The Lounge is rated Safe For Work. If you're about to post something inappropriate for a shared office environment, then don't post it. No ads, no abuse, and no programming questions. Trolling, (political, climate, religious or whatever) will result in your account being removed.
If "you pythonians" are so sensitive and "tired of this criticism", I suggest that whenever you see any critical remark about Python, you leave that discussion thread immediately.
When you answer to voices critical to Python semantic indentation with a "tired of this critisism", it is very close to "shut up - we don't want to hear about it", only your opinion about Python should be heard. When I am told, directly or indirectly, to shut up, it is not strawmanning to infer that you believe you have The Right Answer on the issue.
When you state that you "are tired of this critisism", it is quite clearly a request from you to stop the critisism. Even though I clearly understand you that way, I still made it conditional, if it is so, then... That is not an "ad hominem attack", it is drawing conclusions based on your statement, on the condition that I have interpreted it correctly. An given that explicit condition, it is certainly not strawmanning. Others may read "us Pythonians are tired of this critisism" as "we welcome critical opinions on this issue", but I guess the way I read it is more like the common interpretation.
Sure, we use indentation to ease reading in almost all modern programming languages, but the critisism was on the semantics of indentation - which is non-existent in C. You were the one who brought in C indentation, and then you blame me for strawmanning when I reject your invalid parallels between Python and C. Isn't that sort of turning things upside-down?
I pointed out that Python semantic indentation is conceptually different from C layout for readability, and you suggest that I am "really stupid" and I "fail to understand" (but this is of course not ad hominem attacks...).
I cannot suggest that you seem to not grasp the difference between assigning semantics to whitespace and not assigning semantics to whitespace - that would be another ad hominem attack, so I am not saying so. I must assume that you understand the difference. But then - maybe because I am "really stupid" honestly "fail to understand" why you, with your full comprehension of semantics and non-semantics, do not see the relevance to Strostrups proposal to assign semantics to whitespace to the degree that you can treat whitespace as an operator. He shows the absurdity of whitespace semantics by suggesting that even the abscence of something that (in C) is without semantics should be given a semantic interpretation... Actually, that is the case in Python: Remove some whitespace in a Python program, and its semantics change. But appearenly, I am too stupid to understand why you do not see the relevance.
My stupidity is also displayed by wasting time replying to your post. I will try to control it by not answering to whatever you respond with to this.
This single feature has held me back from investing time into this language.
Doing some RCA my opinion is that technology like language generators has promoted the creation of marginally different quite a few languages—so called jvm languages —
There was php and Perl. Anyone not intellectually lazy and a bit more egoless would have perfected php instead of whipping up a new language with brain dead features. Not sure python space or dos backslash takes the top spot for an epoch of productivity killer. Backslash inventor now admits that is his worst decision.
# Python program to check if the input number is prime or not
num = 15
# take input from the user
# num = int(input("Enter a number: "))
# prime numbers are greater than 1
if num > 1:
for i in range(2,num):
if (num % i) == 0:
print(num,"is not a prime number")
#print(num % i)
print(num,"is a prime number")
# if input number is less than
# or equal to 1, it is not prime
print(num,"is not a prime number")
What the heck is that else: statement doing out there, who does it belong to?
Tell me about it. I started with FoxPro before it was "Visual".
v2.0 I think...
The Beer Prayer - Our lager, which art in barrels, hallowed be thy drink. Thy will be drunk, I will be drunk, at home as it is in the tavern. Give us this day our foamy head, and forgive us our spillage as we forgive those who spill against us. And lead us not to incarceration, but deliver us from hangovers. For thine is the beer, the bitter and the lager, for ever and ever. Barmen.
I started with FoxPro 2.0 and my first computer job was maintaining the Lawn Doctor Business System written in that language in 1994. It was the system that Lawn Doctor franchisees used to run their businesses.
The difficult we do right away...
...the impossible takes slightly longer.
The largest liquidation in the world so far used Foxpro for its claim and payments systems. I wrote some of them and maintained existing ones. Used properly it was a great little language. Visual Foxpro was even better but short lived due to DOTNET. Rick Strahl once commented , if someone says it can't be done in Foxpro, there's a good chance he doesn't know what he's talking about.
We can’t stop here, this is bat country - Hunter S Thompson RIP
From the little I remember...wasn’t it column based too? Like commands had to start in specific columns or the compiler didn’t even see them?
It was so non-REPL too. You had to write an entire program, ship it off to the mainframe, wait and then check the green-lined paper to determine what even went on.
A friend of mine recently landed a new gig, so I asked about it.
First question, what technologies do they use?
His answer was rather unexpected... "Mainly COBOL.NET[^]"
Apparently, you can compile COBOL to MSIL and even run it in Azure, but why anyone would ever want that is beyond me
In their case they sort of "upgraded" (if you can call it that) some old COBOL applications.
Their new services were all Java (no, not Java.NET or COBOL.jar )