"convert" string to bytes without changing data (encoding)
steve+comp.lang.python at pearwood.info
Fri Mar 30 03:16:22 CEST 2012
On Thu, 29 Mar 2012 11:30:19 -0400, Ross Ridge wrote:
> Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python at pearwood.info> wrote:
>>Your reaction is to make an equally unjustified estimate of Evan's
>>mindset, namely that he is not just wrong about you, but *deliberately
>>and maliciously* lying about you in the full knowledge that he is wrong.
> No, Evan in his own words admitted that his post was ment to be harsh,
> "a bit harsher than it deserves", showing his malicious intent.
Being harsher than it deserves is not synonymous with malicious. You are
making assumptions about Evan's mental state that are not supported by
the evidence. Evan may believe that by "punishing" (for some feeble sense
of punishment) you harshly, he is teaching you better behaviour that will
be to your own benefit; or that it will act as a warning to others.
Either way he may believe that he is actually doing good.
And then he entirely undermined his own actions by admitting that he was
over-reacting. This suggests that, in fact, he wasn't really motivated by
either malice or beneficence but mere frustration.
It is quite clear that Evan let his passions about writing maintainable
code get the best of him. His rant was more about "people like you" than
Evan, if you're reading this, I think you owe Ross an apology for flying
off the handle. Ross, I think you owe Evan an apology for unjustified
accusations of malice.
> He made
> accusations that where neither supported by anything I've said
Now that is not actually true. Your posts have defended the idea that
copying the raw internal byte representation of strings is a reasonable
thing to do. You even claimed to know how to do so, for any version of
Python (but so far have ignored my request for you to demonstrate).
> in this
> thread nor by the code I actually write. His accusation about me were
> completely made up, he was not telling the truth and had no reasonable
> basis to beleive he was telling the truth. He was malicously lying and
> I'm completely justified in saying so.
No, they were not completely made up. Your posts give many signs of being
somebody who might very well write code to the implementation rather than
the interface. Whether you are or not is a separate question, but your
posts in this thread indicate that you very likely could be.
If this is not the impression you want to give, then you should
reconsider your posting style.
Ross, to be frank, your posting style in this thread has been cowardly
and pedantic, an obnoxious combination. Please take this as constructive
criticism and not an attack -- you have alienated people in this thread,
leading at least one person to publicly kill-file your future posts. I
choose to assume you aren't aware of why that is than that you are doing
Without actually coming out and making a clear, explicit statement that
you approve or disapprove of the OP's attempt to use implementation
details, you *imply* support without explicitly giving it; you criticise
others for saying it can't be done without demonstrating that it can be
done. If this is a deliberate rhetorical trick, then shame on you for
being a coward without the conviction to stand behind concrete
expressions of your opinion. If not, then you should be aware that you
are using a rhetorical style that will make many people predisposed to
think you are a twat.
You *might* have said
Guys, you're technically wrong about this. This is how you can
retrieve the internal representation of a string as a sequence
of bytes: ...code... but you shouldn't use this in production
code because it is fragile and depends on implementation details
that may break in PyPy and Jython and IronPython.
But you didn't.
You *might* have said
Wrong, you can convert a string into a sequence of bytes without
encoding or decoding: ...code... but don't do this.
But you didn't.
Instead you puffed yourself up as a big shot who was more technically
correct than everyone else, but without *actually* demonstrating that you
can do what you said you can do. You labelled as "bullshit" our attempts
to discourage the OP from his misguided approached.
If your intention was to put people off-side, you succeeded very well. If
not, you should be aware that you have, and consider how you might avoid
this in the future.
More information about the Python-list