Python's simplicity philosophy
curty at freeze.invalid0
Sat Nov 22 18:02:47 CET 2003
On Fri, 21 Nov 2003 13:54:03 -0800, Erik Max Francis wrote:
> Curt wrote:
> > No, he didn't contrive an example. Please don't invent things.
> I posted another example, totally unrelated to your flirty/curty
Oh yes, you did. Was that the contrived example he was referring to?
I actually thought he was alluding to your contrived example which was
a variation on the theme of my contrived example. Why did I think that?
Let's go back to the context of the whole shebang which you've cut.
He quotes you, then me, then speaks out himself:
"You don't really think the sequence [flirty, curty, curty, flirty]
is sorted, do you?"
"Well, you did do something to the sample for which you fail to find
a more descriptive word than "tweak"."
"He contrived an example that demonstrated his point."
Then I say the following thing, which you truncated:
"No, he didn't contrive an example. Please don't invent things. He
tooked my perfectly good and reasonable example of a file containing
redundant entries and "tweaked" it in order to make the entries of type
Well, the whole thing is not as clearly a case of bad reading as you say
> nonsense, that demonstrated that uniq could do something meaningful with
> a totally unsorted file. Please read things.
More information about the Python-list