Mangle function name with decorator?

[Aahz]

c.l.python used to be the core of a community built around a language. It
no longer is. It is a very useful place, where some very helpful and
knowledgeable people hang out and give advice, but instead of representing
the full interests of the Python community it is now very much a resource
for helping new users.

It seems to me that you're making two separate assertions here. I don't
think that c.l.py ever represented the full interests of the Python
community once python-dev took off (which was essentially before I
started using Python in 1999). I do think that c.l.py is still in many
ways the core of the community, because it's the only hangout where the
disparate parts of the community come together, but the core has
diminished to a small fraction of the whole community.

I feel quite strongly about this. I thought that c.l.python was almost
exceptional in the range (the perl group was another, similar community
back then). I do worry that someone might have screwed up in a quite
major way, and that Python will suffer seriously, in the longer term, as a
result.

From my POV as someone who has been observing Usenet for eighteen years,
c.l.py is *still* an exceptional community. And while Usenet is now an
Internet backwater, there's far too much useful traffic to claim that
Usenet is in any danger of dying.
--
Aahz ([email protected]) <*> http://www.pythoncraft.com/

"At Resolver we've found it useful to short-circuit any doubt and just
refer to comments in code as 'lies'. "
--Michael Foord paraphrases Christian Muirhead on python-dev, 2009-3-22

 

[Steven D'Aprano]

I see how c-l-py doesn't represent the full interests of Python,

Python is a *programming language*. It doesn't have interests. It just
sits there, a bunch of bits on a disk, waiting to be used. *People* have
interests, and Python is a means to an end.

although I can't attest to whether it used to. Naturally, among any
person or people, conflicts arise, dilemmas arise, and c-l-py vets
don't solve them in the same manner, or with the same results, that
dev vets do.

What makes you think that only "vets" are capable of solving issues that
arises? I have news for you: they're just people too. They put their
trousers on one leg at a time just like the rest of us.

Somebody can be a vet with 15 years experience, and still be an immature,
foolish jerk, or a grumpy old-curmudgeon. Somebody else might have just
started using the language a week ago, and yet have excellent conflict-
resolution skills. Anyone who has been on Usenet long enough to recognise
other posters will almost certainly be able to think of examples of each.

The long term direction of this is dissent, struggle, and mutiny.

Don't forget social unrest, rioting in the streets, and the eventual
break-down of civilization as we know it. Don't worry, I'm prepared for
the invariable fallout when Python 3.1 comes out: I have a year's supply
of tinned food in the basement, and enough guns and ammo to fight off the
Chinese Army for a month.

Logically, one of the c-l-py posters, not necessarily the
vets, will fork the source, it will become popular, and Pythoneers
will no longer be able to cut-and-paste source to share.

Oh noes!!! Python will be just like nearly every other language!!!

Including Python. There are already at least thirteen implementations
(forks) of Python (although some of these are defunct or unmaintained):

CPython
Jython
IronPython
Python for .NET
CLPython
PyPy
Unladen Swallow
Python for S60
PyVM
Vyper
RPython
Stackless Python
CapPython


Diversity in software is *good*, not a bad thing. If Guido gets hit by a
bus, we'll be sad, but the long term availability of Python will be in no
way endangered.


As for being "able to cut-and-paste source to share", syntax and built-in
functions are a small part of what makes Python great. The libraries are
just as important, and much Python source code can't be just cut-and-
pasted. You also need to install the appropriate modules, and sometimes
be running on the appropriate operating system.

Don't worry kiddies, rumours of Python's death are greatly exaggerated.

 

[Aaron Brady]

Python is a *programming language*. It doesn't have interests. It just
sits there, a bunch of bits on a disk, waiting to be used. *People* have
interests, and Python is a means to an end.

I misquoted this one. andrew said:

...representing the full interests of the Python community...

However, he also said:

...and that Python will suffer seriously

I think he probably meant, its popularity, and possibly its unity.

What makes you think that only "vets" are capable of solving issues that
arises? I have news for you: they're just people too. They put their
trousers on one leg at a time just like the rest of us.

I don't think it, but I say it because it's the vets that get their
way most of the time. Whether it's because they're more comfortable
with the environment, i.e. know what to expect from more people on the
list than newbies, or they're both due to a lurking variable, such as
obsession with computers <cough>, hostility, uncooperativeness and
dominance; I can't say. Maybe comfortableness leads to a "my ships
don't sink" kind of mentality over time. (Side effects include...)

Somebody can be a vet with 15 years experience, and still be an immature,
foolish jerk, or a grumpy old-curmudgeon. Somebody else might have just
started using the language a week ago, and yet have excellent conflict-
resolution skills.

Ok that's true. We don't know who sticks around on Usenet, or on c-l-
py in particular, or what traits they have in common. I think human-
resources-lang-python is a different list.

Anyone who has been on Usenet long enough to recognise
other posters will almost certainly be able to think of examples of each.


Don't forget social unrest, rioting in the streets, and the eventual
break-down of civilization as we know it. Don't worry, I'm prepared for
the invariable fallout when Python 3.1 comes out: I have a year's supply
of tinned food in the basement, and enough guns and ammo to fight off the
Chinese Army for a month.

Google says: "China - Population: 1,330,044,544 (July 2008 est.)". At
a rate of one cubic inch per round, that's a space of
1000"x1000"x1000", or 83'x83'x83', of solid ammo.

Oh noes!!! Python will be just like nearly every other language!!!

Alright fine, so I got all mushy and sentimental and over-prioritized.

Including Python. There are already at least thirteen implementations
(forks) of Python (although some of these are defunct or unmaintained):

snip

Is that just off the top of your head, Steven? Come on, be honest...!

Diversity in software is *good*, not a bad thing. If Guido gets hit by a
bus, we'll be sad, but the long term availability of Python will be in no
way endangered.

I'm not convinced. If there is no final say on what is and what isn't
Python, the costs could exceed the benefits. Otherwise, all I have is
my implementation of it, which you might have not.

 

[Hendrik van Rooyen]

Oh noes!!! Python will be just like nearly every other language!!!

Including Python. There are already at least thirteen implementations
(forks) of Python (although some of these are defunct or unmaintained):

CPython
Jython
IronPython
Python for .NET
CLPython
PyPy
Unladen Swallow
Python for S60
PyVM
Vyper
RPython
Stackless Python
CapPython

Its kind of sad to see unladen swallow, which is just
a promise, on the list, while Shedskin, which isn't,
is ignored.

Does this say something about big corporations
vs the small man?

- Hendrik

 

[Paul Rubin]

Its kind of sad to see unladen swallow, which is just
a promise, on the list, while Shedskin, which isn't,
is ignored.

Does this say something about big corporations
vs the small man?

I think the programs on the list were supposed to actually implement
Python and extensions of Python, but not incompatible dialects.
Otherwise Pyrex (for example) would also be on the list.

 

[srepmub]

I think the programs on the list were supposed to actually implement
Python and extensions of Python, but not incompatible dialects.
Otherwise Pyrex (for example) would also be on the list.

for the record, the input for Shedskin is pure Python, so there is no
added syntax or optional type declaration system. that said, I can
understand it not being on some list for not being production-ready.


thanks,
mark dufour.

 

[Michele Simionato]

for the record, the input for Shedskin is pure Python, so there is no
added syntax or optional type declaration system. that said, I can
understand it not being on some list for not being production-ready.

thanks,
mark dufour.

But does ShedSkin accepts all valid Python constructs?
I thought there were restrictions.

 

[Steven D'Aprano]

Its kind of sad to see unladen swallow, which is just a promise, on the
list, while Shedskin, which isn't, is ignored.

Does this say something about big corporations vs the small man?

No, what it says is that I had just read a post about Unladen Swallow two
minutes before, and I forgot completely about Shedskin.

Although I took a few minutes to google, I knew I'd probably missed
something, which is why I said there are *at least* thirteen
implementations of Python.

 

[Tim Golden]

No, what it says is that I had just read a post about Unladen Swallow two
minutes before, and I forgot completely about Shedskin.

Although I took a few minutes to google, I knew I'd probably missed
something, which is why I said there are *at least* thirteen
implementations of Python.

I was going to post in your defence (before realising that
you were more than capable of doing that for yourself).
It was obviously just a casual list, not the official
definitive everything-not-here-is-not-valid Python-lookalikes
competition entrants list.

But I was impressed you managed to get so many: I was
aware of everything on that list, but I'm quite sure I
couldn't have named them all together.

TJG

 

[srepmub]

But doesShedSkinaccepts all valid Python constructs?
I thought there were restrictions.

there are certainly several important restrictions, but what I meant
was that if it works with Shedskin it is also valid Python code, and
there are no hidden type declarations or hints hidden in docstrings
and such.


thanks,
mark dufour.