python adds an extra half space when reading from a string or list
joshua.landau.ws at gmail.com
Tue Jul 2 07:32:24 CEST 2013
On 2 July 2013 05:34, rusi <rustompmody at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Monday, July 1, 2013 8:36:53 PM UTC+5:30, Neil Cerutti wrote:
>> On 2013-07-01, rusi wrote:
>> > 1. Kill-filing/spam-filtering are tools for spam.
>> > Nikos is certainly not spamming in the sense of automated
>> > sending out of cooked mail to zillions of recipients/lists.
>> > His posts are definite and intentional
>> I disagree. Kill-files are not only for spam. I filter out
>> anything I believe I won't want to see.
> I happen to be a champ in using a wrench to hammer screws into bricks.
> Others do a better job I am told -- and without being champs :-)
That's not really valid, your proposed technique is "use nothing", in
which case using a wrench is a golden opportunity. And you've also
implied that filtering out what you don't want is akin to hammering
screws into bricks, in which case I've been programming wrong my whole
> Tools can be used right... and wrong. Sufficiently extreme wrong use adds to the original problem/mess.
> Kill-filing is a solution for one problem. In the current context it is much more the problem than the solution. Two cases:
True, kill-filing *is* a solution for one problem. Don't get ahead of
yourself, though, by assuming that implies it's not a solution for
> 1. My estimate is that about 30-40 *different* answers-ers in hundreds of different posts have expressed frustration with dealing with Nikos. The fact that they are now silent can mean one of two cases:
I'm struggling to make those numbers add up.
> a. Nikos has turned a new leaf and become a golden boy
> b. The protesters have opted out of the discussion/system
> (like so-called democracies where 20% of the populace vote and criminals come to power)
First of all, the basis on which you claim there are only two cases is
false. Hence this point is void.
Secondly: wut? How is any of this a relevant point in the least?
> You can take your pick on which case (Hint: Read this thread)
> 2. "I am killfiling you" is bullying behavior. It is worse than useless because
No it is not. You can check the definition of "bully" if you want.
Please try not to overuse emotionally rigged terms.
> a. The problem cases couldn't care a hoot
Nikos has shown that he does, in fact, "care a hoot".
> b. Those who could contribute usefully are shut up
You wouldn't killfire someone whose posts you want to read.
> c. The messengers are being shot as substitute for the culprits
If what the messengers are talking unacceptably for your tastes, then
by all means you should have right not to listen. Is that not just
People aren't kill-firing because the "messengers" are telling truths
we don't want to hear. People are kill-firing because they're doing it
in ways that we don't find acceptable.
> On the whole we techies have a penchant (may I say allure?) for solving problems technically rather than socially.
> It works well up to a point:
> "Thou shall indent thy programs" is a social requirement in C and technical in python. And so we consider -- rightly -- that python advances C.
> However this line cannot solve all problems. Our belief that technology can solve all problems is directly linked to the impending fact that the planet may go up in smoke.
> In short technology in its place is good but conscience is not substitutable:
> the use of (tools like) kill-filing analogizes to this piece of medical logic:
> Brain tumor causes headache
> Aspirin cures headache
> Therefore aspirin cures brain tumors
I see no connection. No connection to what this is supposedly an "in
short" of (despite being longer) and no connection to the actual point
you are trying to make. Basically, I don't understand what you're
trying to portray.
> Nikos is not spamming/trolling/baiting/flaming. The Nikos-threads are a more serious disease than all these. The fact that this thread is not started by him suggests the disease is spreading. By not speaking up one is colluding.
You might want to look up colluding.
Basically, rusi, I don't understand you. You seem to speak coherently,
but I never know what point you are making, what side you are arguing.
You seem to be strongly anti-Nikos, but further than that is opaque to
me. What I'm not too fond of, though, is your seeming insistence that
your methodology should be rigorously followed by every other party on
this list -- we are not a dictatorship, least of all one of your
control. As long as we all act civil, and occasionally on-topic, what
you do is at your discretion. Plus it's hard to follow someone's
command if you haven't the least idea what they're telling you to do.
Actually, the one other thing I get from you is that you have the
militant view of "we have to all act now in unison to do <whatever
your goal is, still not sure>". It might explain your odd choice of
More information about the Python-list