standardization allows?

Discussion in 'Python' started by castironpi@gmail.com, Feb 13, 2008.

  1. Guest

    Standardization helps avoid the readability and reliability problems
    which arise when many different individuals create their own slightly
    varying implementations, each with their own quirks and naming
    conventions.
     
    , Feb 13, 2008
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Guest

    On Feb 13, 4:41 pm, wrote:
    > Standardization helps avoid the readability and reliability problems
    > which arise when many different individuals create their own slightly
    > varying implementations, each with their own quirks and naming
    > conventions.


    Standardization allows RCA cables, bumpers, and 115V plugs. The Bill
    of Rights allows Huckleberry Finn. What is the analogue of the Bill
    of Rights for programmers and users, whether of programming languages
    or latter-generation software?
     
    , Feb 19, 2008
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. wrote:

    >Standardization allows RCA cables, bumpers, and 115V plugs. The Bill
    >of Rights allows Huckleberry Finn. What is the analogue of the Bill
    >of Rights for programmers and users, whether of programming languages
    >or latter-generation software?
    >
    >

    I want that drogues, man
     
    Gerardo Herzig, Feb 19, 2008
    #3
  4. Guest

    On Feb 19, 3:47 pm, Gerardo Herzig <> wrote:
    > wrote:
    > >Standardization allows RCA cables, bumpers, and 115V plugs.  The Bill
    > >of Rights allows Huckleberry Finn.  What is the analogue of the Bill
    > >of Rights for programmers and users, whether of programming languages
    > >or latter-generation software?

    >
    > I want that drogues, man


    Magnavox is free to make proprietary connection cable. BNSF is free
    to make train car trucks that are not 11' across. Python programmers
    are free to do X their way.

    The std. lib. has readability and reliability problems. Individuals
    created their own slightly varying implementation. It has its own
    quirks and naming conventions. This is RCA cable; it goes in.
     
    , Feb 19, 2008
    #4
  5. Paul Rubin Guest

    writes:
    > Standardization allows RCA cables, bumpers, and 115V plugs. The Bill
    > of Rights allows Huckleberry Finn. What is the analogue of the Bill
    > of Rights for programmers and users, whether of programming languages
    > or latter-generation software?


    http://gplv3.fsf.org ;-)
     
    Paul Rubin, Feb 19, 2008
    #5
  6. Guest

    On Feb 19, 4:05 pm, Paul Rubin <http://> wrote:
    > writes:
    > > Standardization allows RCA cables, bumpers, and 115V plugs.  The Bill
    > > of Rights allows Huckleberry Finn.  What is the analogue of the Bill
    > > of Rights for programmers and users, whether of programming languages
    > > or latter-generation software?

    >
    > http://gplv3.fsf.org  ;-)


    What are the words that everyone understands?
     
    , Feb 19, 2008
    #6
  7. Paddy Guest

    On Feb 13, 10:41 pm, wrote:
    > Standardization helps avoid the readability and reliability problems
    > which arise when many different individuals create their own slightly
    > varying implementations, each with their own quirks and naming
    > conventions.


    Turing test entrant?

    - Paddy.
    Currently reading "Permutation City" by Greg Egan.
     
    Paddy, Feb 20, 2008
    #7
  8. Paddy Guest

    On Feb 19, 10:00 pm, wrote:
    > On Feb 19, 3:47 pm, Gerardo Herzig <> wrote:
    >
    > > wrote:
    > > >Standardization allows RCA cables, bumpers, and 115V plugs. The Bill
    > > >of Rights allows Huckleberry Finn. What is the analogue of the Bill
    > > >of Rights for programmers and users, whether of programming languages
    > > >or latter-generation software?

    >
    > > I want that drogues, man

    >
    > Magnavox is free to make proprietary connection cable. BNSF is free
    > to make train car trucks that are not 11' across. Python programmers
    > are free to do X their way.
    >
    > The std. lib. has readability and reliability problems. Individuals
    > created their own slightly varying implementation. It has its own
    > quirks and naming conventions. This is RCA cable; it goes in.


    I don't think a Turing Test program is this good - it's been steered
    manually.
     
    Paddy, Feb 20, 2008
    #8
  9. Paddy Guest

    On Feb 19, 10:13 pm, wrote:
    > On Feb 19, 4:05 pm, Paul Rubin <http://> wrote:
    >
    > > writes:
    > > > Standardization allows RCA cables, bumpers, and 115V plugs. The Bill
    > > > of Rights allows Huckleberry Finn. What is the analogue of the Bill
    > > > of Rights for programmers and users, whether of programming languages
    > > > or latter-generation software?

    >
    > >http://gplv3.fsf.org ;-)

    >
    > What are the words that everyone understands?


    This seems to be a lazy spurt from a Turing Test program.

    Should do better F-

    - Paddy.
     
    Paddy, Feb 20, 2008
    #9
  10. Guest

    On Feb 19, 9:41 pm, Paddy <> wrote:
    > On Feb 13, 10:41 pm, wrote:
    >
    > > Standardization helps avoid the readability and reliability problems
    > > which arise when many different individuals create their own slightly
    > > varying implementations, each with their own quirks and naming
    > > conventions.

    >
    > Turing test entrant?
    >
    > - Paddy.
    > Currently reading "Permutation City" by Greg Egan.


    That's actually from the standard library documentation.
    http://docs.python.org/lib/module-itertools.html , paragraph 2,
    sentence 2.
     
    , Feb 21, 2008
    #10
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. jean-gert nesselbosch
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    340
    jean-gert nesselbosch
    Oct 20, 2005
  2. billiejoex

    glob.glob standardization

    billiejoex, Jun 27, 2007, in forum: Python
    Replies:
    3
    Views:
    273
    Tim Roberts
    Jun 29, 2007
  3. Paddy
    Replies:
    23
    Views:
    791
    Eduardo O. Padoan
    Feb 2, 2008
  4. SMH
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    886
    Peter Flynn
    Aug 18, 2011
  5. jean-gert nesselbosch

    standardization efforts concerning xml-parser-outputs

    jean-gert nesselbosch, Oct 20, 2005, in forum: Perl Misc
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    102
Loading...

Share This Page