 3:10:51 PM UTC-7, Michael Okuntsov wrote: > Nevermind. for j in range(1,8) should be for j in range(8). I can't tell you how many times I've gotten bit in the ass with that off-by-one mistake whenever I use a range that doesn't start at zero. I know that if I want to

Re: [beginner] What's wrong?

On 01/04/2016 23:10, Michael Okuntsov wrote: Nevermind. for j in range(1,8) should be for j in range(8). Thank you for your correction, we in Python land greatly appreciate such things :) -- My fellow Pythonistas, ask not what our language can do for you, ask what you can do for our

  1   2   >