From bradallen137 at gmail.com Sat Nov 7 23:18:19 2009 From: bradallen137 at gmail.com (Brad Allen) Date: Sat, 7 Nov 2009 16:18:19 -0600 Subject: [python-advocacy] How programming language webpages should be designed Message-ID: <4957f1ef0911071418t74d1bf61k3c95a190b7c794ae@mail.gmail.com> Jason Baker has interesting thoughts about how programming language web sites should be designed, and criticizes python.org for not putting code examples on the front page: http://jasonmbaker.com/how-programming-language-webpages-should-be-d From amnorvend at gmail.com Sun Nov 8 14:43:51 2009 From: amnorvend at gmail.com (Jason Baker) Date: Sun, 8 Nov 2009 07:43:51 -0600 Subject: [python-advocacy] How programming language webpages should be designed In-Reply-To: References: <4957f1ef0911071418t74d1bf61k3c95a190b7c794ae@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <816c4abb0911080543n48c39ed1hb9fb31b24d249bc3@mail.gmail.com> > Jason Baker has interesting thoughts about how programming language > web sites should be designed, and criticizes python.org for not > putting code examples on the front page: It's worth pointing out that I didn't intend for this post to just be a criticism of python.org. For the most part, python does all of the things that I list well... except what is in my opinion the most important one. That said, I won't be the person who sits back and criticizes without trying to change anything. Here's what I would like to propose: Have a set of simple examples (on average 4-5 lines, no more than 10) that demonstrate most of Python's major features and link to them on the front page. Something like this: http://wiki.python.org/moin/BeginnersGuide/Programmers/SimpleExamples I like this format because the examples are easy to understand, and they show off Python's strength: readability. I think that most people who have a bit of programming experience will be able to figure these out without too much description or even any interactive interpreter output. If this is something the community wants to go with, I'm willing to put time into writing this page. From paul at boddie.org.uk Sun Nov 8 18:29:30 2009 From: paul at boddie.org.uk (Paul Boddie) Date: Sun, 8 Nov 2009 18:29:30 +0100 Subject: [python-advocacy] How programming language webpages should be designed In-Reply-To: <816c4abb0911080543n48c39ed1hb9fb31b24d249bc3@mail.gmail.com> References: <4957f1ef0911071418t74d1bf61k3c95a190b7c794ae@mail.gmail.com> <816c4abb0911080543n48c39ed1hb9fb31b24d249bc3@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <200911081829.31138.paul@boddie.org.uk> On Sunday 08 November 2009 14:43:51 Jason Baker wrote: > > Jason Baker has interesting thoughts about how programming language > > web sites should be designed, and criticizes python.org for not > > putting code examples on the front page: > > It's worth pointing out that I didn't intend for this post to just be > a criticism of python.org. For the most part, python does all of the > things that I list well... except what is in my opinion the most > important one. I think your point is a very good one, which is why I responded to your blog entry in a comment. > That said, I won't be the person who sits back and criticizes without > trying to change anything. Here's what I would like to propose: > > Have a set of simple examples (on average 4-5 lines, no more than 10) > that demonstrate most of Python's major features and link to them on > the front page. Something like this: > http://wiki.python.org/moin/BeginnersGuide/Programmers/SimpleExamples I've added syntax colouring to these examples. Please revert the change if you don't like it or think that it's distracting. > I like this format because the examples are easy to understand, and > they show off Python's strength: readability. I think that most > people who have a bit of programming experience will be able to figure > these out without too much description or even any interactive > interpreter output. Yes, I think it's perplexing that Python's readability is promoted as a strength and yet there's an apparent reluctance to show any code. > If this is something the community wants to go with, I'm willing to > put time into writing this page. I want to encourage you and others to improve these resources. I recently stumbled across the "simple programs" page again on the Wiki, which was an initiative to show off programs of increasing length and complexity, but this brings me to another area of concern: some of the programs had been hastily modified to work with Python 3 - changing print statements to functions, for instance - and this actually changed the behaviour of the affected programs (the editor concerned was obviously not motivated to change them all) as well as making the programs inconsistent with the text. I suppose that this is another concern with Python 3 (which I'm sure I've also mentioned before): if one promotes Python, should programs use Python 3 syntax and features when many people will still be encountering Python 2 programs? It doesn't help that right at the very start of a beginner's experience with Python, there's a divergence between the dialects involving the print statement. Paul From goodger at python.org Sun Nov 8 18:40:20 2009 From: goodger at python.org (David Goodger) Date: Sun, 8 Nov 2009 18:40:20 +0100 Subject: [python-advocacy] How programming language webpages should be designed In-Reply-To: <200911081829.31138.paul@boddie.org.uk> References: <4957f1ef0911071418t74d1bf61k3c95a190b7c794ae@mail.gmail.com> <816c4abb0911080543n48c39ed1hb9fb31b24d249bc3@mail.gmail.com> <200911081829.31138.paul@boddie.org.uk> Message-ID: <4335d2c40911080940t3fed60fncfcf459309971a2f@mail.gmail.com> On Sun, Nov 8, 2009 at 18:29, Paul Boddie wrote: > Yes, I think it's perplexing that Python's readability is promoted as a > strength and yet there's an apparent reluctance to show any code. I don't think there's any reluctance. Nobody has ever done it, that's all. Even a simple thing as this, perhaps nobody ever thought to do it (or had the will to do it, or the ability to edit the site). -- David Goodger From carl at personnelware.com Sun Nov 8 18:56:14 2009 From: carl at personnelware.com (Carl Karsten) Date: Sun, 8 Nov 2009 11:56:14 -0600 Subject: [python-advocacy] How programming language webpages should be designed In-Reply-To: <200911081829.31138.paul@boddie.org.uk> References: <4957f1ef0911071418t74d1bf61k3c95a190b7c794ae@mail.gmail.com> <816c4abb0911080543n48c39ed1hb9fb31b24d249bc3@mail.gmail.com> <200911081829.31138.paul@boddie.org.uk> Message-ID: <549053140911080956o2d2dce58o1ce3b4e336ff744@mail.gmail.com> > brings me to another area of concern: some of the programs had been hastily > modified to work with Python 3 - changing print statements to functions, for > instance - and this actually changed the behaviour of the affected programs > (the editor concerned was obviously not motivated to change them all) as well > as making the programs inconsistent with the text. > > I suppose that this is another concern with Python 3 (which I'm sure I've also > mentioned before): if one promotes Python, should programs use Python 3 > syntax and features when many people will still be encountering Python 2 > programs? It doesn't help that right at the very start of a beginner's > experience with Python, there's a divergence between the dialects involving > the print statement. If the goal of what this list and thread is about is to promote python (which i am sure it is) then the site should use the new and improved Python 3. Some shops are stuck on python 2.3, some on .net, some on java, some with poor coding practices - That doesn't make Python any less wonderful, and it is the wonderful that we want people to understand. -- Carl K From goodger at python.org Sun Nov 8 19:30:08 2009 From: goodger at python.org (David Goodger) Date: Sun, 8 Nov 2009 19:30:08 +0100 Subject: [python-advocacy] How programming language webpages should be designed In-Reply-To: <549053140911080956o2d2dce58o1ce3b4e336ff744@mail.gmail.com> References: <4957f1ef0911071418t74d1bf61k3c95a190b7c794ae@mail.gmail.com> <816c4abb0911080543n48c39ed1hb9fb31b24d249bc3@mail.gmail.com> <200911081829.31138.paul@boddie.org.uk> <549053140911080956o2d2dce58o1ce3b4e336ff744@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <4335d2c40911081030l147a748u4200a7291bf4533d@mail.gmail.com> On Sun, Nov 8, 2009 at 18:56, Carl Karsten wrote: >> if one promotes Python, should programs use Python 3 >> syntax and features when many people will still be encountering Python 2 >> programs? It doesn't help that right at the very start of a beginner's >> experience with Python, there's a divergence between the dialects involving >> the print statement. > > If the goal of what this list and thread is about is to promote python > (which i am sure it is) then the site should use the new and improved > Python 3. I disagree with you there. We're still positioning Python 2.6 as the recommended version for most people, right? Python 3.1 is the cutting-edge version for those who know what they're doing. I think it's a great idea to put some code on the front page, with a link to further examples. Part of that should be a clear (but brief) explanation of the differences between 2.x and 3.x, specifically their audiences: who they're aimed at. Such a clear explanation is currently missing. A "Which Python?" link or sidebar should be prominent. As long as 2.x is listed first on the left-hand side under downloads, we should use 2.x syntax for intros, with links (or sidebars, whatever) to 3.x equivalents. When 2.x becomes legacy, then switch everything to 3.x. -- David Goodger From carl at personnelware.com Sun Nov 8 20:15:29 2009 From: carl at personnelware.com (Carl Karsten) Date: Sun, 8 Nov 2009 13:15:29 -0600 Subject: [python-advocacy] How programming language webpages should be designed In-Reply-To: <4335d2c40911081030l147a748u4200a7291bf4533d@mail.gmail.com> References: <4957f1ef0911071418t74d1bf61k3c95a190b7c794ae@mail.gmail.com> <816c4abb0911080543n48c39ed1hb9fb31b24d249bc3@mail.gmail.com> <200911081829.31138.paul@boddie.org.uk> <549053140911080956o2d2dce58o1ce3b4e336ff744@mail.gmail.com> <4335d2c40911081030l147a748u4200a7291bf4533d@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <549053140911081115p792be7ffl6cef423cd86990e1@mail.gmail.com> On Sun, Nov 8, 2009 at 12:30 PM, David Goodger wrote: > On Sun, Nov 8, 2009 at 18:56, Carl Karsten wrote: >>> if one promotes Python, should programs use Python 3 >>> syntax and features when many people will still be encountering Python 2 >>> programs? It doesn't help that right at the very start of a beginner's >>> experience with Python, there's a divergence between the dialects involving >>> the print statement. >> >> If the goal of what this list and thread is about is to promote python >> (which i am sure it is) then the site should use the new and improved >> Python 3. > > I disagree with you there. Do you disagree with the goal? > We're still positioning Python 2.6 as the > recommended version for most people, right? Who is we? I might be able to figure out what I recommend, but it would be way too small a group, and probably not representative of the group we are advocating to. Recommended for what? I can think of a few cases that would have different answers, like "need a job at a 2.4 shop" or "I want to write some scripts for the new Blender" (which requires 3 yay!) or "I want to be employable" For someone who has never seen python before, and has no requirements I tell them to look at 3. I think they will learn more quicker that way and can adapt to other things if they need to. The reason I ask "for what is because it may not need to be consistent with what is show cased. That sounds bait-and-switch but I am not sure it is, or that it is bad. > Python 3.1 is the > cutting-edge version for those who know what they're doing. I think > it's a great idea to put some code on the front page, with a link to > further examples. Part of that should be a clear (but brief) > explanation of the differences between 2.x and 3.x, specifically their > audiences: who they're aimed at. Such a clear explanation is currently > missing. A "Which Python?" link or sidebar should be prominent. I thought we wanted code on the front page, not a choice of links to code. "which version" also sounds like a good thing, but for other reasons than the goal of promoting. > > As long as 2.x is listed first on the left-hand side under downloads, > we should use 2.x syntax for intros, with links (or sidebars, > whatever) to 3.x equivalents. Why is 2 above 3? Seems to me 3 should be on top. > When 2.x becomes legacy, then switch > everything to 3.x. Depends on what you mean by legacy. (i bet you love this :) There may be more to the requirement than just "2 is legacy" - "popular" maybe, but I don't think so. I can't think of anything that makes me say 'stick with 2' so for now I'll focus on what you said, which i think is correct. If 2.x isn't legacy now, it wont be for years, like 10. what event will happen that hasn't happened yet that defines legacy? I think now that 3 is out, stable, in production and depended on (yay Blender!) that kinda makes 2 legacy. The reason 2 is used at all is because of existing code bases. Pretty sure that's the essence of legacy. -- Carl K From mtobis at gmail.com Sun Nov 8 20:37:34 2009 From: mtobis at gmail.com (Michael Tobis) Date: Sun, 8 Nov 2009 13:37:34 -0600 Subject: [python-advocacy] How programming language webpages should be designed In-Reply-To: <4335d2c40911081030l147a748u4200a7291bf4533d@mail.gmail.com> References: <4957f1ef0911071418t74d1bf61k3c95a190b7c794ae@mail.gmail.com> <816c4abb0911080543n48c39ed1hb9fb31b24d249bc3@mail.gmail.com> <200911081829.31138.paul@boddie.org.uk> <549053140911080956o2d2dce58o1ce3b4e336ff744@mail.gmail.com> <4335d2c40911081030l147a748u4200a7291bf4533d@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: The front page examples ought to be few and brief and ought to work without alteration in both 2.6 and 3.1 . mt From dgoodger at gmail.com Sun Nov 8 21:04:47 2009 From: dgoodger at gmail.com (David Goodger) Date: Sun, 8 Nov 2009 21:04:47 +0100 Subject: [python-advocacy] How programming language webpages should be designed In-Reply-To: <549053140911081115p792be7ffl6cef423cd86990e1@mail.gmail.com> References: <4957f1ef0911071418t74d1bf61k3c95a190b7c794ae@mail.gmail.com> <816c4abb0911080543n48c39ed1hb9fb31b24d249bc3@mail.gmail.com> <200911081829.31138.paul@boddie.org.uk> <549053140911080956o2d2dce58o1ce3b4e336ff744@mail.gmail.com> <4335d2c40911081030l147a748u4200a7291bf4533d@mail.gmail.com> <549053140911081115p792be7ffl6cef423cd86990e1@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <4335d2c40911081204m75162d3j163793a39c4ac725@mail.gmail.com> 2009/11/8 Carl Karsten : > On Sun, Nov 8, 2009 at 12:30 PM, David Goodger wrote: >> On Sun, Nov 8, 2009 at 18:56, Carl Karsten wrote: >>>> if one promotes Python, should programs use Python 3 >>>> syntax and features when many people will still be encountering Python 2 >>>> programs? It doesn't help that right at the very start of a beginner's >>>> experience with Python, there's a divergence between the dialects involving >>>> the print statement. >>> >>> If the goal of what this list and thread is about is to promote python >>> (which i am sure it is) then the site should use the new and improved >>> Python 3. >> >> I disagree with you there. > > Do you disagree with the goal? No, of course not. I disagree with the assertion that we should be using Python 3 syntax. I think we should primarily show Python 2 syntax, with Python 3 as an alternative. >> We're still positioning Python 2.6 as the >> recommended version for most people, right? > > Who is we? The Python community in general, the Python developers, and the people who maintain the website (the pydotorg group). >?I might be able to figure out what I recommend, but it > would be way too small a group, and probably not representative of the > group we are advocating to. Carl, please don't be obtuse. > Recommended for what? Python 2 is still recommended for most new users. Perhaps the clearest indication of this is on , where it states "If you don't know which version to use, start with Python 2.6.4; more existing third party software is compatible with Python 2 than Python 3 right now." We clearly need a better indication of who should be using which version. >> Python 3.1 is the >> cutting-edge version for those who know what they're doing. I think >> it's a great idea to put some code on the front page, with a link to >> further examples. Part of that should be a clear (but brief) >> explanation of the differences between 2.x and 3.x, specifically their >> audiences: who they're aimed at. Such a clear explanation is currently >> missing. A "Which Python?" link or sidebar should be prominent. > > I thought we wanted code on the front page, not a choice of links to code. > > "which version" also sounds like a good thing, but for other reasons > than the goal of promoting. I agree that some code on the front page is a good idea. I just don't think it should be Python 3, or not only Python 3. >> As long as 2.x is listed first on the left-hand side under downloads, >> we should use 2.x syntax for intros, with links (or sidebars, >> whatever) to 3.x equivalents. > > Why is 2 above 3? ?Seems to me 3 should be on top. This has been discussed many times on other lists, such as on python-dev, perhaps on pydotorg. The consensus is that Python 2.6 is the currently recommended stable production version. Somebody please correct me if I'm mistaken. (And please point me to the new decision.) >> When 2.x becomes legacy, then switch >> everything to 3.x. > > Depends on what you mean by legacy. ?(i bet you love this :) No I don't. You do seem to love picking fights though, and wasting people's time. > There may be more to the requirement than just "2 is legacy" - > "popular" maybe, but I don't think so. ?I can't think of anything that > makes me say 'stick with 2' so for now I'll focus on what you said, > which i think is correct. > > If 2.x isn't legacy now, it wont be for years, like 10. ?what event > will happen that hasn't happened yet that defines legacy? > > I think now that 3 is out, stable, in production and depended on (yay > Blender!) ?that kinda makes 2 legacy. ?The reason 2 is used at all is > because of existing code bases. ?Pretty sure that's the essence of > legacy. My understanding is that Python 2 is still the recommended version because so many 3rd-party libraries and frameworks still depend on it. I don't know exactly when Python 3 will become the recommended version for most new users. I don't decide that. Some day, the community in general will come to a consensus (prompted by Guido or someone else, or spontaneously, who knows) that Python 3 is now the version to recommend to most new users. To my knowledge, that hasn't happened yet. -- David Goodger From goodger at python.org Sun Nov 8 21:07:51 2009 From: goodger at python.org (David Goodger) Date: Sun, 8 Nov 2009 21:07:51 +0100 Subject: [python-advocacy] How programming language webpages should be designed In-Reply-To: References: <4957f1ef0911071418t74d1bf61k3c95a190b7c794ae@mail.gmail.com> <816c4abb0911080543n48c39ed1hb9fb31b24d249bc3@mail.gmail.com> <200911081829.31138.paul@boddie.org.uk> <549053140911080956o2d2dce58o1ce3b4e336ff744@mail.gmail.com> <4335d2c40911081030l147a748u4200a7291bf4533d@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <4335d2c40911081207o13d8b3f7tf79fc7323cb1ae31@mail.gmail.com> On Sun, Nov 8, 2009 at 20:37, Michael Tobis wrote: > The front page examples ought to be few and brief +1 > and ought to work > without alteration in both 2.6 and 3.1 . +0. Only if it doesn't make the code ugly or unnatural. For some examples, that should be easy to avoid. -- David Goodger From roy at panix.com Sun Nov 8 21:33:35 2009 From: roy at panix.com (Roy Smith) Date: Sun, 8 Nov 2009 15:33:35 -0500 Subject: [python-advocacy] How programming language webpages should be designed In-Reply-To: References: <4957f1ef0911071418t74d1bf61k3c95a190b7c794ae@mail.gmail.com> <816c4abb0911080543n48c39ed1hb9fb31b24d249bc3@mail.gmail.com> <200911081829.31138.paul@boddie.org.uk> <549053140911080956o2d2dce58o1ce3b4e336ff744@mail.gmail.com> <4335d2c40911081030l147a748u4200a7291bf4533d@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <072755bf1a129a2c15d514e2c9c18e17.squirrel@mail.panix.com> > The front page examples ought to be few and brief and ought to work > without alteration in both 2.6 and 3.1 . > > mt > _______________________________________________ > Advocacy mailing list > Advocacy at python.org > http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/advocacy > > It would be good if they would work in substantially older versions than 2.6. Looking at a couple of random RedHat boxes we've got here, it looks like AS4 shipped with 2.3 and AS3 with 2.2. True, AS3 and AS4 aren't current, but there's lots of those (and older) out in the field. The use case I see is some bored sysadmin hearing about Python, going to the web site, and saying, "OK, I'm willing to play with this a bit". He sees some sample code and tries it out on whatever box he happens to be on at the moment. If it doesn't work the first time, the most likely outcome is he'll just move on to something else. We've probably got an attention span window of about 3 minutes. I'm sure there are plenty of good examples we could come up with that work just fine all the way back to 2.0. Our goal is to get somebody hooked on the language in general. We can do that just fine with older versions. Once we've got them liking the basic language, there's plenty of time to show them all the improved features of newer versions. From bradallen137 at gmail.com Sun Nov 8 23:20:12 2009 From: bradallen137 at gmail.com (Brad Allen) Date: Sun, 8 Nov 2009 16:20:12 -0600 Subject: [python-advocacy] How programming language webpages should be designed In-Reply-To: References: <4957f1ef0911071418t74d1bf61k3c95a190b7c794ae@mail.gmail.com> <816c4abb0911080543n48c39ed1hb9fb31b24d249bc3@mail.gmail.com> <200911081829.31138.paul@boddie.org.uk> <549053140911080956o2d2dce58o1ce3b4e336ff744@mail.gmail.com> <4335d2c40911081030l147a748u4200a7291bf4533d@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <4957f1ef0911081420j7ad5dbaatb636dc304e74220b@mail.gmail.com> On Sun, Nov 8, 2009 at 1:37 PM, Michael Tobis wrote: > The front page examples ought to be few and brief and ought to work > without alteration in both 2.6 and 3.1 . +1 We're talking about simple examples for beginners so this shouldn't be a problem. For example, the Python 3 syntax for print statements also works in Python 2.6. print('hello world') From carl at personnelware.com Sun Nov 8 23:22:06 2009 From: carl at personnelware.com (Carl Karsten) Date: Sun, 8 Nov 2009 16:22:06 -0600 Subject: [python-advocacy] How programming language webpages should be designed In-Reply-To: <4335d2c40911081204m75162d3j163793a39c4ac725@mail.gmail.com> References: <4957f1ef0911071418t74d1bf61k3c95a190b7c794ae@mail.gmail.com> <816c4abb0911080543n48c39ed1hb9fb31b24d249bc3@mail.gmail.com> <200911081829.31138.paul@boddie.org.uk> <549053140911080956o2d2dce58o1ce3b4e336ff744@mail.gmail.com> <4335d2c40911081030l147a748u4200a7291bf4533d@mail.gmail.com> <549053140911081115p792be7ffl6cef423cd86990e1@mail.gmail.com> <4335d2c40911081204m75162d3j163793a39c4ac725@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <549053140911081422x58ff8178q84f7fab18a411064@mail.gmail.com> On Sun, Nov 8, 2009 at 2:04 PM, David Goodger wrote: > 2009/11/8 Carl Karsten : >> On Sun, Nov 8, 2009 at 12:30 PM, David Goodger wrote: >>> On Sun, Nov 8, 2009 at 18:56, Carl Karsten wrote: >>>>> if one promotes Python, should programs use Python 3 >>>>> syntax and features when many people will still be encountering Python 2 >>>>> programs? It doesn't help that right at the very start of a beginner's >>>>> experience with Python, there's a divergence between the dialects involving >>>>> the print statement. >>>> >>>> If the goal of what this list and thread is about is to promote python >>>> (which i am sure it is) then the site should use the new and improved >>>> Python 3. >>> >>> I disagree with you there. >> >> Do you disagree with the goal? > > No, of course not. I disagree with the assertion that we should be > using Python 3 syntax. I think we should primarily show Python 2 > syntax, with Python 3 as an alternative. > >>> We're still positioning Python 2.6 as the >>> recommended version for most people, right? >> >> Who is we? > > The Python community in general, the Python developers, and the people > who maintain the website (the pydotorg group). > >>?I might be able to figure out what I recommend, but it >> would be way too small a group, and probably not representative of the >> group we are advocating to. > > Carl, please don't be obtuse. > >> Recommended for what? > > Python 2 is still recommended for most new users. Perhaps the clearest > indication of this is on , where it > states "If you don't know which version to use, start with Python > 2.6.4; more existing third party software is compatible with Python 2 > than Python 3 right now." > > We clearly need a better indication of who should be using which version. > >>> Python 3.1 is the >>> cutting-edge version for those who know what they're doing. I think >>> it's a great idea to put some code on the front page, with a link to >>> further examples. Part of that should be a clear (but brief) >>> explanation of the differences between 2.x and 3.x, specifically their >>> audiences: who they're aimed at. Such a clear explanation is currently >>> missing. A "Which Python?" link or sidebar should be prominent. >> >> I thought we wanted code on the front page, not a choice of links to code. >> >> "which version" also sounds like a good thing, but for other reasons >> than the goal of promoting. > > I agree that some code on the front page is a good idea. I just don't > think it should be Python 3, or not only Python 3. "without alteration in both 2.6 and 3.1" I like that idea, until it comes to print. I can't think of sample code that doesn't use print. > >>> As long as 2.x is listed first on the left-hand side under downloads, >>> we should use 2.x syntax for intros, with links (or sidebars, >>> whatever) to 3.x equivalents. >> >> Why is 2 above 3? ?Seems to me 3 should be on top. > > This has been discussed many times on other lists, such as on > python-dev, perhaps on pydotorg. The consensus is that Python 2.6 is > the currently recommended stable production version. > > Somebody please correct me if I'm mistaken. (And please point me to > the new decision.) > >>> When 2.x becomes legacy, then switch >>> everything to 3.x. >> >> Depends on what you mean by legacy. ?(i bet you love this :) > > No I don't. You do seem to love picking fights though, and wasting > people's time. I love clarity. If I don't understand what someone is getting at, I ask. I would rather I didn't have to ask, but I try to be tolerant of my fellow humans. > >> There may be more to the requirement than just "2 is legacy" - >> "popular" maybe, but I don't think so. ?I can't think of anything that >> makes me say 'stick with 2' so for now I'll focus on what you said, >> which i think is correct. >> >> If 2.x isn't legacy now, it wont be for years, like 10. ?what event >> will happen that hasn't happened yet that defines legacy? >> >> I think now that 3 is out, stable, in production and depended on (yay >> Blender!) ?that kinda makes 2 legacy. ?The reason 2 is used at all is >> because of existing code bases. ?Pretty sure that's the essence of >> legacy. > > My understanding is that Python 2 is still the recommended version > because so many 3rd-party libraries and frameworks still depend on it. > I don't know exactly when Python 3 will become the recommended version > for most new users. I don't decide that. > > Some day, the community in general will come to a consensus (prompted > by Guido or someone else, or spontaneously, who knows) that Python 3 > is now the version to recommend to most new users. To my knowledge, > that hasn't happened yet. Even though I mildly disagree, it does sound reasonable for which version people should use. But I don't think "show people 3" should wait for the "2 is legacy" consensus. Showing people 3 will help move along 3's adoption. I think that is good, but it wouldn't take much to convince me otherwise. -- Carl K From fuzzyman at voidspace.org.uk Sun Nov 8 23:22:56 2009 From: fuzzyman at voidspace.org.uk (Michael Foord) Date: Sun, 08 Nov 2009 23:22:56 +0100 Subject: [python-advocacy] How programming language webpages should be designed In-Reply-To: <4957f1ef0911081420j7ad5dbaatb636dc304e74220b@mail.gmail.com> References: <4957f1ef0911071418t74d1bf61k3c95a190b7c794ae@mail.gmail.com> <816c4abb0911080543n48c39ed1hb9fb31b24d249bc3@mail.gmail.com> <200911081829.31138.paul@boddie.org.uk> <549053140911080956o2d2dce58o1ce3b4e336ff744@mail.gmail.com> <4335d2c40911081030l147a748u4200a7291bf4533d@mail.gmail.com> <4957f1ef0911081420j7ad5dbaatb636dc304e74220b@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <4AF744C0.5050001@voidspace.org.uk> Brad Allen wrote: > On Sun, Nov 8, 2009 at 1:37 PM, Michael Tobis wrote: > >> The front page examples ought to be few and brief and ought to work >> without alteration in both 2.6 and 3.1 . >> > > +1 > > We're talking about simple examples for beginners so this shouldn't be > a problem. For example, the Python 3 syntax for print statements also > works in Python 2.6. > > print('hello world') > But that's not how you should teach print in Python 2.6 - and it will break as soon as you add commas (you will then be printing a tuple). I'm in favour of adding a simple code example to the front page, but we should pick Python 2.6 or 3 and label it as such. Personally I think we should promote Python 3, but I wouldn't be against 2.6. All the best, Michael > _______________________________________________ > Advocacy mailing list > Advocacy at python.org > http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/advocacy > -- http://www.ironpythoninaction.com/ From mtobis at gmail.com Sun Nov 8 23:45:09 2009 From: mtobis at gmail.com (Michael Tobis) Date: Sun, 8 Nov 2009 16:45:09 -0600 Subject: [python-advocacy] How programming language webpages should be designed In-Reply-To: <4AF744C0.5050001@voidspace.org.uk> References: <4957f1ef0911071418t74d1bf61k3c95a190b7c794ae@mail.gmail.com> <816c4abb0911080543n48c39ed1hb9fb31b24d249bc3@mail.gmail.com> <200911081829.31138.paul@boddie.org.uk> <549053140911080956o2d2dce58o1ce3b4e336ff744@mail.gmail.com> <4335d2c40911081030l147a748u4200a7291bf4533d@mail.gmail.com> <4957f1ef0911081420j7ad5dbaatb636dc304e74220b@mail.gmail.com> <4AF744C0.5050001@voidspace.org.uk> Message-ID: The level of the target audience would be such that they would not think to print a tuple right away, and if they chanced to they would not be all that concerned by the parentheses, which does not constitute "breakage" at that level. The transition from 2.* to 3.* is already chasing people away. (I had a student assistant last summer who was quite concerned about it and resistant to Python on that account.) You don't want to make a fuss about this on the homepage if you can honestly avoid it. mt From carl at personnelware.com Mon Nov 9 00:05:15 2009 From: carl at personnelware.com (Carl Karsten) Date: Sun, 8 Nov 2009 17:05:15 -0600 Subject: [python-advocacy] code on python.org Message-ID: <549053140911081505x25ae84fep979517355bae54e7@mail.gmail.com> How about having some interactive examples like http://codepad.org/WeFsVveg -- Carl K From paul at boddie.org.uk Mon Nov 9 01:35:59 2009 From: paul at boddie.org.uk (Paul Boddie) Date: Mon, 9 Nov 2009 01:35:59 +0100 Subject: [python-advocacy] How programming language webpages should be designed In-Reply-To: References: <4957f1ef0911071418t74d1bf61k3c95a190b7c794ae@mail.gmail.com> <4AF744C0.5050001@voidspace.org.uk> Message-ID: <200911090136.00044.paul@boddie.org.uk> On Sunday 08 November 2009 23:45:09 Michael Tobis wrote: > The level of the target audience would be such that they would not > think to print a tuple right away, and if they chanced to they would > not be all that concerned by the parentheses, which does not > constitute "breakage" at that level. Michael Foord's point (and mine) is that anyone trying to print a number of things using the Python print statement will use commas to separate those things. Putting brackets around the stuff after "print" might produce the same effect in a Python 3 environment, but it causes a tuple to be printed in Python 2. Exactly this problem is what I was referring to with respect to the "simple programs" page: http://wiki.python.org/moin/SimplePrograms You can put brackets around stuff and then start using the formatting operator, but that obscures the simple things, and Python 3 is moving away from the formatting syntax that earlier versions of Python employ. > The transition from 2.* to 3.* is already chasing people away. (I had > a student assistant last summer who was quite concerned about it and > resistant to Python on that account.) You don't want to make a fuss > about this on the homepage if you can honestly avoid it. This was another reservation of mine about Python 3. Virtually all of the existing material about Python describes stuff which isn't the core developers' idea of what Python should be (or eventually become); insisting that Python 3 is now the "true Python" doesn't magic away all this existing stuff. So, presenting "Python code" to people now involves a nasty dilemma: either present the new stuff and get people confused about the differences between what they have in front of them and what people are now telling them, or present the old stuff and be prepared to say that it's not what the core developers would have you use. Paul From lac at openend.se Mon Nov 9 04:27:43 2009 From: lac at openend.se (Laura Creighton) Date: Mon, 09 Nov 2009 04:27:43 +0100 Subject: [python-advocacy] How programming language webpages should be designed In-Reply-To: Message from Paul Boddie of "Mon, 09 Nov 2009 01:35:59 +0100." <200911090136.00044.paul@boddie.org.uk> References: <4957f1ef0911071418t74d1bf61k3c95a190b7c794ae@mail.gmail.com> <4AF744C0.5050001@voidspace.org.uk> <200911090136.00044.paul@boddie.org.uk> Message-ID: <200911090327.nA93Rh9l030262@theraft.openend.se> One possibility -- make links on the front page 'towers of hanoi' 'a simple web scraper' ... (these are just ideas, we can have whatever code we want, and maybe we show some with ) when you click on the link you get a 3.1 version with a link in the top right corner (would you like to see the version for 2.6) If you click that link you would get the same thing in 2.6 format, with a link (would you like to see the version for 3.1). We could even have a separate link on both pages (explanation of the differences between 2.6 and 3.1) Laura From lac at openend.se Mon Nov 9 04:49:32 2009 From: lac at openend.se (Laura Creighton) Date: Mon, 09 Nov 2009 04:49:32 +0100 Subject: [python-advocacy] How programming language webpages should be designed In-Reply-To: Message from Laura Creighton of "Mon, 09 Nov 2009 04:27:43 +0100." <200911090327.nA93Rh9l030262@theraft.openend.se> References: <4957f1ef0911071418t74d1bf61k3c95a190b7c794ae@mail.gmail.com> <4AF744C0.5050001@voidspace.org.uk> <200911090136.00044.paul@boddie.org.uk> <200911090327.nA93Rh9l030262@theraft.openend.se> Message-ID: <200911090349.nA93nW32031510@theraft.openend.se> In a message of Mon, 09 Nov 2009 04:27:43 +0100, Laura Creighton writes: >One possibility -- make links on the front page > >'towers of hanoi' >'a simple web scraper' >... > >(these are just ideas, we can have whatever code we want, and maybe we >show some with ) Ah, I meant we could show some lines of it and then depending on whether code on the front page is what we want, or just links to code on the front page .. Sorry to be unclear, Laura > >when you click on the link you get a 3.1 version with a link in the >top right corner (would you like to see the version for 2.6) >If you click that link you would get the same thing in 2.6 format, >with a link (would you like to see the version for 3.1). We >could even have a separate link on both pages (explanation of >the differences between 2.6 and 3.1) > >Laura From aahz at pythoncraft.com Mon Nov 9 05:58:43 2009 From: aahz at pythoncraft.com (Aahz) Date: Sun, 8 Nov 2009 20:58:43 -0800 Subject: [python-advocacy] How programming language webpages should be designed In-Reply-To: <549053140911081115p792be7ffl6cef423cd86990e1@mail.gmail.com> References: <4957f1ef0911071418t74d1bf61k3c95a190b7c794ae@mail.gmail.com> <816c4abb0911080543n48c39ed1hb9fb31b24d249bc3@mail.gmail.com> <200911081829.31138.paul@boddie.org.uk> <549053140911080956o2d2dce58o1ce3b4e336ff744@mail.gmail.com> <4335d2c40911081030l147a748u4200a7291bf4533d@mail.gmail.com> <549053140911081115p792be7ffl6cef423cd86990e1@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <20091109045843.GA18254@panix.com> On Sun, Nov 08, 2009, Carl Karsten wrote: > > I thought we wanted code on the front page, not a choice of links to code. What we? My personal preference is for a prominent link to sample code; I can't support more than one code snippet on the front page given all the other competing uses for that space (I'm speaking with my webmaster hat on, although I'm not speaking for the webmaster team), and I think that several code samples works better. -- Aahz (aahz at pythoncraft.com) <*> http://www.pythoncraft.com/ [on old computer technologies and programmers] "Fancy tail fins on a brand new '59 Cadillac didn't mean throwing out a whole generation of mechanics who started with model As." --Andrew Dalke From carl at personnelware.com Mon Nov 9 08:13:47 2009 From: carl at personnelware.com (Carl Karsten) Date: Mon, 9 Nov 2009 01:13:47 -0600 Subject: [python-advocacy] How programming language webpages should be designed In-Reply-To: <20091109045843.GA18254@panix.com> References: <4957f1ef0911071418t74d1bf61k3c95a190b7c794ae@mail.gmail.com> <816c4abb0911080543n48c39ed1hb9fb31b24d249bc3@mail.gmail.com> <200911081829.31138.paul@boddie.org.uk> <549053140911080956o2d2dce58o1ce3b4e336ff744@mail.gmail.com> <4335d2c40911081030l147a748u4200a7291bf4533d@mail.gmail.com> <549053140911081115p792be7ffl6cef423cd86990e1@mail.gmail.com> <20091109045843.GA18254@panix.com> Message-ID: <549053140911082313j3ef5cc56j1b4c64b0e3e5a390@mail.gmail.com> On Sun, Nov 8, 2009 at 10:58 PM, Aahz wrote: > On Sun, Nov 08, 2009, Carl Karsten wrote: >> >> I thought we wanted code on the front page, not a choice of links to code. > > What we? ?My personal preference is for a prominent link to sample code; > I can't support more than one code snippet on the front page given all > the other competing uses for that space (I'm speaking with my webmaster > hat on, although I'm not speaking for the webmaster team), and I think > that several code samples works better. We the people that think we it :) speaking of what is competing for space.... I am taking a harsh look at http://python.org as a sub set of our target audience. I would look for something to read - center has stuff, starts with some marketing stuff which I would just dismiss, runs on various OS's (like most things), it's free (that's nice) description of the PSF, OK i'm done. As a programmer, I like to look at code. pretty sure I would spend more time looking at some interesting code than reading a glossy marketing flier. -- Carl K From amnorvend at gmail.com Mon Nov 9 14:32:28 2009 From: amnorvend at gmail.com (Jason Baker) Date: Mon, 9 Nov 2009 07:32:28 -0600 Subject: [python-advocacy] How programming language webpages should be designed In-Reply-To: <549053140911082313j3ef5cc56j1b4c64b0e3e5a390@mail.gmail.com> References: <4957f1ef0911071418t74d1bf61k3c95a190b7c794ae@mail.gmail.com> <816c4abb0911080543n48c39ed1hb9fb31b24d249bc3@mail.gmail.com> <200911081829.31138.paul@boddie.org.uk> <549053140911080956o2d2dce58o1ce3b4e336ff744@mail.gmail.com> <4335d2c40911081030l147a748u4200a7291bf4533d@mail.gmail.com> <549053140911081115p792be7ffl6cef423cd86990e1@mail.gmail.com> <20091109045843.GA18254@panix.com> <549053140911082313j3ef5cc56j1b4c64b0e3e5a390@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <816c4abb0911090532j2a40214fv7c59c31d9b0c5b2e@mail.gmail.com> Here's the way I see things: the only way to remove confusion about whether to go with Python 2 or 3 is going to be to remove one of those choices. Until that time, we're going to have to live with that. So do we want to dodge the issue, or do we want to hit it head on? I say we hit it head on. So here's what I propose: 1. We have an example on the front page that works in both Python 2 and Python 3. This is a tall order, but we are talking about the front page of python.org here. I think we should choose an algorithm that everyone knows and is largely independent of the language it is implemented in. For example, what about the Fibonacci sequence? Sure it's cliched, but it meets these requirements. 2. We have a link on the front page to more examples both somewhere in the sidebar and as a link below the main example. Again, I propose that these examples should be minimal (no more than around 10 lines of code). This page should have three sections: a Python 2 section, a Python 3 section, and a "should I choose Python 2 or 3?" section (or at least a link to the page answering this question). 3. I also like Laura's idea to have links to solutions to other well-known problems. For instance, we could have a link to a quicksort example, binary search, towers of hanoi, etc. We could put this in an "advanced examples" section. I think that we should shoot for having a Python 2 version and a Python 3 version of each example. However, being that these examples are more complex, we may just have to take what we can get. Any thoughts on this plan of action? From mtobis at gmail.com Mon Nov 9 17:28:47 2009 From: mtobis at gmail.com (Michael Tobis) Date: Mon, 9 Nov 2009 10:28:47 -0600 Subject: [python-advocacy] How programming language webpages should be designed In-Reply-To: <816c4abb0911090532j2a40214fv7c59c31d9b0c5b2e@mail.gmail.com> References: <4957f1ef0911071418t74d1bf61k3c95a190b7c794ae@mail.gmail.com> <816c4abb0911080543n48c39ed1hb9fb31b24d249bc3@mail.gmail.com> <200911081829.31138.paul@boddie.org.uk> <549053140911080956o2d2dce58o1ce3b4e336ff744@mail.gmail.com> <4335d2c40911081030l147a748u4200a7291bf4533d@mail.gmail.com> <549053140911081115p792be7ffl6cef423cd86990e1@mail.gmail.com> <20091109045843.GA18254@panix.com> <549053140911082313j3ef5cc56j1b4c64b0e3e5a390@mail.gmail.com> <816c4abb0911090532j2a40214fv7c59c31d9b0c5b2e@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: On Mon, Nov 9, 2009 at 7:32 AM, Jason Baker wrote: > ?1. We have an example on the front page that works in both Python 2 > and Python 3. ?This is a tall order, but we are talking about the > front page of python.org here. It's not THAT tall of an order. As I understand it Beazley's new edition of Essential Python (don't have my copy yet) has a section on how to write such ambidextrous code. Other than only passing one string to "print" at a time (not that big a constraint in practice; you simply concatenate strings with "+" rather than "," and wrap non-stings in str()) that doesn't touch elementary aspects of the language much. mt From aahz at pythoncraft.com Mon Nov 9 17:36:09 2009 From: aahz at pythoncraft.com (Aahz) Date: Mon, 9 Nov 2009 08:36:09 -0800 Subject: [python-advocacy] How programming language webpages should be designed In-Reply-To: <549053140911082313j3ef5cc56j1b4c64b0e3e5a390@mail.gmail.com> References: <4957f1ef0911071418t74d1bf61k3c95a190b7c794ae@mail.gmail.com> <816c4abb0911080543n48c39ed1hb9fb31b24d249bc3@mail.gmail.com> <200911081829.31138.paul@boddie.org.uk> <549053140911080956o2d2dce58o1ce3b4e336ff744@mail.gmail.com> <4335d2c40911081030l147a748u4200a7291bf4533d@mail.gmail.com> <549053140911081115p792be7ffl6cef423cd86990e1@mail.gmail.com> <20091109045843.GA18254@panix.com> <549053140911082313j3ef5cc56j1b4c64b0e3e5a390@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <20091109163609.GA18853@panix.com> On Mon, Nov 09, 2009, Carl Karsten wrote: > > I am taking a harsh look at http://python.org as a sub set of our > target audience. I would look for something to read - center has > stuff, starts with some marketing stuff which I would just dismiss, > runs on various OS's (like most things), it's free (that's nice) > description of the PSF, OK i'm done. Now, it's "I". Okay, well, there have been lots of iterations of that beginning chunk of text over the years. Some kind of intro is necessary to assure people that they're on python.ORG instead of python.COM (the latter is not safe for work, before you go check). There probably would not be many objections to tweaking the intro. The biggest chunk of screen space goes to news items, and if you want to change that, you'll probably have a fight on your hands. Even sticking a five-line chunk of sample code between intro and news would be difficult because it would increase the clutter. The left nav bar is absolutely essential. There's lots of whitespace on top, but I know from past experience that getting rid of some would be another fight. (There are strong advocates of whitespace.) The pretty much leaves the right side, which again leads to a fight over what the space should be used for, plus it's narrow enough to make it difficult to put code there. It will be much easier to argue for two big links at the top of the left navbar: * "What is Python?", which would start with the code samples * "Learn Python Now!" linking to a live tutorial where people can try code over the web. Anyone arguing in favor of putting code on the website should create a mockup of how they want the new website to look. You will get a better reception if you make it an HTML mockup instead of creating a PDF or GIF (so people can try out the mockup in multiple browsers). -- Aahz (aahz at pythoncraft.com) <*> http://www.pythoncraft.com/ [on old computer technologies and programmers] "Fancy tail fins on a brand new '59 Cadillac didn't mean throwing out a whole generation of mechanics who started with model As." --Andrew Dalke From d-beazley at sbcglobal.net Mon Nov 9 19:25:38 2009 From: d-beazley at sbcglobal.net (David Beazley) Date: Mon, 9 Nov 2009 12:25:38 -0600 Subject: [python-advocacy] How programming language webpages should be designed In-Reply-To: References: <4957f1ef0911071418t74d1bf61k3c95a190b7c794ae@mail.gmail.com> <816c4abb0911080543n48c39ed1hb9fb31b24d249bc3@mail.gmail.com> <200911081829.31138.paul@boddie.org.uk> <549053140911080956o2d2dce58o1ce3b4e336ff744@mail.gmail.com> <4335d2c40911081030l147a748u4200a7291bf4533d@mail.gmail.com> <549053140911081115p792be7ffl6cef423cd86990e1@mail.gmail.com> <20091109045843.GA18254@panix.com> <549053140911082313j3ef5cc56j1b4c64b0e3e5a390@mail.gmail.com> <816c4abb0911090532j2a40214fv7c59c31d9b0c5b2e@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <334E70B3-BD1D-4278-842B-D074FF2FFC3C@sbcglobal.net> Actually, I would slightly disagree. In the "Essential Reference", I do have some examples that use print() in a way that will work for both Python 2 and 3. However, I also explicitly state that the only reason I do that is so that examples meant to illustrate some feature of Python not related to printing work with both versions. There is no section on explicitly writing code that works with both versions. If you ask me, it's probably better to pick a reasonable example that is not so focused on printing. I don't know, do something like an example that posts something on Twitter, or some other example that does something interesting, but which is not totally fixated on printing. Cheers, Dave On Nov 9, 2009, at 10:28 AM, Michael Tobis wrote: > On Mon, Nov 9, 2009 at 7:32 AM, Jason Baker > wrote: > >> 1. We have an example on the front page that works in both Python 2 >> and Python 3. This is a tall order, but we are talking about the >> front page of python.org here. > > It's not THAT tall of an order. As I understand it Beazley's new > edition of Essential Python (don't have my copy yet) has a section on > how to write such ambidextrous code. Other than only passing one > string to "print" at a time (not that big a constraint in practice; > you simply concatenate strings with "+" rather than "," and wrap > non-stings in str()) that doesn't touch elementary aspects of the > language much. > > mt > _______________________________________________ > Advocacy mailing list > Advocacy at python.org > http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/advocacy From paul at boddie.org.uk Mon Nov 9 22:35:28 2009 From: paul at boddie.org.uk (Paul Boddie) Date: Mon, 9 Nov 2009 22:35:28 +0100 Subject: [python-advocacy] How programming language webpages should be designed In-Reply-To: <816c4abb0911090532j2a40214fv7c59c31d9b0c5b2e@mail.gmail.com> References: <4957f1ef0911071418t74d1bf61k3c95a190b7c794ae@mail.gmail.com> <549053140911082313j3ef5cc56j1b4c64b0e3e5a390@mail.gmail.com> <816c4abb0911090532j2a40214fv7c59c31d9b0c5b2e@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <200911092235.28941.paul@boddie.org.uk> On Monday 09 November 2009 14:32:28 Jason Baker wrote: > Here's the way I see things: the only way to remove confusion about > whether to go with Python 2 or 3 is going to be to remove one of those > choices. Until that time, we're going to have to live with that. So > do we want to dodge the issue, or do we want to hit it head on? I say > we hit it head on. I agree! > So here's what I propose: > > 1. We have an example on the front page that works in both Python 2 > and Python 3. This is a tall order, but we are talking about the > front page of python.org here. I think we should choose an algorithm > that everyone knows and is largely independent of the language it is > implemented in. For example, what about the Fibonacci sequence? Sure > it's cliched, but it meets these requirements. You can probably pull that from the "simple programs" page, and it might even work in Python 3 if you add the mandatory pair of brackets. I'm no big fan of Python 3 and won't be switching to it in the foreseeable future, but despite possible differences between the dialects, this exercise actually gives people the opportunity to spin their favourite story: that the differences really aren't that much. Although people probably don't approve of separate versions of such examples - it's admitting that Pythons 2 and 3 are not totally compatible, and the tendency is to downplay or hide this fact - by showing the superficially minor changes, it allows everyone to address concerns or criticisms about Python 3 being a big upheaval (which many people will be aware of by now). > 2. We have a link on the front page to more examples both somewhere > in the sidebar and as a link below the main example. Again, I propose > that these examples should be minimal (no more than around 10 lines of > code). This page should have three sections: a Python 2 section, a > Python 3 section, and a "should I choose Python 2 or 3?" section (or > at least a link to the page answering this question). Yes, I don't see what's wrong with being honest about the choice of Python 2 versus Python 3. There is, after all, still a choice. > 3. I also like Laura's idea to have links to solutions to other > well-known problems. For instance, we could have a link to a > quicksort example, binary search, towers of hanoi, etc. We could put > this in an "advanced examples" section. I think that we should shoot > for having a Python 2 version and a Python 3 version of each example. > However, being that these examples are more complex, we may just have > to take what we can get. To an extent, the simple programs page comes to the rescue again, here. I disagree with Aahz about real-estate on the front page: showing the very thing the site is about is far more important than having testimonials, for example (important though they are), occupying large areas of the page. I was going to use Ferrari's Web site as an example of showing off the goods, and their "launchpad" site does have a big picture of a car on it, but their international site makes the mistake of using Flash, meaning that there's a big blank space when I look at it. Nevertheless, even if I did have Flash, I would be disappointed if it just had some prose about "who drives Ferrari vehicles". > Any thoughts on this plan of action? I encourage you further on this plan. Personally, my eyes tend to glaze over at the forest of hierarchical sidebar menus on python.org, so anything which focuses the content is a good thing. Paul From baiju.m.mail at gmail.com Tue Nov 10 14:10:32 2009 From: baiju.m.mail at gmail.com (Baiju M) Date: Tue, 10 Nov 2009 18:40:32 +0530 Subject: [python-advocacy] code on python.org In-Reply-To: <549053140911081505x25ae84fep979517355bae54e7@mail.gmail.com> References: <549053140911081505x25ae84fep979517355bae54e7@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <3171e4820911100510u7df19aadrac3eaa71ad44e8bb@mail.gmail.com> On Mon, Nov 9, 2009 at 4:35 AM, Carl Karsten wrote: > How about having some interactive examples like > > http://codepad.org/WeFsVveg Sometimes back I started a page in wiki with this idea. http://wiki.python.org/moin/LearnByObservation I have some more: http://live.gnome.org/PyGTK/LearnByObservation But I couldn't proceed further. Regards, Baiju M From aahz at pythoncraft.com Tue Nov 10 19:28:46 2009 From: aahz at pythoncraft.com (Aahz) Date: Tue, 10 Nov 2009 10:28:46 -0800 Subject: [python-advocacy] How programming language webpages should be designed In-Reply-To: <200911092235.28941.paul@boddie.org.uk> References: <4957f1ef0911071418t74d1bf61k3c95a190b7c794ae@mail.gmail.com> <549053140911082313j3ef5cc56j1b4c64b0e3e5a390@mail.gmail.com> <816c4abb0911090532j2a40214fv7c59c31d9b0c5b2e@mail.gmail.com> <200911092235.28941.paul@boddie.org.uk> Message-ID: <20091110182846.GA15379@panix.com> On Mon, Nov 09, 2009, Paul Boddie wrote: > > To an extent, the simple programs page comes to the rescue again, > here. I disagree with Aahz about real-estate on the front page: > showing the very thing the site is about is far more important > than having testimonials, for example (important though they are), > occupying large areas of the page. Far more important for whom? If you agree that testimonials are important, saying that code examples are "far more important" implies that you think that code examples are more important than everything else on that page, including the left navbar links and the news items. I have to strongly disagree with that. But assuming you're simply engaging in hyperbole, I repeat what I said earlier: go ahead and create a sample front page replacing the testimonials with code samples. Until someone is willing to invest the effort into writing HTML, I think we're arguing in a vacuum. Side note: the webmaster team is always looking for volunteers..... -- Aahz (aahz at pythoncraft.com) <*> http://www.pythoncraft.com/ [on old computer technologies and programmers] "Fancy tail fins on a brand new '59 Cadillac didn't mean throwing out a whole generation of mechanics who started with model As." --Andrew Dalke From carl at personnelware.com Tue Nov 10 20:59:27 2009 From: carl at personnelware.com (Carl Karsten) Date: Tue, 10 Nov 2009 13:59:27 -0600 Subject: [python-advocacy] How programming language webpages should be designed In-Reply-To: <20091110182846.GA15379@panix.com> References: <4957f1ef0911071418t74d1bf61k3c95a190b7c794ae@mail.gmail.com> <549053140911082313j3ef5cc56j1b4c64b0e3e5a390@mail.gmail.com> <816c4abb0911090532j2a40214fv7c59c31d9b0c5b2e@mail.gmail.com> <200911092235.28941.paul@boddie.org.uk> <20091110182846.GA15379@panix.com> Message-ID: <549053140911101159o1c10f395j95177c9d7af59582@mail.gmail.com> On Tue, Nov 10, 2009 at 12:28 PM, Aahz wrote: > On Mon, Nov 09, 2009, Paul Boddie wrote: >> >> To an extent, the simple programs page comes to the rescue again, >> here. I disagree with Aahz about real-estate on the front page: >> showing the very thing the site is about is far more important >> than having testimonials, for example (important though they are), >> occupying large areas of the page. > > Far more important for whom? ?If you agree that testimonials are > important, saying that code examples are "far more important" implies > that you think that code examples are more important than everything > else on that page, including the left navbar links and the news items. > > I have to strongly disagree with that. > > But assuming you're simply engaging in hyperbole, I repeat what I said > earlier: go ahead and create a sample front page replacing the > testimonials with code samples. ?Until someone is willing to invest the > effort into writing HTML, I think we're arguing in a vacuum. I am willing to invest the effort if it was likely it would be used, which right now it seems more unlikely given the conflicting goals. but I think that satisfies your requirement, so there is a point in the discussion (I don't think it is an argument until 2 people have strong conflicting opinions, and so far I am not seeing that.) I do agree with the group that thinks there should be code on the opening page. I am not sure what the rest of that group thinks, but I am in favor of replacing quite a bit of what is currently the 'first view' (center, above the fold, what people are going to read before they click away.) But I also think I have a different view of the goal of the first view than others, especially whoever did the current layout. Given that, I think we need to talk about goals before bothering with implementation, like "put code on the page." I see 4 groups of people that should be considered: (list is in alphabetic order to obscure any sense of importance, which I am undecided on) 1. potential python developers - need to write something, get to pick the tools, wondering what python has to offer, maybe considering a career choice. 2. python developers (old and new, but the choice has been made) 3. python users (I have an python app, I need help making it run) 4. technical management that gets to pick tools for a team I have no problem catering to all 4 groups, but each groups needs are fairly different and much like pycon talk selection, there are more options than there is room for, so we have to figure out what to cut. Personally, I think we should give as much as we can to 1 and 4, so 2 and 3 get one link each: "developers" and something like "help me make my python app run" or "my app broke" (thats the only reason I can see #3 coming to the site.) 1 and 4 are groups we want to motivate. we have many motivational things to offer, some will apply to both groups, but most wont apply equally. For instance, when asked "why Django?" Keyton Weissinger said: "There are better, more technically beautiful architectures out there, I find Django to be simple to use an amazingly well documented. I don't get into infrastructure debates, other people care, I don't." http://pyatl.blip.tv/file/2794179/ 26:03 I actually picked Turbo Gears because I was one of those people who cared, but switched when asked to do some Django work. Cash isn't everything, for instance I turned down doing PeopleSoft (very high paying) and MsSQL work. > > Side note: the webmaster team is always looking for volunteers..... > -- > Aahz (aahz at pythoncraft.com) ? ? ? ? ? <*> ? ? ? ? http://www.pythoncraft.com/ > > [on old computer technologies and programmers] ?"Fancy tail fins on a > brand new '59 Cadillac didn't mean throwing out a whole generation of > mechanics who started with model As." ?--Andrew Dalke > _______________________________________________ > Advocacy mailing list > Advocacy at python.org > http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/advocacy > > -- Carl K From paul at boddie.org.uk Wed Nov 11 00:35:12 2009 From: paul at boddie.org.uk (Paul Boddie) Date: Wed, 11 Nov 2009 00:35:12 +0100 Subject: [python-advocacy] How programming language webpages should be designed In-Reply-To: <549053140911101159o1c10f395j95177c9d7af59582@mail.gmail.com> References: <4957f1ef0911071418t74d1bf61k3c95a190b7c794ae@mail.gmail.com> <20091110182846.GA15379@panix.com> <549053140911101159o1c10f395j95177c9d7af59582@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <200911110035.13219.paul@boddie.org.uk> On Tuesday 10 November 2009 20:59:27 Carl Karsten wrote: > On Tue, Nov 10, 2009 at 12:28 PM, Aahz wrote: > > > > Far more important for whom? ?If you agree that testimonials are > > important, saying that code examples are "far more important" implies > > that you think that code examples are more important than everything > > else on that page, including the left navbar links and the news items. > > > > I have to strongly disagree with that. Let's agree to disagree, then. Example code isn't more important for people who already use Python, but then they're probably not going to the front page all the time. I hardly ever visit the front page, myself; I go directly to docs.python.org, wiki.python.org, and occasionally pypi.python.org. News is important because it gives the impression of vitality, but then you can argue that blogs and "tweets" are important, too, and many sites actually incorporate that stuff on the front page as well. And the navigation menus on python.org are, shall we say, less than optimal, although I'm not going to deny that they have a purpose. It's interesting that in a recent python-dev thread, one of the contributors said that he'd rather try out a bunch of languages than use Python 3 (for many, the only one they will have recognised would probably be Haskell). Upon looking at the site for one of those languages, you'd probably end up screaming "Just show me some code!" while reading the lengthy description of how it relates to Self and Smalltalk - maybe it's aimed at people who've already decided that they like Smalltalk. Many people would run out of patience on such a site when many would argue that how a language appears is an important factor in whether people will use it or not. I still think that it's weird that the subject - a language - is surely worthy of its own place amongst the prose in another (natural) language, and yet is kept hidden from the reader. It's like reviewing a painting but not actually showing it. > > But assuming you're simply engaging in hyperbole, I repeat what I said > > earlier: go ahead and create a sample front page replacing the > > testimonials with code samples. ?Until someone is willing to invest the > > effort into writing HTML, I think we're arguing in a vacuum. I actually wrote up some thoughts on this three years ago when GvR suggested that Python should be marketed. You can still find them here: http://wiki.python.org/moin/MarketingPython Testimonials say something like "Python is a safe choice and trusted/innovative companies/organisations really like it". To an extent this is a great differentiator in Python advocacy because people have collected a lot of this kind of material, but it only really persuades one group of decision-makers (the managers), and as PHP and Rails have shown, the other group (the people doing the work) have grown more influential over recent years (or their influence has been recognised). > I am willing to invest the effort if it was likely it would be used, > which right now it seems more unlikely given the conflicting goals. > but I think that satisfies your requirement, so there is a point in > the discussion (I don't think it is an argument until 2 people have > strong conflicting opinions, and so far I am not seeing that.) > > I do agree with the group that thinks there should be code on the > opening page. I am not sure what the rest of that group thinks, but I > am in favor of replacing quite a bit of what is currently the 'first > view' (center, above the fold, what people are going to read before > they click away.) I agree with this, and I'm quite happy to put forward actual designs for criticism. > But I also think I have a different view of the goal of the first view > than others, especially whoever did the current layout. > > Given that, I think we need to talk about goals before bothering with > implementation, like "put code on the page." I'm quite happy to work with whatever we have on the Wiki at this point, although I don't think we're short of material. > I see 4 groups of people that should be considered: (list is in > alphabetic order to obscure any sense of importance, which I am > undecided on) > > 1. potential python developers - need to write something, get to pick > the tools, wondering what python has to offer, maybe considering a > career choice. > 2. python developers (old and new, but the choice has been made) > 3. python users (I have an python app, I need help making it run) > 4. technical management that gets to pick tools for a team This is like the Marketing Python page I wrote, except that I more or less ignore 2 and 3, since the topic was marketing to people who don't use Python already. > I have no problem catering to all 4 groups, but each groups needs are > fairly different and much like pycon talk selection, there are more > options than there is room for, so we have to figure out what to cut. > > Personally, I think we should give as much as we can to 1 and 4, so 2 > and 3 get one link each: "developers" and something like "help me > make my python app run" or "my app broke" (thats the only reason I can > see #3 coming to the site.) In fact, a lot of people in group #3 will never make it to python.org unless they downloaded the application from a site they found via python.org, and even then they're more likely to just go to where they found it (or complain to their distribution vendor). [...] > > Side note: the webmaster team is always looking for volunteers..... I don't mind drafting concrete suggestions, but I feel that my volunteer budget is already spent on a number of other areas, I'm afraid. There's only so much time I can devote to all of this. Paul From carl at personnelware.com Wed Nov 11 00:46:01 2009 From: carl at personnelware.com (Carl Karsten) Date: Tue, 10 Nov 2009 17:46:01 -0600 Subject: [python-advocacy] how can Ubuntu push Python? Message-ID: <549053140911101546i1218916bk7f7c5ffb4aad2763@mail.gmail.com> A few years ago, a Ubutnu dev said: "Ubuntu is committed to providing a complete Python development environment out of the box. It's a conscious decision, made without pretense of language neutrality." (I can probably dig up the name if anyone cares.) I am not denying it, and if you poke around there is evidence of it, but maybe it would be good for both Ubuntu and Python if that was advertised? I am sure the answer is yes, but have no idea how to implement it, which seems like there should accompany a suggestion sent to Ubuntu. -- Carl K From amnorvend at gmail.com Wed Nov 11 01:09:48 2009 From: amnorvend at gmail.com (Jason Baker) Date: Tue, 10 Nov 2009 18:09:48 -0600 Subject: [python-advocacy] how can Ubuntu push Python? In-Reply-To: <549053140911101546i1218916bk7f7c5ffb4aad2763@mail.gmail.com> References: <549053140911101546i1218916bk7f7c5ffb4aad2763@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <816c4abb0911101609l4bf68757lb82550544270d3a1@mail.gmail.com> On Tue, Nov 10, 2009 at 5:46 PM, Carl Karsten wrote: > A few years ago, a Ubutnu dev said: "Ubuntu is committed to providing > a complete Python development environment out of the box. It's a > conscious decision, made without pretense of language neutrality." ?(I > can probably dig up the name if anyone cares.) > > I am not denying it, and if you poke around there is evidence of it, > but maybe it would be good for both Ubuntu and Python if that was > advertised? I'm a little bit skeptical about "advertising" it, at least directly. We don't want Python to be cubby-holed as a Linux language (or a Windows language, or an OS X language). That said, I do think that we can take advantage of this if we play our cards right. I think the best way to handle this is to think of more ways to push Ubuntu users to ask themselves "I already have a great development environment set up and I can do all kinds of cool stuff, why not give Python a shot?" Perhaps what we need is some more quick guides to making neat stuff under ubuntu. From amnorvend at gmail.com Wed Nov 11 01:12:53 2009 From: amnorvend at gmail.com (Jason Baker) Date: Tue, 10 Nov 2009 18:12:53 -0600 Subject: [python-advocacy] How programming language webpages should be designed In-Reply-To: <20091110182846.GA15379@panix.com> References: <4957f1ef0911071418t74d1bf61k3c95a190b7c794ae@mail.gmail.com> <549053140911082313j3ef5cc56j1b4c64b0e3e5a390@mail.gmail.com> <816c4abb0911090532j2a40214fv7c59c31d9b0c5b2e@mail.gmail.com> <200911092235.28941.paul@boddie.org.uk> <20091110182846.GA15379@panix.com> Message-ID: <816c4abb0911101612p128124ces9bd9a579579bf363@mail.gmail.com> On Tue, Nov 10, 2009 at 12:28 PM, Aahz wrote: > But assuming you're simply engaging in hyperbole, I repeat what I said > earlier: go ahead and create a sample front page replacing the > testimonials with code samples. ?Until someone is willing to invest the > effort into writing HTML, I think we're arguing in a vacuum. I *really* wish I could do this, but any HTML I put together would probably make everyone cringe in horror. Here's my suggestion though: I seriously doubt that anyone really even *reads* the part that's not bolded in the top center blurb. Why not just get rid of it to make room for a code sample? From tleeuwenburg at gmail.com Wed Nov 11 01:30:03 2009 From: tleeuwenburg at gmail.com (Tennessee Leeuwenburg) Date: Wed, 11 Nov 2009 11:30:03 +1100 Subject: [python-advocacy] how can Ubuntu push Python? In-Reply-To: <816c4abb0911101609l4bf68757lb82550544270d3a1@mail.gmail.com> References: <549053140911101546i1218916bk7f7c5ffb4aad2763@mail.gmail.com> <816c4abb0911101609l4bf68757lb82550544270d3a1@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <43c8685c0911101630o2ca6a0btd5c992d9f8d6d6f0@mail.gmail.com> On Wed, Nov 11, 2009 at 11:09 AM, Jason Baker wrote: > On Tue, Nov 10, 2009 at 5:46 PM, Carl Karsten > wrote: > > A few years ago, a Ubutnu dev said: "Ubuntu is committed to providing > > a complete Python development environment out of the box. It's a > > conscious decision, made without pretense of language neutrality." (I > > can probably dig up the name if anyone cares.) > > > > I am not denying it, and if you poke around there is evidence of it, > > but maybe it would be good for both Ubuntu and Python if that was > > advertised? > > I'm a little bit skeptical about "advertising" it, at least directly. > We don't want Python to be cubby-holed as a Linux language (or a > Windows language, or an OS X language). That said, I do think that we > can take advantage of this if we play our cards right. I think the > best way to handle this is to think of more ways to push Ubuntu users > to ask themselves "I already have a great development environment set > up and I can do all kinds of cool stuff, why not give Python a shot?" > > Perhaps what we need is some more quick guides to making neat stuff > under ubuntu. > I think that's a fantastic idea. "5 cool things you can do with Python on Ubuntu" for example... +1! -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From amnorvend at gmail.com Wed Nov 11 15:52:17 2009 From: amnorvend at gmail.com (Jason Baker) Date: Wed, 11 Nov 2009 08:52:17 -0600 Subject: [python-advocacy] How programming language webpages should be designed In-Reply-To: <549053140911101159o1c10f395j95177c9d7af59582@mail.gmail.com> References: <4957f1ef0911071418t74d1bf61k3c95a190b7c794ae@mail.gmail.com> <549053140911082313j3ef5cc56j1b4c64b0e3e5a390@mail.gmail.com> <816c4abb0911090532j2a40214fv7c59c31d9b0c5b2e@mail.gmail.com> <200911092235.28941.paul@boddie.org.uk> <20091110182846.GA15379@panix.com> <549053140911101159o1c10f395j95177c9d7af59582@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <816c4abb0911110652vfed2b34h63340a3e0002f760@mail.gmail.com> On Tue, Nov 10, 2009 at 1:59 PM, Carl Karsten wrote: > 1. potential python developers - need to write something, get to pick > the tools, wondering what python has to offer, maybe considering a > career choice. > 2. python developers (old and new, but the choice has been made) > 3. python users (I have an python app, I need help making it run) > 4. technical management that gets to pick tools for a team > > I have no problem catering to all 4 groups, but each groups needs are > fairly different and much like pycon talk selection, there are more > options than there is room for, so we have to figure out what to cut. Personally, I think that it's easy to make the decision to cut #3 out. Not because they aren't important, but more because there's not really a lot we can do to help them aside from giving instructions on how to install python. Personally, I think that we need to focus primarily on #1 for the front page. I think that will be best for groups 1 and 4 (and likely 2 as well). The kind of marketing that we're doing right now sounds like the kind of thing that would attract PHBs who are likely to say "oh, that's cute" and then choose Java or C# anyway because they're "standard". I think that we should really go after technical decision makers who are actually technical. And I think they're more likely to be swayed by two things: 1. The amount of available people who know the language 2. The technical merits of it And I think the best way to address both of those concerns is to make it easy to learn the language, not to say things like "Industrial Light and Magic is using this, why aren't you?" From carl at personnelware.com Wed Nov 11 18:43:33 2009 From: carl at personnelware.com (Carl Karsten) Date: Wed, 11 Nov 2009 11:43:33 -0600 Subject: [python-advocacy] How programming language webpages should be designed In-Reply-To: <816c4abb0911110652vfed2b34h63340a3e0002f760@mail.gmail.com> References: <4957f1ef0911071418t74d1bf61k3c95a190b7c794ae@mail.gmail.com> <549053140911082313j3ef5cc56j1b4c64b0e3e5a390@mail.gmail.com> <816c4abb0911090532j2a40214fv7c59c31d9b0c5b2e@mail.gmail.com> <200911092235.28941.paul@boddie.org.uk> <20091110182846.GA15379@panix.com> <549053140911101159o1c10f395j95177c9d7af59582@mail.gmail.com> <816c4abb0911110652vfed2b34h63340a3e0002f760@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <549053140911110943g3f5cd86ep9f36d84395714d6f@mail.gmail.com> On Wed, Nov 11, 2009 at 8:52 AM, Jason Baker wrote: > On Tue, Nov 10, 2009 at 1:59 PM, Carl Karsten wrote: >> 1. potential python developers - need to write something, get to pick >> the tools, wondering what python has to offer, maybe considering a >> career choice. >> 2. python developers (old and new, but the choice has been made) >> 3. python users (I have an python app, I need help making it run) >> 4. technical management that gets to pick tools for a team >> >> I have no problem catering to all 4 groups, but each groups needs are >> fairly different and much like pycon talk selection, there are more >> options than there is room for, so we have to figure out what to cut. > > Personally, I think that it's easy to make the decision to cut #3 out. > ?Not because they aren't important, but more because there's not > really a lot we can do to help them aside from giving instructions on > how to install python. > > Personally, I think that we need to focus primarily on #1 for the > front page. ?I think that will be best for groups 1 and 4 (and likely > 2 as well). > > The kind of marketing that we're doing right now sounds like the kind > of thing that would attract PHBs who are likely to say "oh, that's > cute" and then choose Java or C# anyway because they're "standard". ?I > think that we should really go after technical decision makers who are > actually technical. ?And I think they're more likely to be swayed by > two things: > > ?1. The amount of available people who know the language > ?2. The technical merits of it > > And I think the best way to address both of those concerns is to make > it easy to learn the language, not to say things like "Industrial > Light and Magic is using this, why aren't you?" I completely agree. I was on the fence about the PHBs, but I can see enough of them doing what you suggest that it isn't worth reducing the potential developer content. We can still have it available, just not on the opening view. -- Carl K From rayallen153 at googlemail.com Thu Nov 12 12:37:08 2009 From: rayallen153 at googlemail.com (Ray Allen) Date: Thu, 12 Nov 2009 11:37:08 +0000 Subject: [python-advocacy] How programming language webpages should be designed Message-ID: Hi, After sending some suggestions to webmaster, I was informed about this list. Looking through this thread, it's great to see much of what I was thinking has already been discussed (namely that Python homepage should have some example code and Python itself should be more heavily marketed). It seems that what is needed now is some example code. On the 2.6 or 3.0 question, I would imagine that it would be easy to have both available as tabs with 2.6 (or whatever is in most use) displaying by default. I'd like to see it possible to execute the code too. My thoughts on what code to use: something that works with lists, is highly readable and reinforces the benefits of Python. I can't design webpages, but by way of a contribution I've got a code suggestion. Hope this helps! Ray Allen """Example Python Program""" import random # Create and add to a list python = [] python.append("Easy to read") python.append("Fast to code") python.append("Quick to learn") python.append("Modular and object oriented") python.append("Open source and cross platform") # Shuffle list random.shuffle(python) # Loop through list count = 1 print "Python is ... " for each in python: print count,each count += 1 print "Discover more at http://www.python.org" -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- """Example Python Program""" import random # Create and add to a list python = [] python.append("Easy to read") python.append("Fast to code") python.append("Quick to learn") python.append("Modular and object oriented") python.append("Open source and cross platform") # Shuffle list random.shuffle(python) # Loop through list count = 1 print "Python is ... " for each in python: print count,each count += 1 print "Discover more at http://www.python.org" From carl at personnelware.com Thu Nov 12 14:50:52 2009 From: carl at personnelware.com (Carl Karsten) Date: Thu, 12 Nov 2009 07:50:52 -0600 Subject: [python-advocacy] How programming language webpages should be designed In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <549053140911120550r72d57660s5c5adadcd9987c12@mail.gmail.com> On Thu, Nov 12, 2009 at 5:37 AM, Ray Allen wrote: > Hi, > After sending some suggestions to webmaster, I was informed about this > list.? Looking through this thread, it's great to see much of what I was > thinking has already been discussed (namely that Python homepage should have > some example code and Python itself should be more heavily marketed).? It > seems that what is needed now is some example code.? On the 2.6 or 3.0 > question, I would imagine that it would be easy to have both available as > tabs with 2.6 (or whatever is in most use) displaying by default.? I'd like > to see it possible to execute the code too. http://codepad.org/eRDY42Lj > My thoughts on what code to > use: something that works with lists, is highly readable and reinforces the > benefits of Python. A dict would be nice too, but I don't want so much in one snippit that it becomes hard to follow. I like that your code has some marketing embedded in it. >? I can't design webpages, but by way of a contribution > I've got a code suggestion.? Hope this helps! > Ray Allen > > """Example Python Program""" > > import random > > # Create and add to a list > python = [] > python.append("Easy to read") > python.append("Fast to code") > python.append("Quick to learn") > python.append("Modular and object oriented") > python.append("Open source and cross platform") > > # Shuffle list > random.shuffle(python) > > # Loop through list > count = 1 > print "Python is ... " > for each in python: > ??? print count,each > ??? count += 1 > > print "Discover more at http://www.python.org" > > > _______________________________________________ > Advocacy mailing list > Advocacy at python.org > http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/advocacy > > -- Carl K From rayallen153 at googlemail.com Thu Nov 12 15:39:59 2009 From: rayallen153 at googlemail.com (Ray Allen) Date: Thu, 12 Nov 2009 14:39:59 +0000 Subject: [python-advocacy] How programming language webpages should be designed In-Reply-To: <549053140911120550r72d57660s5c5adadcd9987c12@mail.gmail.com> References: <549053140911120550r72d57660s5c5adadcd9987c12@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: I'd like > > to see it possible to execute the code too. > > http://codepad.org/eRDY42Lj > ***Hopefully, we'd be able to allow interactive execution thereby allowing the user to guess ouptut first and witness the shuffle function in action. I lvery much like the interactive shell used for the tutorial on the ruby site. A dict would be nice too, but I don't want so much in one snippit > that it becomes hard to follow. > > I like that your code has some marketing embedded in it. > ***Thanks. The code as it stands is simple to follow, but it includes quite a few concepts: the use of a standard library funciton; list creation; list method; iteration; strings; integer; print output. In hindsight, I guess it would remain simple and readable if we added a bit more flow control (such as an if statement) but I'm not sure about dictionaires or classes. These are soon discovered in the tutorial/documentation and are probably best avoided if this is just intended to give a taster. """Example Python Program""" import random # Create and add to a list python = [] python.append("Easy to read") python.append("Fast to code") python.append("Quick to learn") python.append("Modular and object oriented") python.append("Open source and cross platform") # Shuffle list random.shuffle(python) # Loop through list count = 1 print "Python is ... " for each in python: print count,each count += 1 print "Discover more at http://www.python.org" -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From roy at panix.com Thu Nov 12 16:09:57 2009 From: roy at panix.com (Roy Smith) Date: Thu, 12 Nov 2009 10:09:57 -0500 Subject: [python-advocacy] How programming language webpages should be designed In-Reply-To: References: <549053140911120550r72d57660s5c5adadcd9987c12@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <82D1D0CA-5579-43C6-B2AF-AFA0CA235B00@panix.com> > # Create and add to a list > python = [] > python.append("Easy to read") > python.append("Fast to code") > python.append("Quick to learn") > python.append("Modular and object oriented") > python.append("Open source and cross platform") I'm not sure what this is intended to demonstrate, but it's certainly not a good example of idiomatic python code. The ratio of real data to cruft is about 1:1 python = {"Easy to read", "Fast to code", etc "Open source and cross platform"] is certainly the way anybody would write that. ---------------- Roy Smith roy at panix.com -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From roy at panix.com Thu Nov 12 16:11:47 2009 From: roy at panix.com (Roy Smith) Date: Thu, 12 Nov 2009 10:11:47 -0500 Subject: [python-advocacy] How programming language webpages should be designed In-Reply-To: <82D1D0CA-5579-43C6-B2AF-AFA0CA235B00@panix.com> References: <549053140911120550r72d57660s5c5adadcd9987c12@mail.gmail.com> <82D1D0CA-5579-43C6-B2AF-AFA0CA235B00@panix.com> Message-ID: Well, except for the '[' -> '{' typo I made :-) On Nov 12, 2009, at 10:09 AM, Roy Smith wrote: >> # Create and add to a list >> python = [] >> python.append("Easy to read") >> python.append("Fast to code") >> python.append("Quick to learn") >> python.append("Modular and object oriented") >> python.append("Open source and cross platform") > > I'm not sure what this is intended to demonstrate, but it's > certainly not a good example of idiomatic python code. The ratio of > real data to cruft is about 1:1 > > python = {"Easy to read", > "Fast to code", > etc > "Open source and cross platform"] > > is certainly the way anybody would write that. > > ---------------- > Roy Smith > roy at panix.com > > > > ---------------- Roy Smith roy at panix.com -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From ziade.tarek at gmail.com Thu Nov 12 16:19:03 2009 From: ziade.tarek at gmail.com (=?ISO-8859-1?Q?Tarek_Ziad=E9?=) Date: Thu, 12 Nov 2009 16:19:03 +0100 Subject: [python-advocacy] How programming language webpages should be designed In-Reply-To: References: <549053140911120550r72d57660s5c5adadcd9987c12@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <94bdd2610911120719h38a5f7f7n525a5bd8eb1cbdae@mail.gmail.com> On Thu, Nov 12, 2009 at 3:39 PM, Ray Allen wrote: [..] > > # Loop through list > count = 1 > print "Python is ... " > for each in python: > ??? print count,each > ??? count += 1 I'd replace this bloc by: # Loop through list print "Python is ... " for index, each in enumerate(python): print index + 1, each (using enumerate is much more pythonic than using a count variable) Regards Tarek From carl at personnelware.com Thu Nov 12 17:00:58 2009 From: carl at personnelware.com (Carl Karsten) Date: Thu, 12 Nov 2009 10:00:58 -0600 Subject: [python-advocacy] example code Message-ID: <549053140911120800p37a4480dh724296f2069f45cc@mail.gmail.com> 2009/11/12 Tarek Ziad? : > On Thu, Nov 12, 2009 at 3:39 PM, Ray Allen wrote: > [..] >> >> # Loop through list >> count = 1 >> print "Python is ... " >> for each in python: >> ??? print count,each >> ??? count += 1 > > I'd replace this bloc by: > > # Loop through list > print "Python is ... " > for index, each in enumerate(python): > ? ?print index + 1, each > > (using enumerate is much more pythonic than using a count variable) I would avoid the counter. I learned to iterate a list by using a counter as an index into the list. When I was shown that I didn't need the counter, I felt uneasy - perhaps even in denial that this was a good thing - seemed like a short cut. Weeks or months later it hit me: The reason I needed it in those other languages is because they didn't have this 'feature', so the counter/index/item was a work around. A few months ago someone getting started with python was asking me ~"why is the counter/index/item pattern so cumbersome?" A:"Because you normally don't need the counter." I could see in his eyes the exact same disbelief I had felt. I think we should to focus on what makes python different. -- Carl K From rayallen153 at googlemail.com Thu Nov 12 17:33:20 2009 From: rayallen153 at googlemail.com (Ray Allen) Date: Thu, 12 Nov 2009 16:33:20 +0000 Subject: [python-advocacy] example code In-Reply-To: <549053140911120800p37a4480dh724296f2069f45cc@mail.gmail.com> References: <549053140911120800p37a4480dh724296f2069f45cc@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: Thanks for the comments. Taking them onboard, we'd end up with the following.. """Example Python Program""" import random # Create list python = ["Easy to read", "Fast to code", "Quick to learn", "Modular and object oriented"] # Append list python.append("Open source and cross platform") # Shuffle list random.shuffle(python) # Loop list print "Python is ... " for index, each in enumerate(python): print index + 1, each print "Discover more at http://www.python.org" It's fewer lines than many 'helloworld!' examples in other languages, but it demonstrates a few good features without confusing anybody. 2009/11/12 Carl Karsten > 2009/11/12 Tarek Ziad? : > > On Thu, Nov 12, 2009 at 3:39 PM, Ray Allen > wrote: > > [..] > >> > >> # Loop through list > >> count = 1 > >> print "Python is ... " > >> for each in python: > >> print count,each > >> count += 1 > > > > I'd replace this bloc by: > > > > # Loop through list > > print "Python is ... " > > for index, each in enumerate(python): > > print index + 1, each > > > > (using enumerate is much more pythonic than using a count variable) > > I would avoid the counter. > > I learned to iterate a list by using a counter as an index into the > list. When I was shown that I didn't need the counter, I felt uneasy > - perhaps even in denial that this was a good thing - seemed like a > short cut. Weeks or months later it hit me: The reason I needed it > in those other languages is because they didn't have this 'feature', > so the counter/index/item was a work around. > > A few months ago someone getting started with python was asking me > ~"why is the counter/index/item pattern so cumbersome?" A:"Because > you normally don't need the counter." I could see in his eyes the > exact same disbelief I had felt. > > I think we should to focus on what makes python different. > > -- > Carl K > _______________________________________________ > Advocacy mailing list > Advocacy at python.org > http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/advocacy > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From roy at panix.com Thu Nov 12 17:46:49 2009 From: roy at panix.com (Roy Smith) Date: Thu, 12 Nov 2009 11:46:49 -0500 Subject: [python-advocacy] example code In-Reply-To: References: <549053140911120800p37a4480dh724296f2069f45cc@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <024fdc7b24e1970ed9d35725805ab63e.squirrel@mail.panix.com> > # Loop list > print "Python is ... " > for index, each in enumerate(python): > print index + 1, each Idiomatic python doesn't loop, it iterates. That's more than just nit-picking words. The iterator concept is fundamental. It's not just that we have iterators, but that there's a standard iterator protocol so all iterators look and feel the same (as opposed to, say, C++, where every time I use an iterator I need to look up how the iterator for this particular class works, because they're all different). What you want to do is demonstrate how iterators work (i.e. how easy they are to use). The extra fluff with enumerate and printing the numbers just obscures the main point you're trying to make. I suggest: # Loop list print "Python is ... " for attribute in python: print attribute From carl at personnelware.com Thu Nov 12 18:04:40 2009 From: carl at personnelware.com (Carl Karsten) Date: Thu, 12 Nov 2009 11:04:40 -0600 Subject: [python-advocacy] example code In-Reply-To: References: <549053140911120800p37a4480dh724296f2069f45cc@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <549053140911120904v1da0af39se14073b58e983faf@mail.gmail.com> On Thu, Nov 12, 2009 at 10:33 AM, Ray Allen wrote: > Thanks for the comments.? Taking them onboard, we'd end up with the > following.. > > """Example Python Program""" > > import random > > # Create? list > python = ["Easy to read", > "Fast to code", > "Quick to learn", > "Modular and object oriented"] > > # Append list > python.append("Open source and cross platform") > > # Shuffle list > random.shuffle(python) > > # Loop list > print "Python is ... " > for index, each in enumerate(python): each is a keyword in other languages (for each foo in bar) so it may add confusion here. for feature in python: print(feature) I also think we should leave out the comments. at least these. I doubt anyone puts this level of comment in their code. We want to keep the snippet short, and I am pretty sure anyone who understands the comment will also understand the code. > ??? print index + 1, each > > print "Discover more at http://www.python.org" > > It's fewer lines than many 'helloworld!' examples in other languages, but it > demonstrates a few good features without confusing anybody. > > 2009/11/12 Carl Karsten >> >> 2009/11/12 Tarek Ziad? : >> > On Thu, Nov 12, 2009 at 3:39 PM, Ray Allen >> > wrote: >> > [..] >> >> >> >> # Loop through list >> >> count = 1 >> >> print "Python is ... " >> >> for each in python: >> >> ??? print count,each >> >> ??? count += 1 >> > >> > I'd replace this bloc by: >> > >> > # Loop through list >> > print "Python is ... " >> > for index, each in enumerate(python): >> > ? ?print index + 1, each >> > >> > (using enumerate is much more pythonic than using a count variable) >> >> I would avoid the counter. >> >> I learned to iterate a list by using a counter as an index into the >> list. ?When I was shown that I didn't need the counter, I felt uneasy >> - perhaps even in denial that this was a good thing - seemed like a >> short cut. ? Weeks or months later it hit me: The reason I needed it >> in those other languages is because they didn't have this 'feature', >> so the counter/index/item was a work around. >> >> A few months ago someone getting started with python was asking me >> ~"why is the counter/index/item pattern so cumbersome?" ?A:"Because >> you normally don't need the counter." ?I could see in his eyes the >> exact same disbelief I had felt. >> >> I think we should to focus on what makes python different. >> >> -- >> Carl K >> _______________________________________________ >> Advocacy mailing list >> Advocacy at python.org >> http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/advocacy > > -- Carl K From aahz at pythoncraft.com Thu Nov 12 18:20:21 2009 From: aahz at pythoncraft.com (Aahz) Date: Thu, 12 Nov 2009 09:20:21 -0800 Subject: [python-advocacy] example code In-Reply-To: References: <549053140911120800p37a4480dh724296f2069f45cc@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <20091112172021.GA5726@panix.com> On Thu, Nov 12, 2009, Ray Allen wrote: > > # Create list > python = ["Easy to read", > "Fast to code", > "Quick to learn", > "Modular and object oriented"] AFAIK, almost everyone indents multi-line expressions. There are several ways to do it, this is my preferred version: python = [ "Easy to read", "Fast to code", "Quick to learn", "Modular and object oriented", ] The reason I prefer this is because it makes it easy to edit the list, specifically including the trailing comma on the last element. (E.g. it's much easier to delete the first list element than when you put it next to the opening bracket -- just delete the line.) It's also easy to read because the beginning and end of the list are highly visible. I prefer to indent only one level rather than matching up the beginning and ending brackets because that gives more line length to the list contents. -- Aahz (aahz at pythoncraft.com) <*> http://www.pythoncraft.com/ [on old computer technologies and programmers] "Fancy tail fins on a brand new '59 Cadillac didn't mean throwing out a whole generation of mechanics who started with model As." --Andrew Dalke From ziade.tarek at gmail.com Thu Nov 12 18:21:39 2009 From: ziade.tarek at gmail.com (=?ISO-8859-1?Q?Tarek_Ziad=E9?=) Date: Thu, 12 Nov 2009 18:21:39 +0100 Subject: [python-advocacy] How programming language webpages should be designed In-Reply-To: References: <549053140911120550r72d57660s5c5adadcd9987c12@mail.gmail.com> <94bdd2610911120719h38a5f7f7n525a5bd8eb1cbdae@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <94bdd2610911120921w33d0d3bcw42913a44a18012f3@mail.gmail.com> On Thu, Nov 12, 2009 at 4:59 PM, Michael Tobis wrote: > OK, now we need to decide whether the code is aimed at beginners > rather than professionals. > > I am fond of this trick as a python demo: > > #### > > # pythagorean triples > > def triples(upto=100): > ? ?R = lambda N : range(1,N+1) > ? ?for triple in [ > ? ? ? ? ? ?(x, y, z) for z in R(upto) for y in R(z) for x in R(y) > ? ? ? ? ? ?if x*x + y*y == z*z]: > ? ? ? ?print triple > > triples() > > #### > > Exercises: 1) write it as a one-liner 2) eliminate redundant triples > like (6,8,10) which is really the (3,4,5) triple repeated 3) make it > go faster (it's O(N^3); not difficult to make it O(N^2)) > > This is an elementary exercise (no imports) that shows off some less > mundane features of Python. > > Showing off SimpleHTTPServer is also a good idea to demonstrate the > ideas of included batteries. > > I like Dave's idea of a Twitter client. ?Recursive puzzles, like > Sudoko or 8 queens... > > We need to come up with examples where the objective is easy to > understand and where python is extraordinary, at least compared to > what they are probably already using. > (replying on-list, I've figured out you missed the reply-all) Maybe a random script can be displayed when the page is displayed, so we can have several snippets ? Tarek From rayallen153 at googlemail.com Thu Nov 12 18:38:26 2009 From: rayallen153 at googlemail.com (Ray Allen) Date: Thu, 12 Nov 2009 17:38:26 +0000 Subject: [python-advocacy] How programming language webpages should be designed In-Reply-To: <94bdd2610911120921w33d0d3bcw42913a44a18012f3@mail.gmail.com> References: <549053140911120550r72d57660s5c5adadcd9987c12@mail.gmail.com> <94bdd2610911120719h38a5f7f7n525a5bd8eb1cbdae@mail.gmail.com> <94bdd2610911120921w33d0d3bcw42913a44a18012f3@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: Thanks for the advice on the list indentation, comments and avoiding 'each' as a variable - changes applied. I think it's right to keep iteration as simple as possible, but I also think it's worth keeping an explicit count. This provides the opportunity to demo the ease with which an integer variable can be set. That leaves me with: """Example Python Program""" import random python = ["Easy to read", "Fast to code", "Quick to learn", "Modular and object oriented"] python.append("Open source and cross platform") random.shuffle(python) count = 1 print "Python is ... " for feature in python: print count,feature count += 1 print "Discover more at http://www.python.org" Not sure about the pythagorean triples as a means of demonstrating python code. I was aiming for something that demonstrated to the uninitiated just how close to psuedocode Python could look. Ray -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From aahz at pythoncraft.com Thu Nov 12 19:21:38 2009 From: aahz at pythoncraft.com (Aahz) Date: Thu, 12 Nov 2009 10:21:38 -0800 Subject: [python-advocacy] How programming language webpages should be designed In-Reply-To: <94bdd2610911120921w33d0d3bcw42913a44a18012f3@mail.gmail.com> References: <549053140911120550r72d57660s5c5adadcd9987c12@mail.gmail.com> <94bdd2610911120719h38a5f7f7n525a5bd8eb1cbdae@mail.gmail.com> <94bdd2610911120921w33d0d3bcw42913a44a18012f3@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <20091112182138.GA28440@panix.com> On Thu, Nov 12, 2009, Tarek Ziad? wrote: > > Maybe a random script can be displayed when the page is displayed, so > we can have several snippets ? That's half easy. That is, there currently is a mechanism for randomly switching contents each time the site gets built, but because it's static HTML, there's no mechanism for switching on each page load. (I'm a fairly strong proponent for keeping the front page static.) -- Aahz (aahz at pythoncraft.com) <*> http://www.pythoncraft.com/ [on old computer technologies and programmers] "Fancy tail fins on a brand new '59 Cadillac didn't mean throwing out a whole generation of mechanics who started with model As." --Andrew Dalke From roy at panix.com Thu Nov 12 19:22:13 2009 From: roy at panix.com (Roy Smith) Date: Thu, 12 Nov 2009 13:22:13 -0500 Subject: [python-advocacy] How programming language webpages should be designed In-Reply-To: <94bdd2610911120921w33d0d3bcw42913a44a18012f3@mail.gmail.com> References: <549053140911120550r72d57660s5c5adadcd9987c12@mail.gmail.com> <94bdd2610911120719h38a5f7f7n525a5bd8eb1cbdae@mail.gmail.com> <94bdd2610911120921w33d0d3bcw42913a44a18012f3@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <816aa0b99700aa17a289c1226fc749a0.squirrel@mail.panix.com> Yikes! That looks more like an entry for an Obfuscated Python contest than something we want to put on the home page as an example of how simple and appealing Python is. > On Thu, Nov 12, 2009 at 4:59 PM, Michael Tobis wrote: >> OK, now we need to decide whether the code is aimed at beginners >> rather than professionals. >> >> I am fond of this trick as a python demo: >> >> #### >> >> # pythagorean triples >> >> def triples(upto=100): >> ? ?R = lambda N : range(1,N+1) >> ? ?for triple in [ >> ? ? ? ? ? ?(x, y, z) for z in R(upto) for y in R(z) for x in R(y) >> ? ? ? ? ? ?if x*x + y*y == z*z]: >> ? ? ? ?print triple >> >> triples() >> >> #### >> >> Exercises: 1) write it as a one-liner 2) eliminate redundant triples >> like (6,8,10) which is really the (3,4,5) triple repeated 3) make it >> go faster (it's O(N^3); not difficult to make it O(N^2)) >> >> This is an elementary exercise (no imports) that shows off some less >> mundane features of Python. >> >> Showing off SimpleHTTPServer is also a good idea to demonstrate the >> ideas of included batteries. >> >> I like Dave's idea of a Twitter client. ?Recursive puzzles, like >> Sudoko or 8 queens... >> >> We need to come up with examples where the objective is easy to >> understand and where python is extraordinary, at least compared to >> what they are probably already using. >> > > (replying on-list, I've figured out you missed the reply-all) > > Maybe a random script can be displayed when the page is displayed, so > we can have several snippets ? > > Tarek > _______________________________________________ > Advocacy mailing list > Advocacy at python.org > http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/advocacy > > From fuzzyman at voidspace.org.uk Thu Nov 12 19:37:18 2009 From: fuzzyman at voidspace.org.uk (Michael Foord) Date: Thu, 12 Nov 2009 19:37:18 +0100 Subject: [python-advocacy] How programming language webpages should be designed In-Reply-To: References: <549053140911120550r72d57660s5c5adadcd9987c12@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <4AFC55DE.5050202@voidspace.org.uk> Ray Allen wrote: > I'd like > > > to see it possible to execute the code too. > > http://codepad.org/eRDY42Lj > > > ***Hopefully, we'd be able to allow interactive execution thereby > allowing the user to guess ouptut first and witness the shuffle > function in action. I lvery much like the interactive shell used for > the tutorial on the ruby site. > One possibility would be "Try Python". It uses Silverlight to execute Python *in* the browser: http://www.trypython.org/ All the best, Michael Foord > A dict would be nice too, but I don't want so much in one snippit > that it becomes hard to follow. > > I like that your code has some marketing embedded in it. > > > ***Thanks. The code as it stands is simple to follow, but it includes > quite a few concepts: the use of a standard library funciton; list > creation; list method; iteration; strings; integer; print output. > In hindsight, I guess it would remain simple and readable if we added > a bit more flow control (such as an if statement) but I'm not sure > about dictionaires or classes. These are soon discovered in the > tutorial/documentation and are probably best avoided if this is just > intended to give a taster. > > """Example Python Program""" > > import random > > # Create and add to a list > python = [] > python.append("Easy to read") > python.append("Fast to code") > python.append("Quick to learn") > python.append("Modular and object oriented") > python.append("Open source and cross platform") > > # Shuffle list > random.shuffle(python) > > # Loop through list > count = 1 > print "Python is ... " > for each in python: > print count,each > count += 1 > > print "Discover more at http://www.python.org" > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > _______________________________________________ > Advocacy mailing list > Advocacy at python.org > http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/advocacy > -- http://www.ironpythoninaction.com/ From amnorvend at gmail.com Thu Nov 12 20:10:54 2009 From: amnorvend at gmail.com (Jason Baker) Date: Thu, 12 Nov 2009 13:10:54 -0600 Subject: [python-advocacy] How programming language webpages should be designed In-Reply-To: <4AFC55DE.5050202@voidspace.org.uk> References: <549053140911120550r72d57660s5c5adadcd9987c12@mail.gmail.com> <4AFC55DE.5050202@voidspace.org.uk> Message-ID: <816c4abb0911121110n793c7628m53ed21a2dabe2250@mail.gmail.com> On Thu, Nov 12, 2009 at 12:37 PM, Michael Foord wrote: > One possibility would be "Try Python". It uses Silverlight to execute Python > *in* the browser: I really like Try Python a lot. However, I do know a number of people that would quickly give up on Python the minute they see "requires silverlight" anywhere. Rational or irrational, I don't think we want to risk losing devs because of that. From fuzzyman at voidspace.org.uk Thu Nov 12 20:13:24 2009 From: fuzzyman at voidspace.org.uk (Michael Foord) Date: Thu, 12 Nov 2009 20:13:24 +0100 Subject: [python-advocacy] How programming language webpages should be designed In-Reply-To: <816c4abb0911121110n793c7628m53ed21a2dabe2250@mail.gmail.com> References: <549053140911120550r72d57660s5c5adadcd9987c12@mail.gmail.com> <4AFC55DE.5050202@voidspace.org.uk> <816c4abb0911121110n793c7628m53ed21a2dabe2250@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <4AFC5E54.6080005@voidspace.org.uk> Jason Baker wrote: > On Thu, Nov 12, 2009 at 12:37 PM, Michael Foord > wrote: > >> One possibility would be "Try Python". It uses Silverlight to execute Python >> *in* the browser: >> > > > I really like Try Python a lot. However, I do know a number of people > that would quickly give up on Python the minute they see "requires > silverlight" anywhere. Rational or irrational, I don't think we want > to risk losing devs because of that. > Whilst I understand people not wanting to install Python I doubt that an online example needing Silverlight will actually cause people to give up on *Python* altogether. :-) All the best, Michael -- http://www.ironpythoninaction.com/ From rayallen153 at googlemail.com Thu Nov 12 20:40:00 2009 From: rayallen153 at googlemail.com (Ray Allen) Date: Thu, 12 Nov 2009 19:40:00 +0000 Subject: [python-advocacy] How programming language webpages should be designed In-Reply-To: <4AFC5E54.6080005@voidspace.org.uk> References: <549053140911120550r72d57660s5c5adadcd9987c12@mail.gmail.com> <4AFC55DE.5050202@voidspace.org.uk> <816c4abb0911121110n793c7628m53ed21a2dabe2250@mail.gmail.com> <4AFC5E54.6080005@voidspace.org.uk> Message-ID: <4AFC6490.5050201@gmail.com> Michael Foord wrote: > Jason Baker wrote: >> On Thu, Nov 12, 2009 at 12:37 PM, Michael Foord >> wrote: >> >>> One possibility would be "Try Python". It uses Silverlight to >>> execute Python >>> *in* the browser: >>> >> >> >> I really like Try Python a lot. However, I do know a number of people >> that would quickly give up on Python the minute they see "requires >> silverlight" anywhere. Rational or irrational, I don't think we want >> to risk losing devs because of that. >> > Whilst I understand people not wanting to install Python I doubt that > an online example needing Silverlight will actually cause people to > give up on *Python* altogether. :-) > > All the best, > > Michael > > > Sorry - but I think Silverlight should be avoided for the reasons listed. Maybe to start with, it should just be a static image displaying code. That could be added very quickly. Ray From andre.roberge at gmail.com Thu Nov 12 20:58:40 2009 From: andre.roberge at gmail.com (Andre Roberge) Date: Thu, 12 Nov 2009 15:58:40 -0400 Subject: [python-advocacy] How programming language webpages should be designed In-Reply-To: <4AFC6490.5050201@gmail.com> References: <549053140911120550r72d57660s5c5adadcd9987c12@mail.gmail.com> <4AFC55DE.5050202@voidspace.org.uk> <816c4abb0911121110n793c7628m53ed21a2dabe2250@mail.gmail.com> <4AFC5E54.6080005@voidspace.org.uk> <4AFC6490.5050201@gmail.com> Message-ID: <7528bcdd0911121158j7204f141rd8e3d1fbed4279f4@mail.gmail.com> On Thu, Nov 12, 2009 at 3:40 PM, Ray Allen wrote: > Michael Foord wrote: > >> Jason Baker wrote: >> >>> On Thu, Nov 12, 2009 at 12:37 PM, Michael Foord >>> wrote: >>> >>> >>>> One possibility would be "Try Python". It uses Silverlight to execute >>>> Python >>>> *in* the browser: >>>> >>>> >>> >>> I really like Try Python a lot. However, I do know a number of people >>> that would quickly give up on Python the minute they see "requires >>> silverlight" anywhere. Rational or irrational, I don't think we want >>> to risk losing devs because of that. >>> >>> >> Whilst I understand people not wanting to install Python I doubt that an >> online example needing Silverlight will actually cause people to give up on >> *Python* altogether. :-) >> > > Sorry - but I think Silverlight should be avoided for the reasons listed. > Maybe to start with, it should just be a static image displaying code. > That could be added very quickly. > Another option might be to adapt skulpt: http://www.skulpt.org/ Andr? > > > _______________________________________________ > Advocacy mailing list > Advocacy at python.org > http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/advocacy > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From andre.roberge at gmail.com Thu Nov 12 20:59:03 2009 From: andre.roberge at gmail.com (Andre Roberge) Date: Thu, 12 Nov 2009 15:59:03 -0400 Subject: [python-advocacy] How programming language webpages should be designed In-Reply-To: <4AFC6490.5050201@gmail.com> References: <549053140911120550r72d57660s5c5adadcd9987c12@mail.gmail.com> <4AFC55DE.5050202@voidspace.org.uk> <816c4abb0911121110n793c7628m53ed21a2dabe2250@mail.gmail.com> <4AFC5E54.6080005@voidspace.org.uk> <4AFC6490.5050201@gmail.com> Message-ID: <7528bcdd0911121159u67982623lf7d2d8178b5021f5@mail.gmail.com> On Thu, Nov 12, 2009 at 3:40 PM, Ray Allen wrote: > Michael Foord wrote: > >> Jason Baker wrote: >> >>> On Thu, Nov 12, 2009 at 12:37 PM, Michael Foord >>> wrote: >>> >>> >>>> One possibility would be "Try Python". It uses Silverlight to execute >>>> Python >>>> *in* the browser: >>>> >>>> >>> >>> I really like Try Python a lot. However, I do know a number of people >>> that would quickly give up on Python the minute they see "requires >>> silverlight" anywhere. Rational or irrational, I don't think we want >>> to risk losing devs because of that. >>> >>> >> Whilst I understand people not wanting to install Python I doubt that an >> online example needing Silverlight will actually cause people to give up on >> *Python* altogether. :-) >> > > Sorry - but I think Silverlight should be avoided for the reasons listed. > Maybe to start with, it should just be a static image displaying code. > That could be added very quickly. > Another option might be to adapt skulpt: http://www.skulpt.org/ Andr? > > > _______________________________________________ > Advocacy mailing list > Advocacy at python.org > http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/advocacy > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From fuzzyman at voidspace.org.uk Thu Nov 12 21:00:26 2009 From: fuzzyman at voidspace.org.uk (Michael Foord) Date: Thu, 12 Nov 2009 21:00:26 +0100 Subject: [python-advocacy] How programming language webpages should be designed In-Reply-To: <7528bcdd0911121159u67982623lf7d2d8178b5021f5@mail.gmail.com> References: <549053140911120550r72d57660s5c5adadcd9987c12@mail.gmail.com> <4AFC55DE.5050202@voidspace.org.uk> <816c4abb0911121110n793c7628m53ed21a2dabe2250@mail.gmail.com> <4AFC5E54.6080005@voidspace.org.uk> <4AFC6490.5050201@gmail.com> <7528bcdd0911121159u67982623lf7d2d8178b5021f5@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <4AFC695A.4070809@voidspace.org.uk> Andre Roberge wrote: > > > On Thu, Nov 12, 2009 at 3:40 PM, Ray Allen > wrote: > > Michael Foord wrote: > > Jason Baker wrote: > > On Thu, Nov 12, 2009 at 12:37 PM, Michael Foord > > wrote: > > > One possibility would be "Try Python". It uses > Silverlight to execute Python > *in* the browser: > > > > I really like Try Python a lot. However, I do know a > number of people > that would quickly give up on Python the minute they see > "requires > silverlight" anywhere. Rational or irrational, I don't > think we want > to risk losing devs because of that. > > > Whilst I understand people not wanting to install Python I > doubt that an online example needing Silverlight will actually > cause people to give up on *Python* altogether. :-) > > > > Sorry - but I think Silverlight should be avoided for the reasons > listed. Maybe to start with, it should just be a static image > displaying code. That could be added very quickly. > > > Another option might be to adapt skulpt: http://www.skulpt.org/ How complete an implementation of Python is it? Last time I looked (a couple of months ago) it was still very immature. All the best, Michael > > Andr? > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Advocacy mailing list > Advocacy at python.org > http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/advocacy > > -- http://www.ironpythoninaction.com/ From rayallen153 at googlemail.com Thu Nov 12 21:42:38 2009 From: rayallen153 at googlemail.com (Ray Allen) Date: Thu, 12 Nov 2009 20:42:38 +0000 Subject: [python-advocacy] How programming language webpages should be designed In-Reply-To: <4AFC695A.4070809@voidspace.org.uk> References: <549053140911120550r72d57660s5c5adadcd9987c12@mail.gmail.com> <4AFC55DE.5050202@voidspace.org.uk> <816c4abb0911121110n793c7628m53ed21a2dabe2250@mail.gmail.com> <4AFC5E54.6080005@voidspace.org.uk> <4AFC6490.5050201@gmail.com> <7528bcdd0911121159u67982623lf7d2d8178b5021f5@mail.gmail.com> <4AFC695A.4070809@voidspace.org.uk> Message-ID: <4AFC733E.1040400@gmail.com> Skulpt looks good and would be a 'nice-to-have', but given the preference for a static page, and given the ease with which a nice contrasting image displaying code could be added, why not start with something like this.. http://docs.google.com/View?id=dct77gh9_0hkv55s7w Ray From fuzzyman at voidspace.org.uk Thu Nov 12 21:46:43 2009 From: fuzzyman at voidspace.org.uk (Michael Foord) Date: Thu, 12 Nov 2009 21:46:43 +0100 Subject: [python-advocacy] How programming language webpages should be designed In-Reply-To: <4AFC733E.1040400@gmail.com> References: <549053140911120550r72d57660s5c5adadcd9987c12@mail.gmail.com> <4AFC55DE.5050202@voidspace.org.uk> <816c4abb0911121110n793c7628m53ed21a2dabe2250@mail.gmail.com> <4AFC5E54.6080005@voidspace.org.uk> <4AFC6490.5050201@gmail.com> <7528bcdd0911121159u67982623lf7d2d8178b5021f5@mail.gmail.com> <4AFC695A.4070809@voidspace.org.uk> <4AFC733E.1040400@gmail.com> Message-ID: <4AFC7433.8050204@voidspace.org.uk> Ray Allen wrote: > Skulpt looks good and would be a 'nice-to-have', but given the > preference for a static page, and given the ease with which a nice > contrasting image displaying code could be added, why not start with > something like this.. On the Ruby site "Try Ruby online" is a prominent link but not actually itself on the front page (or even on the ruby-lang.org site itself). > > http://docs.google.com/View?id=dct77gh9_0hkv55s7w Well, I really like it. :-) Personally I doubt the news items are important to *new* visitors of the Python.org site - who are the most important visitors. I would have no objection to pushing the news items down in favour of a prominent code example like that. I have a *strong* preference for the code example being text (styled with CSS) rather than image though. All the best, Michael > > Ray -- http://www.ironpythoninaction.com/ From rayallen153 at googlemail.com Thu Nov 12 21:57:11 2009 From: rayallen153 at googlemail.com (Ray Allen) Date: Thu, 12 Nov 2009 20:57:11 +0000 Subject: [python-advocacy] How programming language webpages should be designed In-Reply-To: <4AFC7433.8050204@voidspace.org.uk> References: <549053140911120550r72d57660s5c5adadcd9987c12@mail.gmail.com> <4AFC55DE.5050202@voidspace.org.uk> <816c4abb0911121110n793c7628m53ed21a2dabe2250@mail.gmail.com> <4AFC5E54.6080005@voidspace.org.uk> <4AFC6490.5050201@gmail.com> <7528bcdd0911121159u67982623lf7d2d8178b5021f5@mail.gmail.com> <4AFC695A.4070809@voidspace.org.uk> <4AFC733E.1040400@gmail.com> <4AFC7433.8050204@voidspace.org.uk> Message-ID: <4AFC76A7.6020904@gmail.com> >> http://docs.google.com/View?id=dct77gh9_0hkv55s7w > > Well, I really like it. :-) > > Personally I doubt the news items are important to *new* visitors of > the Python.org site - who are the most important visitors. I would > have no objection to pushing the news items down in favour of a > prominent code example like that. > > I have a *strong* preference for the code example being text (styled > with CSS) rather than image though. > > All the best, > > Michael I agree on the news, and can see why it would be best for the code example to be plain text (subject to it remaining high contrast). Thanks for the positive response. Ray From carl at personnelware.com Thu Nov 12 22:04:44 2009 From: carl at personnelware.com (Carl Karsten) Date: Thu, 12 Nov 2009 15:04:44 -0600 Subject: [python-advocacy] How programming language webpages should be designed In-Reply-To: <4AFC733E.1040400@gmail.com> References: <549053140911120550r72d57660s5c5adadcd9987c12@mail.gmail.com> <4AFC55DE.5050202@voidspace.org.uk> <816c4abb0911121110n793c7628m53ed21a2dabe2250@mail.gmail.com> <4AFC5E54.6080005@voidspace.org.uk> <4AFC6490.5050201@gmail.com> <7528bcdd0911121159u67982623lf7d2d8178b5021f5@mail.gmail.com> <4AFC695A.4070809@voidspace.org.uk> <4AFC733E.1040400@gmail.com> Message-ID: <549053140911121304v761ae313vc310d01242492ae8@mail.gmail.com> On Thu, Nov 12, 2009 at 2:42 PM, Ray Allen wrote: > Skulpt looks good and would be a 'nice-to-have', but given the preference > for a static page, and given the ease with which a nice contrasting image > displaying code could be added, why not start with something like this.. > > http://docs.google.com/View?id=dct77gh9_0hkv55s7w images of text = yuck. can't cut/paste, can make the font bigger, don't work with accessibility -- Carl K From lac at openend.se Thu Nov 12 22:40:46 2009 From: lac at openend.se (Laura Creighton) Date: Thu, 12 Nov 2009 22:40:46 +0100 Subject: [python-advocacy] How programming language webpages should be designed In-Reply-To: Message from Ray Allen of "Thu, 12 Nov 2009 20:42:38 GMT." <4AFC733E.1040400@gmail.com> References: <549053140911120550r72d57660s5c5adadcd9987c12@mail.gmail.com> <4AFC55DE.5050202@voidspace.org.uk> <816c4abb0911121110n793c7628m53ed21a2dabe2250@mail.gmail.com> <4AFC5E54.6080005@voidspace.org.uk> <4AFC6490.5050201@gmail.com> <7528bcdd0911121159u67982623lf7d2d8178b5021f5@mail.gmail.com> <4AFC695A.4070809@voidspace.org.uk> <4AFC733E.1040400@gmail.com> Message-ID: <200911122140.nACLekrW022610@theraft.openend.se> In a message of Thu, 12 Nov 2009 20:42:38 GMT, Ray Allen writes: >Skulpt looks good and would be a 'nice-to-have', but given the >preference for a static page, and given the ease with which a nice >contrasting image displaying code could be added, why not start with >something like this.. > >http://docs.google.com/View?id=dct77gh9_0hkv55s7w > >Ray Add me to the list of people who wants the count variable to go away. And given that they are already at www.python.org, we should point them at something else ... say a 'more examples' page. I'd prefer for feature in python: print feature random.shuffle(python) for feature in python: print feature thus showing how things have changed. Laura From aahz at pythoncraft.com Thu Nov 12 22:40:51 2009 From: aahz at pythoncraft.com (Aahz) Date: Thu, 12 Nov 2009 13:40:51 -0800 Subject: [python-advocacy] How programming language webpages should be designed In-Reply-To: <4AFC7433.8050204@voidspace.org.uk> References: <549053140911120550r72d57660s5c5adadcd9987c12@mail.gmail.com> <4AFC55DE.5050202@voidspace.org.uk> <816c4abb0911121110n793c7628m53ed21a2dabe2250@mail.gmail.com> <4AFC5E54.6080005@voidspace.org.uk> <4AFC6490.5050201@gmail.com> <7528bcdd0911121159u67982623lf7d2d8178b5021f5@mail.gmail.com> <4AFC695A.4070809@voidspace.org.uk> <4AFC733E.1040400@gmail.com> <4AFC7433.8050204@voidspace.org.uk> Message-ID: <20091112214051.GA24213@panix.com> On Thu, Nov 12, 2009, Michael Foord wrote: > > Personally I doubt the news items are important to *new* visitors of the > Python.org site - who are the most important visitors. I would have no > objection to pushing the news items down in favour of a prominent code > example like that. This has been discussed before, and so far the sentiment among people actually maintaining the website is to consider existing Python users an important clientele. Some reasons why: * Encouraging them to join the community * Giving emphasis to the PSF (related to previous point) * Providing support (many people end up using Python e.g. as part of work) * Encouraging people to become core developers Not that I'm claiming that the existing site necessarily is doing the best job of meeting these goals, but I do think that changing the site in ways detrimental to these goals will get pushback. > I have a *strong* preference for the code example being text (styled > with CSS) rather than image though. +1 -- copy/paste for testing/playing is essential -- Aahz (aahz at pythoncraft.com) <*> http://www.pythoncraft.com/ [on old computer technologies and programmers] "Fancy tail fins on a brand new '59 Cadillac didn't mean throwing out a whole generation of mechanics who started with model As." --Andrew Dalke From carl at personnelware.com Thu Nov 12 23:17:22 2009 From: carl at personnelware.com (Carl Karsten) Date: Thu, 12 Nov 2009 16:17:22 -0600 Subject: [python-advocacy] How programming language webpages should be designed In-Reply-To: <20091112214051.GA24213@panix.com> References: <549053140911120550r72d57660s5c5adadcd9987c12@mail.gmail.com> <4AFC55DE.5050202@voidspace.org.uk> <816c4abb0911121110n793c7628m53ed21a2dabe2250@mail.gmail.com> <4AFC5E54.6080005@voidspace.org.uk> <4AFC6490.5050201@gmail.com> <7528bcdd0911121159u67982623lf7d2d8178b5021f5@mail.gmail.com> <4AFC695A.4070809@voidspace.org.uk> <4AFC733E.1040400@gmail.com> <4AFC7433.8050204@voidspace.org.uk> <20091112214051.GA24213@panix.com> Message-ID: <549053140911121417v3af8e261t12d6c2ea55cbc00@mail.gmail.com> On Thu, Nov 12, 2009 at 3:40 PM, Aahz wrote: > On Thu, Nov 12, 2009, Michael Foord wrote: >> >> Personally I doubt the news items are important to *new* visitors of the >> Python.org site - who are the most important visitors. I would have no >> objection to pushing the news items down in favour of a prominent code >> example like that. > > This has been discussed before, and so far the sentiment among people > actually maintaining the website is to consider existing Python users an > important clientele. > > Some reasons why: > > * Encouraging them to join the community > * Giving emphasis to the PSF (related to previous point) > * Providing support (many people end up using Python e.g. as part of work) > * Encouraging people to become core developers > > Not that I'm claiming that the existing site necessarily is doing the > best job of meeting these goals, but I do think that changing the site in > ways detrimental to these goals will get pushback. I figured as much and it is fairly reasonable. This subject can be re-visited every so often, but not too often. or something. a thread like this every 6 months doesn't sound unreasonable, and it would only happen if there was a group that strongly opposed the current sentiment. Any idea when the last time it was discuessed? -- Carl K From rayallen153 at googlemail.com Thu Nov 12 23:21:09 2009 From: rayallen153 at googlemail.com (Ray Allen) Date: Thu, 12 Nov 2009 22:21:09 +0000 Subject: [python-advocacy] How programming language webpages should be designed In-Reply-To: <20091112214051.GA24213@panix.com> References: <549053140911120550r72d57660s5c5adadcd9987c12@mail.gmail.com> <4AFC55DE.5050202@voidspace.org.uk> <816c4abb0911121110n793c7628m53ed21a2dabe2250@mail.gmail.com> <4AFC5E54.6080005@voidspace.org.uk> <4AFC6490.5050201@gmail.com> <7528bcdd0911121159u67982623lf7d2d8178b5021f5@mail.gmail.com> <4AFC695A.4070809@voidspace.org.uk> <4AFC733E.1040400@gmail.com> <4AFC7433.8050204@voidspace.org.uk> <20091112214051.GA24213@panix.com> Message-ID: Seems agreed, it'd be good to have: code on the front page; simple, short, readable code; styled in html, not as an image; link to further examples It would be good to see something come of this thread. Seems like the ruby site is a good example of where it can work. Ray -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From aahz at pythoncraft.com Thu Nov 12 23:27:39 2009 From: aahz at pythoncraft.com (Aahz) Date: Thu, 12 Nov 2009 14:27:39 -0800 Subject: [python-advocacy] How programming language webpages should be designed In-Reply-To: <200911122140.nACLekrW022610@theraft.openend.se> References: <549053140911120550r72d57660s5c5adadcd9987c12@mail.gmail.com> <4AFC55DE.5050202@voidspace.org.uk> <816c4abb0911121110n793c7628m53ed21a2dabe2250@mail.gmail.com> <4AFC5E54.6080005@voidspace.org.uk> <4AFC6490.5050201@gmail.com> <7528bcdd0911121159u67982623lf7d2d8178b5021f5@mail.gmail.com> <4AFC695A.4070809@voidspace.org.uk> <4AFC733E.1040400@gmail.com> <200911122140.nACLekrW022610@theraft.openend.se> Message-ID: <20091112222739.GA15244@panix.com> On Thu, Nov 12, 2009, Laura Creighton wrote: > > for feature in python: > print feature > > random.shuffle(python) > > for feature in python: > print feature > > thus showing how things have changed. +10! -- Aahz (aahz at pythoncraft.com) <*> http://www.pythoncraft.com/ [on old computer technologies and programmers] "Fancy tail fins on a brand new '59 Cadillac didn't mean throwing out a whole generation of mechanics who started with model As." --Andrew Dalke From andre.roberge at gmail.com Thu Nov 12 23:35:45 2009 From: andre.roberge at gmail.com (Andre Roberge) Date: Thu, 12 Nov 2009 18:35:45 -0400 Subject: [python-advocacy] How programming language webpages should be designed In-Reply-To: <20091112222739.GA15244@panix.com> References: <549053140911120550r72d57660s5c5adadcd9987c12@mail.gmail.com> <4AFC55DE.5050202@voidspace.org.uk> <816c4abb0911121110n793c7628m53ed21a2dabe2250@mail.gmail.com> <4AFC5E54.6080005@voidspace.org.uk> <4AFC6490.5050201@gmail.com> <7528bcdd0911121159u67982623lf7d2d8178b5021f5@mail.gmail.com> <4AFC695A.4070809@voidspace.org.uk> <4AFC733E.1040400@gmail.com> <200911122140.nACLekrW022610@theraft.openend.se> <20091112222739.GA15244@panix.com> Message-ID: <7528bcdd0911121435o5dbad5e8mf580e785fc82d661@mail.gmail.com> On Thu, Nov 12, 2009 at 6:27 PM, Aahz wrote: > On Thu, Nov 12, 2009, Laura Creighton wrote: > > > > for feature in python: > > print feature > > > > random.shuffle(python) > > > > for feature in python: > > print feature > > > > thus showing how things have changed. > shouldn't the second print statement be: print(feature) ? :-) > > +10! > -- > Aahz (aahz at pythoncraft.com) <*> > http://www.pythoncraft.com/ > > [on old computer technologies and programmers] "Fancy tail fins on a > brand new '59 Cadillac didn't mean throwing out a whole generation of > mechanics who started with model As." --Andrew Dalke > _______________________________________________ > Advocacy mailing list > Advocacy at python.org > http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/advocacy > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From fuzzyman at voidspace.org.uk Thu Nov 12 23:43:10 2009 From: fuzzyman at voidspace.org.uk (Michael Foord) Date: Thu, 12 Nov 2009 23:43:10 +0100 Subject: [python-advocacy] How programming language webpages should be designed In-Reply-To: <20091112214051.GA24213@panix.com> References: <549053140911120550r72d57660s5c5adadcd9987c12@mail.gmail.com> <4AFC55DE.5050202@voidspace.org.uk> <816c4abb0911121110n793c7628m53ed21a2dabe2250@mail.gmail.com> <4AFC5E54.6080005@voidspace.org.uk> <4AFC6490.5050201@gmail.com> <7528bcdd0911121159u67982623lf7d2d8178b5021f5@mail.gmail.com> <4AFC695A.4070809@voidspace.org.uk> <4AFC733E.1040400@gmail.com> <4AFC7433.8050204@voidspace.org.uk> <20091112214051.GA24213@panix.com> Message-ID: <4AFC8F7E.1020604@voidspace.org.uk> Aahz wrote: > On Thu, Nov 12, 2009, Michael Foord wrote: > >> Personally I doubt the news items are important to *new* visitors of the >> Python.org site - who are the most important visitors. I would have no >> objection to pushing the news items down in favour of a prominent code >> example like that. >> > > This has been discussed before, and so far the sentiment among people > actually maintaining the website is to consider existing Python users an > important clientele. > > Fair enough. Do you think that pushing the news down 'a bit', below a code example like that, would substantially work against that aim? All the best, Michael > Some reasons why: > > * Encouraging them to join the community > * Giving emphasis to the PSF (related to previous point) > * Providing support (many people end up using Python e.g. as part of work) > * Encouraging people to become core developers > > Not that I'm claiming that the existing site necessarily is doing the > best job of meeting these goals, but I do think that changing the site in > ways detrimental to these goals will get pushback. > > >> I have a *strong* preference for the code example being text (styled >> with CSS) rather than image though. >> > > +1 -- copy/paste for testing/playing is essential > -- http://www.ironpythoninaction.com/ From aahz at pythoncraft.com Thu Nov 12 23:53:21 2009 From: aahz at pythoncraft.com (Aahz) Date: Thu, 12 Nov 2009 14:53:21 -0800 Subject: [python-advocacy] How programming language webpages should be designed In-Reply-To: <549053140911121417v3af8e261t12d6c2ea55cbc00@mail.gmail.com> References: <4AFC55DE.5050202@voidspace.org.uk> <816c4abb0911121110n793c7628m53ed21a2dabe2250@mail.gmail.com> <4AFC5E54.6080005@voidspace.org.uk> <4AFC6490.5050201@gmail.com> <7528bcdd0911121159u67982623lf7d2d8178b5021f5@mail.gmail.com> <4AFC695A.4070809@voidspace.org.uk> <4AFC733E.1040400@gmail.com> <4AFC7433.8050204@voidspace.org.uk> <20091112214051.GA24213@panix.com> <549053140911121417v3af8e261t12d6c2ea55cbc00@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <20091112225321.GA9047@panix.com> On Thu, Nov 12, 2009, Carl Karsten wrote: > > This subject can be re-visited every so often, but not too often. > or something. a thread like this every 6 months doesn't sound > unreasonable, and it would only happen if there was a group that > strongly opposed the current sentiment. > > Any idea when the last time it was discuessed? Many moons ago. ;-) -- Aahz (aahz at pythoncraft.com) <*> http://www.pythoncraft.com/ [on old computer technologies and programmers] "Fancy tail fins on a brand new '59 Cadillac didn't mean throwing out a whole generation of mechanics who started with model As." --Andrew Dalke From aahz at pythoncraft.com Thu Nov 12 23:58:15 2009 From: aahz at pythoncraft.com (Aahz) Date: Thu, 12 Nov 2009 14:58:15 -0800 Subject: [python-advocacy] How programming language webpages should be designed In-Reply-To: <4AFC8F7E.1020604@voidspace.org.uk> References: <4AFC55DE.5050202@voidspace.org.uk> <816c4abb0911121110n793c7628m53ed21a2dabe2250@mail.gmail.com> <4AFC5E54.6080005@voidspace.org.uk> <4AFC6490.5050201@gmail.com> <7528bcdd0911121159u67982623lf7d2d8178b5021f5@mail.gmail.com> <4AFC695A.4070809@voidspace.org.uk> <4AFC733E.1040400@gmail.com> <4AFC7433.8050204@voidspace.org.uk> <20091112214051.GA24213@panix.com> <4AFC8F7E.1020604@voidspace.org.uk> Message-ID: <20091112225815.GB9047@panix.com> On Thu, Nov 12, 2009, Michael Foord wrote: > Aahz wrote: >> On Thu, Nov 12, 2009, Michael Foord wrote: >>> >>> Personally I doubt the news items are important to *new* visitors of >>> the Python.org site - who are the most important visitors. I would >>> have no objection to pushing the news items down in favour of a >>> prominent code example like that. >> >> This has been discussed before, and so far the sentiment among people >> actually maintaining the website is to consider existing Python users an >> important clientele. > > Do you think that pushing the news down 'a bit', below a code example > like that, would substantially work against that aim? My concern is that having three different "chunks" in the center section would look cluttered, but if someone comes up with something that looks nice it's fine by me. I certainly think the top text "about Python" can use some shortening. -- Aahz (aahz at pythoncraft.com) <*> http://www.pythoncraft.com/ [on old computer technologies and programmers] "Fancy tail fins on a brand new '59 Cadillac didn't mean throwing out a whole generation of mechanics who started with model As." --Andrew Dalke From amnorvend at gmail.com Thu Nov 12 23:59:20 2009 From: amnorvend at gmail.com (Jason Baker) Date: Thu, 12 Nov 2009 16:59:20 -0600 Subject: [python-advocacy] How programming language webpages should be designed In-Reply-To: <20091112214051.GA24213@panix.com> References: <549053140911120550r72d57660s5c5adadcd9987c12@mail.gmail.com> <4AFC55DE.5050202@voidspace.org.uk> <816c4abb0911121110n793c7628m53ed21a2dabe2250@mail.gmail.com> <4AFC5E54.6080005@voidspace.org.uk> <4AFC6490.5050201@gmail.com> <7528bcdd0911121159u67982623lf7d2d8178b5021f5@mail.gmail.com> <4AFC695A.4070809@voidspace.org.uk> <4AFC733E.1040400@gmail.com> <4AFC7433.8050204@voidspace.org.uk> <20091112214051.GA24213@panix.com> Message-ID: <816c4abb0911121459s19a045f8pced9bcc85bc4b3b9@mail.gmail.com> On Thu, Nov 12, 2009 at 3:40 PM, Aahz wrote: > On Thu, Nov 12, 2009, Michael Foord wrote: >> >> Personally I doubt the news items are important to *new* visitors of the >> Python.org site - who are the most important visitors. I would have no >> objection to pushing the news items down in favour of a prominent code >> example like that. > > This has been discussed before, and so far the sentiment among people > actually maintaining the website is to consider existing Python users an > important clientele. I don't disagree with that. The problem that I see is that the front page aims at so many different categories of people that it's useful to none of them. Why not give existing python devs their own "homepage" with that kind of thing on it? I think that's better for devs in the long run anyway. Much as I hate to use Microsoft as an example, some of the MSDN pages are actually good examples of how this could work: http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/vcsharp/default.aspx From tleeuwenburg at gmail.com Fri Nov 13 00:03:06 2009 From: tleeuwenburg at gmail.com (Tennessee Leeuwenburg) Date: Fri, 13 Nov 2009 10:03:06 +1100 Subject: [python-advocacy] example code In-Reply-To: <20091112172021.GA5726@panix.com> References: <549053140911120800p37a4480dh724296f2069f45cc@mail.gmail.com> <20091112172021.GA5726@panix.com> Message-ID: <43c8685c0911121503n6803547cv25424db41b483f00@mail.gmail.com> Just another option... print "Python is" + ', '.join([index + ', ' + each for each in python]) On Fri, Nov 13, 2009 at 4:20 AM, Aahz wrote: > On Thu, Nov 12, 2009, Ray Allen wrote: > > > > # Create list > > python = ["Easy to read", > > "Fast to code", > > "Quick to learn", > > "Modular and object oriented"] > > AFAIK, almost everyone indents multi-line expressions. There are several > ways to do it, this is my preferred version: > > python = [ > "Easy to read", > "Fast to code", > "Quick to learn", > "Modular and object oriented", > ] > > The reason I prefer this is because it makes it easy to edit the list, > specifically including the trailing comma on the last element. (E.g. > it's much easier to delete the first list element than when you put it > next to the opening bracket -- just delete the line.) It's also easy to > read because the beginning and end of the list are highly visible. I > prefer to indent only one level rather than matching up the beginning and > ending brackets because that gives more line length to the list contents. > -- > Aahz (aahz at pythoncraft.com) <*> > http://www.pythoncraft.com/ > > [on old computer technologies and programmers] "Fancy tail fins on a > brand new '59 Cadillac didn't mean throwing out a whole generation of > mechanics who started with model As." --Andrew Dalke > _______________________________________________ > Advocacy mailing list > Advocacy at python.org > http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/advocacy > -- -------------------------------------------------- Tennessee Leeuwenburg http://myownhat.blogspot.com/ "Don't believe everything you think" -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From roy at panix.com Fri Nov 13 02:33:51 2009 From: roy at panix.com (Roy Smith) Date: Thu, 12 Nov 2009 20:33:51 -0500 Subject: [python-advocacy] example code In-Reply-To: <43c8685c0911121503n6803547cv25424db41b483f00@mail.gmail.com> References: <549053140911120800p37a4480dh724296f2069f45cc@mail.gmail.com> <20091112172021.GA5726@panix.com> <43c8685c0911121503n6803547cv25424db41b483f00@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <6140056F-DE45-4A78-9865-2246DA58B906@panix.com> On Nov 12, 2009, at 6:03 PM, Tennessee Leeuwenburg wrote: > Just another option... > > print "Python is" + ', '.join([index + ', ' + each for each in > python]) Our job here is that of pitchman, huckster, pimp even. We have very little time to capture somebody's interest. What we are talking about is a tease. Quick, obvious, to the point. If our audience has to stop and think to understand what they're reading, we've already lost. In other words, KISS. > > On Fri, Nov 13, 2009 at 4:20 AM, Aahz wrote: > On Thu, Nov 12, 2009, Ray Allen wrote: > > > > # Create list > > python = ["Easy to read", > > "Fast to code", > > "Quick to learn", > > "Modular and object oriented"] > > AFAIK, almost everyone indents multi-line expressions. There are > several > ways to do it, this is my preferred version: > > python = [ > "Easy to read", > "Fast to code", > "Quick to learn", > "Modular and object oriented", > ] > > The reason I prefer this is because it makes it easy to edit the list, > specifically including the trailing comma on the last element. (E.g. > it's much easier to delete the first list element than when you put it > next to the opening bracket -- just delete the line.) It's also > easy to > read because the beginning and end of the list are highly visible. I > prefer to indent only one level rather than matching up the > beginning and > ending brackets because that gives more line length to the list > contents. > -- > Aahz (aahz at pythoncraft.com) <*> http://www.pythoncraft.com/ > > [on old computer technologies and programmers] "Fancy tail fins on a > brand new '59 Cadillac didn't mean throwing out a whole generation of > mechanics who started with model As." --Andrew Dalke > _______________________________________________ > Advocacy mailing list > Advocacy at python.org > http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/advocacy > > > > -- > -------------------------------------------------- > Tennessee Leeuwenburg > http://myownhat.blogspot.com/ > "Don't believe everything you think" > _______________________________________________ > Advocacy mailing list > Advocacy at python.org > http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/advocacy ---------------- Roy Smith roy at panix.com -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From rayallen153 at googlemail.com Fri Nov 13 11:59:07 2009 From: rayallen153 at googlemail.com (Ray Allen) Date: Fri, 13 Nov 2009 10:59:07 +0000 Subject: [python-advocacy] example code In-Reply-To: <6140056F-DE45-4A78-9865-2246DA58B906@panix.com> References: <549053140911120800p37a4480dh724296f2069f45cc@mail.gmail.com> <20091112172021.GA5726@panix.com> <43c8685c0911121503n6803547cv25424db41b483f00@mail.gmail.com> <6140056F-DE45-4A78-9865-2246DA58B906@panix.com> Message-ID: > > Our job here is that of pitchman, huckster, pimp even. We have very little > time to capture somebody's interest. What we are talking about is a tease. > Quick, obvious, to the point. If our audience has to stop and think to > understand what they're reading, we've already lost. > > In other words, KISS. > Agreed. I've taken out the counter and put in a link to SimplePrograms. """Example Python Program""" import random python = [ "Easy to read", "Fast to code", "Quick to learn", "Modular and object oriented", "Open source and cross platform", ] python.append("Widely adopted") random.shuffle(python) print "Python is ... " for feature in python: print feature print "See more examples of Python code at \ http://wiki.python.org/moin/SimplePrograms" -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From dorait at imorph.com Wed Nov 11 02:39:30 2009 From: dorait at imorph.com (Dorai Thodla) Date: Wed, 11 Nov 2009 07:09:30 +0530 Subject: [python-advocacy] How programming language webpages should be designed In-Reply-To: <549053140911101159o1c10f395j95177c9d7af59582@mail.gmail.com> References: <4957f1ef0911071418t74d1bf61k3c95a190b7c794ae@mail.gmail.com> <549053140911082313j3ef5cc56j1b4c64b0e3e5a390@mail.gmail.com> <816c4abb0911090532j2a40214fv7c59c31d9b0c5b2e@mail.gmail.com> <200911092235.28941.paul@boddie.org.uk> <20091110182846.GA15379@panix.com> <549053140911101159o1c10f395j95177c9d7af59582@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <603b7e560911101739xe84c8a1gce2bff495c82f95b@mail.gmail.com> Isn't it worth putting some effort in doing this page and doing some split testing? May help observe which one gets more clicks. The group that believes that this page will help can do a mockup and try to get some help. I think if the code samples show the high level language features of Python, it may certainly help. Dorai On Wed, Nov 11, 2009 at 1:29 AM, Carl Karsten wrote: > On Tue, Nov 10, 2009 at 12:28 PM, Aahz wrote: > > On Mon, Nov 09, 2009, Paul Boddie wrote: > >> > >> To an extent, the simple programs page comes to the rescue again, > >> here. I disagree with Aahz about real-estate on the front page: > >> showing the very thing the site is about is far more important > >> than having testimonials, for example (important though they are), > >> occupying large areas of the page. > > > > Far more important for whom? If you agree that testimonials are > > important, saying that code examples are "far more important" implies > > that you think that code examples are more important than everything > > else on that page, including the left navbar links and the news items. > > > > I have to strongly disagree with that. > > > > But assuming you're simply engaging in hyperbole, I repeat what I said > > earlier: go ahead and create a sample front page replacing the > > testimonials with code samples. Until someone is willing to invest the > > effort into writing HTML, I think we're arguing in a vacuum. > > I am willing to invest the effort if it was likely it would be used, > which right now it seems more unlikely given the conflicting goals. > but I think that satisfies your requirement, so there is a point in > the discussion (I don't think it is an argument until 2 people have > strong conflicting opinions, and so far I am not seeing that.) > > I do agree with the group that thinks there should be code on the > opening page. I am not sure what the rest of that group thinks, but I > am in favor of replacing quite a bit of what is currently the 'first > view' (center, above the fold, what people are going to read before > they click away.) > > But I also think I have a different view of the goal of the first view > than others, especially whoever did the current layout. > > Given that, I think we need to talk about goals before bothering with > implementation, like "put code on the page." > > I see 4 groups of people that should be considered: (list is in > alphabetic order to obscure any sense of importance, which I am > undecided on) > > 1. potential python developers - need to write something, get to pick > the tools, wondering what python has to offer, maybe considering a > career choice. > 2. python developers (old and new, but the choice has been made) > 3. python users (I have an python app, I need help making it run) > 4. technical management that gets to pick tools for a team > > I have no problem catering to all 4 groups, but each groups needs are > fairly different and much like pycon talk selection, there are more > options than there is room for, so we have to figure out what to cut. > > Personally, I think we should give as much as we can to 1 and 4, so 2 > and 3 get one link each: "developers" and something like "help me > make my python app run" or "my app broke" (thats the only reason I can > see #3 coming to the site.) > > 1 and 4 are groups we want to motivate. we have many motivational > things to offer, some will apply to both groups, but most wont apply > equally. > For instance, when asked "why Django?" Keyton Weissinger said: > "There are better, more technically beautiful architectures out there, > I find Django to be simple to use an amazingly well documented. I > don't get into infrastructure debates, other people care, I don't." > http://pyatl.blip.tv/file/2794179/ 26:03 > > I actually picked Turbo Gears because I was one of those people who > cared, but switched when asked to do some Django work. Cash isn't > everything, for instance I turned down doing PeopleSoft (very high > paying) and MsSQL work. > > > > > > Side note: the webmaster team is always looking for volunteers..... > > -- > > Aahz (aahz at pythoncraft.com) <*> > http://www.pythoncraft.com/ > > > > [on old computer technologies and programmers] "Fancy tail fins on a > > brand new '59 Cadillac didn't mean throwing out a whole generation of > > mechanics who started with model As." --Andrew Dalke > > _______________________________________________ > > Advocacy mailing list > > Advocacy at python.org > > http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/advocacy > > > > > > > > -- > Carl K > _______________________________________________ > Advocacy mailing list > Advocacy at python.org > http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/advocacy > -- Dorai, http://thodla.com -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From amnorvend at gmail.com Fri Nov 13 15:55:14 2009 From: amnorvend at gmail.com (Jason Baker) Date: Fri, 13 Nov 2009 08:55:14 -0600 Subject: [python-advocacy] example code In-Reply-To: References: <549053140911120800p37a4480dh724296f2069f45cc@mail.gmail.com> <20091112172021.GA5726@panix.com> <43c8685c0911121503n6803547cv25424db41b483f00@mail.gmail.com> <6140056F-DE45-4A78-9865-2246DA58B906@panix.com> Message-ID: <816c4abb0911130655s1f676b4at24db5b8cb2207c52@mail.gmail.com> On Fri, Nov 13, 2009 at 4:59 AM, Ray Allen wrote: > """Example Python Program""" > import random > python = [ > ??????? "Easy to read", > ??????? "Fast to code", > ??????? "Quick to learn", > ??????? "Modular and object oriented", > ??????? "Open source and cross platform", > ??????? ] > python.append("Widely adopted") > random.shuffle(python) > print "Python is ... " > for feature in python: > ??? print feature > print "See more examples of Python code at \ > http://wiki.python.org/moin/SimplePrograms" I like this one. However, I think it's still just a little on the complex side for a front-page example. What about something more like this: python = [ "Easy to read", "Fast to code", "Quick to learn", "Modular and object oriented", "Open source and cross platform", ] print "Python is ... " for feature in python: print feature print "See more examples of Python code at \ http://wiki.python.org/moin/SimplePrograms"