Talk:Python (programming language)/Archive 3: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added
m bypass deleted redirect per RFD using AWB
MalnadachBot (talk | contribs)
m Fixed Lint errors in signatures. (Task 2)
 
(5 intermediate revisions by 4 users not shown)
Line 1:
{{talkarchivenav}}
 
== Doctest ==
I have just created my first page on [[Doctest]]. Is there room for a link to it?
Line 7 ⟶ 9:
:That bothered me before but I didn't change it. I think the whole example is bad, with or without braces, with braces it's biased because C doesn't need them in that case and without them it just sucks because it's meant to demonstrate that whitespace is significant in Python with regards to blocks but isn't in most other languages. Without the braces the example doesn't really convey the point clearly enough.
 
:Off topic: I would have written that as <code>return n == 0 ? 1 : n * factorial(n-1)</code> in C and <code>[*] 1..$n</code> in my favorite language, guess which;) —[[{{Userns:2}}:Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason/Sig}}|Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason]] 22:25, 23 December 2005 (UTC)
::I think you're quite right about it being a bad example. I can't come up with anything off the top of my head that is both simple and requires a block of statements. Off topic: Yeah, ?: is handy stuff, and the $ gives the language away. =) --Phill
 
Line 70 ⟶ 72:
:--[[User:Kris Schnee|Kris Schnee]] 06:36, 13 September 2006 (UTC)
 
Still no, no, no... a criticism section in a PL article is ugly and out of place, and reflects a seriously misguided misunderstanding of "balance". There are indeed some other PLs that have such sections, but always to the detriment of those articles... and a lot of PL articles that thankfully eschew them. A PL isn't a debate for political office. Just neutrally present the features and history of a PL, neither advocating or condemning the fact it has the features it does! <font color="darkgreen">[[User:Lulu of the Lotus-Eaters|LotLE]]</font>×<fontspan colorstyle="darkred" size="-2color:darkgreen;">LotLE</span>]]×[[User talk:Lulu of the Lotus-Eaters|<span style="color:darkred; font-size:x-small;">talk]]</fontspan>]] 05:25, 14 September 2006 (UTC)
 
== Why such prominance for Python 3000? ==
Line 261 ⟶ 263:
I wonder if we should try to include a discussion of decorators in this article. This isn't an article or tutorial on Python syntax, and as such we are certainly not exhaustive in explaining constructs. But the passing mention of metaprogramming via the __dict__ attribute made me think of the fact that decorators are probably the best choice for most metaprogramming jobs in the latest Python versions.
 
What do other editors think? Worth including or too esoteric? <font color="darkgreen">[[User:Lulu of the Lotus-Eaters|LotLE]]</font>×<fontspan colorstyle="darkred" size="-2color:darkgreen;">LotLE</span>]]×[[User talk:Lulu of the Lotus-Eaters|<span style="color:darkred; font-size:x-small;">talk]]</fontspan>]] 20:34, 22 May 2006 (UTC)
 
:A discussion on decorators would probably be a little much for this article. However, the syntax section is getting a little long anyway - [[Python syntax]], analogous to [[C syntax]] would have a place for an explanation about decorators. We'd leave a vastly trimmed-down version of what's there right now (indentation, statements, fundamental datatypes, interesting expressions (lambda, listcomps, etc) (maybe)). I've seen this proposed above once or twice, but I feel if we add any more syntactical nuances to the article it will be stretched too far, so the time is opportune. --[[User: Sam Pointon|Sam Pointon]] 20:42, 22 May 2006 (UTC)
 
::I like that proposal. Want to start it, Sam Pointon? <font color="darkgreen">[[User:Lulu of the Lotus-Eaters|LotLE]]</font>×<fontspan colorstyle="darkred" size="-2color:darkgreen;">LotLE</span>]]×[[User talk:Lulu of the Lotus-Eaters|<span style="color:darkred; font-size:x-small;">talk]]</fontspan>]] 21:06, 22 May 2006 (UTC)
 
::Nevermind. I decided to [[WP:BOLD|be bold]], and started the suggested child myself. I started with a pretty aggressive cut-and-paste. Most likely, we'll want to move a little bit more back up from the child to the main article. But I like the look of only giving a general "feel-of-the-language" description in the main article, and let the actual syntax discussion go in the so-named child. <font color="darkgreen">[[User:Lulu of the Lotus-Eaters|LotLE]]</font>×<fontspan colorstyle="darkred" size="-2color:darkgreen;">LotLE</span>]]×[[User talk:Lulu of the Lotus-Eaters|<span style="color:darkred; font-size:x-small;">talk]]</fontspan>]] 21:18, 22 May 2006 (UTC)
 
::: Good going! --[[User:Piet Delport|Piet Delport]] 10:26, 23 May 2006 (UTC)
Line 275 ⟶ 277:
If there are no objections, i would like to merge [[Python 3]] into this article. Could interested users please take a look at [[Talk:Python 3]]? --[[User:Piet Delport|Piet Delport]] 22:30, 5 June 2006 (UTC)
 
:Oppose merge. See [[Talk:Python 3]] for explanation. <font color="darkgreen">[[User:Lulu of the Lotus-Eaters|LotLE]]</font>×<fontspan colorstyle="darkred" size="-2color:darkgreen;">LotLE</span>]]×[[User talk:Lulu of the Lotus-Eaters|<span style="color:darkred; font-size:x-small;">talk]]</fontspan>]] 02:01, 6 June 2006 (UTC)
 
:: In case other readers are interested: I responded to your concerns over there, and tried to explain my motivation a bit better. --[[User:Piet Delport|Piet Delport]] 10:42, 6 June 2006 (UTC)
Line 287 ⟶ 289:
seems, to me, to be an improvement.
 
Also, IMHO(In my hostile opinion, in this case) in the preceding paragraph, "multi-paradigm language" verges on idiot speak. It appears to pervade the programming entries on wikipedia, so I again choose not to edit the actual entry, but "Python supports (list of 4 programming styles). Extensions like|such as|whatever pyDBC and Contracts for Python provide support for Design by Contract." is a pretty good replacement for the first several sentences of that paragraph. In the python box, the paradigm: multi-paradigm is especially rich. It provides no information what-so-ever. {{<small><span class="autosigned">—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:Maxerickson|Maxerickson}}]] ([[User talk:Maxerickson|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Maxerickson|contribs]]) </span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned -->
 
:I entirely disagree with all these points. The phrase exuberant is widely used in Perl circles, and about Perl, so the contrast is informative. I presume, likewise that [http://ctags.sourceforge.net/ Exuberant Ctags] also don't run joyfully in a literal sense; and yet that's the name (per common programming parlance) that the creators chose for the well-known project. For example, [[Dr. Dobb's Journal]] reviewing ''Beginning Perl'', and uses the characterization.[http://www.ddj.com/184404466]
Line 293 ⟶ 295:
:"Multi-paradigm" is likewise well-known and well-understood; moreover, the term is much more accurate and precise than is the awkward amalgm of examples Maxerickson suggests. For example, the term is discussed explicitly in the article [[Programming language]]. More importantly, Python's own website, and probably ''most'' third party descriptions of it use the "multi-paradigm" phrase.
 
:I admit that a few of the terms used in describing Python might be unfamiliar to readers entirely unfamiliar with programming-language lingo. But most are either defined well enough contextually or wikilinked to appropriate places. Some such terms have slightly different usages or meanings outside of programming lingo. While being excessively jargonistic is bad, I don't believe this article does so, and eschewing all technical or subject-specific vocabulary to reach every member of the "great unwashed" is just as much a pitfall. <font color="darkgreen">[[User:Lulu of the Lotus-Eaters|LotLE]]</font>×<fontspan colorstyle="darkred" size="-2color:darkgreen;">LotLE</span>]]×[[User talk:Lulu of the Lotus-Eaters|<span style="color:darkred; font-size:x-small;">talk]]</fontspan>]] 01:54, 12 June 2006 (UTC)
 
::If exuberant is used in the perl community, great. That doesn't really help it make any sense to somebody who has no sense of the perl community. It also means that it probably doesn't belong in a wikipedia article meant to inform about ''python''.
Line 303 ⟶ 305:
::Sorry about not signing that last post...[[User:Maxerickson|Maxerickson]] 00:55, 13 June 2006 (UTC)
 
:::Hmmm... I'm softening on the "multi-paradigm" usage. I'm sure that in the past the Python website used that description near the front page; but looking now, it's not there. General google search for "multi-paradigm python" shows lots of hits, but not quite "definitive". The "idiot-speak" degradation probably put me off a bit (especially since I probably use that characterization in my book on Python; and I'm sure my book-writing colleagues do). I guess we could be more explicit on what programming paradigms Python supports, if there is some unclarity there. <font color="darkgreen">[[User:Lulu of the Lotus-Eaters|LotLE]]</font>×<fontspan colorstyle="darkred" size="-2color:darkgreen;">LotLE</span>]]×[[User talk:Lulu of the Lotus-Eaters|<span style="color:darkred; font-size:x-small;">talk]]</fontspan>]] 01:10, 13 June 2006 (UTC)
 
:::Re-revisiting, I'm not sure what's to be done. I read the article text again, and it seems about as explicit as we might get. [[Multi-paradigm programming language]] is linked to a whole article that explains it. And the next sentence explicitly lists several supported paradigms (each linked to appropriate articles). That seems like a pretty good definition of what the term means. <font color="darkgreen">[[User:Lulu of the Lotus-Eaters|LotLE]]</font>×<fontspan colorstyle="darkred" size="-2color:darkgreen;">LotLE</span>]]×[[User talk:Lulu of the Lotus-Eaters|<span style="color:darkred; font-size:x-small;">talk]]</fontspan>]] 01:13, 13 June 2006 (UTC)
 
::::To clarify, it is idiot-speak because idiots have stripped paradigm of most of its value, not for some intrinsic reason. I've read some of your book and liked what I read(I've seen you post in c.l.python under Lulu... but didn't make the connection until you mentioned writing a book and clicked your user page link), even when it was over my head. The general thrust of my initial complaint is that using multi-paradigm anywhere in the entry requires explaining it somewhere in the entry, but doesn't really make the entry a great deal more informative. It stands up without ever mentioning paradigm at all. It also makes less sense as a philosophy section then, which I hadn't really thought about. Hmmm.[[User:Maxerickson|Maxerickson]] 01:49, 13 June 2006 (UTC)
 
:::::I think "paradigm" is actually "post-idiocy". There were a few years, maybe centered 5-7 years back, when the word was all the rage of businessese gibberish. But the idiots have moved on to trying to ruin other words, and we can use it as an actual word again (well, not that I ever stopped, but I recognized the peril). I mostly just think of [[Thomas Kuhn]] myself, though I recognize he hardly invented the word either. But we can hardly strip every word used by idiots from every serious article: we'd have to do some sort of global replace on "web-based", "portal", "large scale", "enterprise", "social network", and a bunch of stuff (I wouldn't really be sad to see "enabling" go)... probably some of which is used in this article. <font color="darkgreen">[[User:Lulu of the Lotus-Eaters|LotLE]]</font>×<fontspan colorstyle="darkred" size="-2color:darkgreen;">LotLE</span>]]×[[User talk:Lulu of the Lotus-Eaters|<span style="color:darkred; font-size:x-small;">talk]]</fontspan>]] 02:37, 13 June 2006 (UTC)
 
== Proposal for Disambiguation ==
Line 315 ⟶ 317:
IMO we need a disambig. page for the animal and the programming language.
 
-- ''scott'' <small><span class="autosigned">—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:64.132.237.49|64.132.237.49]] ([[User talk:64.132.237.49|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/64.132.237.49|contribs]]) </span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned -->
-- ''scott'' {{unsigned|64.132.237.49}}
 
:There already is one: [[Python (disambiguation)]] --[[User:Ozzmosis|ozzmosis]] 16:41, 19 June 2006 (UTC)
Line 323 ⟶ 325:
If you have a strong feeling about why a particular link should or should not be included, speak now. Please refer to the Wikipedia policy on external links in your arguments. [[User:Zukeeper|Zukeeper]] 01:58, 13 July 2006 (UTC)
 
:I agree. I have wanted to do the same, but didn't want to single out any one particular thing as uniquely "unworthy". I tend to think the few general tutorials and free books (i.e. that are not platform- or task-specific) are OK, especially if they are not on python.org. Nokia Series 60 is particularly egregiously over-specific, I concur. <font color="darkgreen">[[User:Lulu of the Lotus-Eaters|LotLE]]</font>×<fontspan colorstyle="darkred" size="-2color:darkgreen;">LotLE</span>]]×[[User talk:Lulu of the Lotus-Eaters|<span style="color:darkred; font-size:x-small;">talk]]</fontspan>]] 02:55, 13 July 2006 (UTC)