As our favourite Guido explains it in the Python style guide:
A tab is 8 spaces. A level of indentation is 4. Use tabs and replace with spaces for the "odd levels of indentation".
Most programming text editors worth their salt should allow you to specify a tab stop as 8 spaces wide and a level of identation as 4 spaces. At least in an ideal world.
In Python these guidelines ofcourse are important in more ways than just for looks since they actually tell how your code wil be interpreted!=)
You looked at the screenshots, no less? Whoa, I can see where you're coming from. I mean, the looks of some screenshots are really important, especially in determining if something is "going anywhere" or not. Qualifies you to disqualify their hard work for certain.
Don't worry, some day you'll pick up a shred of sense. I'm sure:/
And in Sweden, for example, it's very doubtful that you can enter into a contract by clicking a button. From what I understand those "click here to accept" things probably hold no legal water what so ever and wouldn't be enforcable if someone actually tried. There are rules as to how contracts can be entered and clicking a button just isn't one of those.
There's a problem and contradiction here. Rich interfaces require client side interactivity. Canned solutions such as Flash can only take you some way to Rich Interface Heaven(tm). That's where scripting becomes important. Like it or not, interfaces are Very Important and that makes scripting the future for the web.
The instant responses and feedback of a local interface just can't be replace by the limited, static, and poor interfaces of applications deployed on the web. Not without client side scripting, constant server roundtrips basically suck.
And you don't suggest replacing your browser with an X server do you?=)
Hm. But Norway is Extremly expensive as compared to pretty much any other country in Europe. Especially their food is very, very expensive. Norway also isn't a part of the European Union. BUT, the Norwegians also get very handsomly paid. Some friends of mine have worked over there and byt cutting down on food expenses by some extreme measures (bringing all their food from Sweden) they have managed to make a LOT of money very quickly. In not so qualified jobs.
And socialist none of the Scandinavian countries are.
On average I belive the Americans eat more fast food than Swedes, but I'd say not by a wide margin. I eat plenty more now than I did when I lived in the U.S. But then, my living situation is different as well:)
Hm. That would be Sweden, but it's schewig the facts a bit. It was the tax on a certain portion of your income beyond a certain taxation level, combined with some housing tax, that could actually reach 100%+, theoretically. This was ofcourse a logical "bug" in the taxation system. It was also very unlikely.
EHm. I'm not a kid. I enjoy a good fighter on the PS and a few friends over, sitting around playing, drinking a bit, talking trash, and generally hanging out.
Console games are often more polished and the "gaming in the sofa" experience is a whole lot better than with a PC. Just for kids? That's just such a 10 years ago attitude =-)
There is no such thing as a "true" democracy. There's direct and representative democracy, neither of which are "false" democracy. I.m.h.o. "false" democracy would be something like the old DDR (Deutsche DEMOCRATISCHE Republik) or White Russia (Belarussia) where there was/is some sort of mockery of a true democracy.
And direct democracy, as mentioned elsewhere, is a really BAD idea. Then we'd really have a "mediacracy" (mediocracy?) as the Media dictated the outcome of specific votes. Very soon nobody would care. A country, especially as large a country as the U.S., is a hugely complex system, and has to be. If everyone had to know all issues to live in it and exercise their democratic right it would be a bit like every user of a OS having to understand everything about the OS, and taking part in arbiting process time slice allocation. We would simply have less users, and then we'd ultimatly have NO democracy as a information overload led to apathy.
Hum. Sue me, but I find the pictures interesting, I loath scrolling through HUGE pages of mostly text, and I in general find his setup very reasonable. He even provides one of those nifty "in article indexes". My pet peeve is multi page articles without those.
He does a good job of writing interesting articles, with the right ammount of technical detail and a "easy to read" language.
And his alleged "anti intel bias" is bull i.m.h.o. I've followed his writing for a while. The P4 article actually did it's fair share of Intel praising and AMD bashing in areas such as build quality and system stability where Intel really DOES shine. The fact that Intel's processor's just aren't as good as AMD's at the moment doesn't mean he has a bias anywhere. Even despite this he does mention, over and over again, that the P4's performance will likely be a lot better a few months down the road as SSE2 gains ground. That's really what you'd but in the words "bias" and "bashing" isn't it?
I mean, someone should have been around long enough that they remember the old AMD processor articles he ran, which weren't all that positive. And someone should remember his praise of Intel's information and business practises and how rude he thought AMD was.
Dunno about NS6, but when I last installed NS4.7 I choose custom installation, and it didn't even leave me the choice not to install AIM. I got what I wanted, plus AIM, which obviously wasn't optional at all. Ugh.
Ok. This is stupid. Blocking people from AIDS treatment, that's bad, isn't it?
Most certainly! But!
But?
Getting a new drug on the market takes about 10 years, a few thousand people, and a LOT of money (partly as a result of the two preceeding points).
O.t.o.h., copying and redistributing an already existant drug costs a tiny fraction of that money, since drug recepies are (and should be, heck we are talking drugs!) public domain material.
No copyright laws would leave us without AIDS treatments, period. At leats without a chance of ever getting better ones. That investment would be one no company would ever make.
Not caring is one thing, getting your facts straight is a different one. If you don't care about the _facts_ regarding a certain subject, keep your mouth shut and your fingers of your keyboard in matters related to that subject. If you don't know or CARE that there are in fact four big IRC networks where there was only three three years ago, don't go spreading your ignorance regarding IRC. At all.
To be honest, your ranting has now reached a level where it's no longer worthy of any comment. It might seem like a way to escpae, fine, then you may think so and scream that. But frankly, I've got too much to say to know where to begin, and since your arguments now lost any credibility in my eyes, this is where I stop.
(Your "definition" of what is a democracy and what isn't still is wrong. You're still mixing apples and oranges. Did you ever take Government in high school?)
It sure does look like my copy of the Amiga Hardware Reference Manual will be obsolete with this new stuff. Ack, I spent a fortune on that book back when I was 14 =)
I don't see how I was comparing apples and oranges, I believe I was correctly identifying the United States government for what it is. Could you explain to me the differences between constitutional republic and represenative democracy and why the two are not mutually exclusive? (This is a curious question, not a challenging one.)
A democracy, even a representative democracy, is a system where the populace directly (direct democracy) or indirectly (representative democracy) by a majority vote controls the decisions made in the government (this isn't a proper defenition,/. love to nitpick). Thus, this is a system for public influence.
A "constitutional republic" is a system whereby this vote of the public is put to work. It refers to how the country and control of the country is _organized_, as opposed to how it is ultimately controlled. You can have a democratic "constitutional republic" or a non-democratic one. This, obviusly, completly ad hoc.
So anything that you would "like to think" is a "good thing for mankind" is something that the government has the right to FORCE me to pay for? What if I don't agree with it and don't want to pay for it?
One of the "drawbacks" of living in a society (democratic or otherwise). Your personal opinion about what is right and wrong doesn't completly control what you can do. I believe it's a good idea for me to go on a three week murder spree. The majority in this country doesn't. I believe I should be able to spend all my dough promoting and handing out a heavy duty drug to children. For some reason the society tries to FORCE me to spend it elsewhere. It's my money, no?
Tell me, who gets to decide what the "greater good" is? And what's the limit on how much I owe?
This is what it all boils down to. The society as a whole, through the vote of democracy, does. If you don't like what the majority decides, move. Doing that is YOUR democratic right. It's prefectly possible to move somewhere where you don't need to pay for no space shuttle and where most laws that impede your personal freedoms are easily ignored. Ofcourse, you will probably have to live with some poverfy around you, a non existant or corrupt police force, bad roads, and some other inconviniences. But why not start a business that fixes those problems? I mean, you don't trust some government to fix them do you?
Do some research. Our government is not a democracy. It is a constitutional republic. When was the last time citizens were able to vote on the passage of a law?
Who's the moron and who's comparing apples and oranges? The US is a representative democracy (and nobody needs to point out the technicalities surrounding this statement) and a constitutional republic. It's perfectly possible to be both as these systems are not mutually exclusive or comparable.
And the wasteful space program which I do not like is something I'm supposed to be thanking the government for?
But then again, I'd like to think that exploring space is a a good thing for mankind, that pushing our boundaries, exploring and going further is one of our goals as a civilization. I'd hate to see us stop that journey of exploration because there are no short term monetary profits to be made.
The implication here is that we need to suck on the government teat in order to get health care, as if health care was a "right."
Nope, you are wrong, that wasn't the implication. That specifically is something you invented yourself to be able to present your favourite argument. Read what I wrote once more. But some would argue that taking care of each other is nice and that people dying, losing eyesight, bodyparts, or whatever, from treatable or curable diseases is a bad for the society as a whole on a pure economical level (not to mention on a level of human suffering, but that apparently doesn't concern you). And that society as a result should try to avoid this happening to it's individuals.
But who am I trying to take your money for the greater good of the society? I mean, it's yours, you earned it, every cent, and you don't owe no steenkin society anything do you?
Beyond that, tell me of *any* corporation that pays taxes instead of collecting them on behalf of the government.
I couldn't. Is that good?
And on the way down to the IRS office you'll probably drive on one of those horrible no fee roads that were payed for by...
And maybe you'll go vote against more taxes, courtesy of a democracy that is payed for by...
And then there's the saturday afternoon entertainment, heading down to the Cape and getting a good look at yet another exploding space shuttle, payed for by...
And when you get horribly ill and your treatment runs far more than you or your family can afford, and it all end with a previously healthy middle class all american family broke and you dead since you couldn't afford to treat your illness, then you can at least be happy Microsoft didn't have to pay no taxes. But ofcourse, that could never happen to you, now could it?
All scare tactics aren't they?
Slashdot Mirror
A tab is 8 spaces. A level of indentation is 4. Use tabs and replace with spaces for the "odd levels of indentation".
Most programming text editors worth their salt should allow you to specify a tab stop as 8 spaces wide and a level of identation as 4 spaces. At least in an ideal world.
In Python these guidelines ofcourse are important in more ways than just for looks since they actually tell how your code wil be interpreted!=)
-
-
-
-
There's a problem and contradiction here. Rich interfaces require client side interactivity. Canned solutions such as Flash can only take you some way to Rich Interface Heaven(tm). That's where scripting becomes important. Like it or not, interfaces are Very Important and that makes scripting the future for the web.
The instant responses and feedback of a local interface just can't be replace by the limited, static, and poor interfaces of applications deployed on the web. Not without client side scripting, constant server roundtrips basically suck.
And you don't suggest replacing your browser with an X server do you?=)
-
And socialist none of the Scandinavian countries are.
-
-
All this if I remember correctly.
-
Console games are often more polished and the "gaming in the sofa" experience is a whole lot better than with a PC. Just for kids? That's just such a 10 years ago attitude =-)
-
I might be wrong, but I think that was it, and I think that would qualify him as "wealthy", even if Bill G is a whole lot "wealthier". =-)
-
And direct democracy, as mentioned elsewhere, is a really BAD idea. Then we'd really have a "mediacracy" (mediocracy?) as the Media dictated the outcome of specific votes. Very soon nobody would care. A country, especially as large a country as the U.S., is a hugely complex system, and has to be. If everyone had to know all issues to live in it and exercise their democratic right it would be a bit like every user of a OS having to understand everything about the OS, and taking part in arbiting process time slice allocation. We would simply have less users, and then we'd ultimatly have NO democracy as a information overload led to apathy.
A bad idea indeed.
-
He does a good job of writing interesting articles, with the right ammount of technical detail and a "easy to read" language.
And his alleged "anti intel bias" is bull i.m.h.o. I've followed his writing for a while. The P4 article actually did it's fair share of Intel praising and AMD bashing in areas such as build quality and system stability where Intel really DOES shine. The fact that Intel's processor's just aren't as good as AMD's at the moment doesn't mean he has a bias anywhere. Even despite this he does mention, over and over again, that the P4's performance will likely be a lot better a few months down the road as SSE2 gains ground. That's really what you'd but in the words "bias" and "bashing" isn't it?
I mean, someone should have been around long enough that they remember the old AMD processor articles he ran, which weren't all that positive. And someone should remember his praise of Intel's information and business practises and how rude he thought AMD was.
-
-
-
-
Most certainly! But!
But?
Getting a new drug on the market takes about 10 years, a few thousand people, and a LOT of money (partly as a result of the two preceeding points).
O.t.o.h., copying and redistributing an already existant drug costs a tiny fraction of that money, since drug recepies are (and should be, heck we are talking drugs!) public domain material.
No copyright laws would leave us without AIDS treatments, period. At leats without a chance of ever getting better ones. That investment would be one no company would ever make.
Oh! Thats great!
?
-
-
People really still ignorant towards IRCnet?
-
To be honest, your ranting has now reached a level where it's no longer worthy of any comment. It might seem like a way to escpae, fine, then you may think so and scream that. But frankly, I've got too much to say to know where to begin, and since your arguments now lost any credibility in my eyes, this is where I stop. (Your "definition" of what is a democracy and what isn't still is wrong. You're still mixing apples and oranges. Did you ever take Government in high school?)
It sure does look like my copy of the Amiga Hardware Reference Manual will be obsolete with this new stuff. Ack, I spent a fortune on that book back when I was 14 =)
Otherwise, Your Amiga is Alive. Or not.
.
For those who know, this isn't funny.
And to be really confusing, we use "," as a decimal places delimiter in numbers. Thus 1.000 = 1000 and 1,000 = 1.
.
Sig goes here, or so I'm told.
Uh, oh, eh. Didn't I hear THAT one before?
Oh yeah, it was this thing called...
A democracy, even a representative democracy, is a system where the populace directly (direct democracy) or indirectly (representative democracy) by a majority vote controls the decisions made in the government (this isn't a proper defenition, /. love to nitpick). Thus, this is a system for public influence.
A "constitutional republic" is a system whereby this vote of the public is put to work. It refers to how the country and control of the country is _organized_, as opposed to how it is ultimately controlled. You can have a democratic "constitutional republic" or a non-democratic one. This, obviusly, completly ad hoc.
So anything that you would "like to think" is a "good thing for mankind" is something that the government has the right to FORCE me to pay for? What if I don't agree with it and don't want to pay for it?
One of the "drawbacks" of living in a society (democratic or otherwise). Your personal opinion about what is right and wrong doesn't completly control what you can do. I believe it's a good idea for me to go on a three week murder spree. The majority in this country doesn't. I believe I should be able to spend all my dough promoting and handing out a heavy duty drug to children. For some reason the society tries to FORCE me to spend it elsewhere. It's my money, no?
Tell me, who gets to decide what the "greater good" is? And what's the limit on how much I owe?
This is what it all boils down to. The society as a whole, through the vote of democracy, does. If you don't like what the majority decides, move. Doing that is YOUR democratic right. It's prefectly possible to move somewhere where you don't need to pay for no space shuttle and where most laws that impede your personal freedoms are easily ignored. Ofcourse, you will probably have to live with some poverfy around you, a non existant or corrupt police force, bad roads, and some other inconviniences. But why not start a business that fixes those problems? I mean, you don't trust some government to fix them do you?
Who's the moron and who's comparing apples and oranges? The US is a representative democracy (and nobody needs to point out the technicalities surrounding this statement) and a constitutional republic. It's perfectly possible to be both as these systems are not mutually exclusive or comparable.
And the wasteful space program which I do not like is something I'm supposed to be thanking the government for?
But then again, I'd like to think that exploring space is a a good thing for mankind, that pushing our boundaries, exploring and going further is one of our goals as a civilization. I'd hate to see us stop that journey of exploration because there are no short term monetary profits to be made.
The implication here is that we need to suck on the government teat in order to get health care, as if health care was a "right."
Nope, you are wrong, that wasn't the implication. That specifically is something you invented yourself to be able to present your favourite argument. Read what I wrote once more. But some would argue that taking care of each other is nice and that people dying, losing eyesight, bodyparts, or whatever, from treatable or curable diseases is a bad for the society as a whole on a pure economical level (not to mention on a level of human suffering, but that apparently doesn't concern you). And that society as a result should try to avoid this happening to it's individuals.
But who am I trying to take your money for the greater good of the society? I mean, it's yours, you earned it, every cent, and you don't owe no steenkin society anything do you?
Beyond that, tell me of *any* corporation that pays taxes instead of collecting them on behalf of the government. I couldn't. Is that good?
And on the way down to the IRS office you'll probably drive on one of those horrible no fee roads that were payed for by... And maybe you'll go vote against more taxes, courtesy of a democracy that is payed for by... And then there's the saturday afternoon entertainment, heading down to the Cape and getting a good look at yet another exploding space shuttle, payed for by... And when you get horribly ill and your treatment runs far more than you or your family can afford, and it all end with a previously healthy middle class all american family broke and you dead since you couldn't afford to treat your illness, then you can at least be happy Microsoft didn't have to pay no taxes. But ofcourse, that could never happen to you, now could it? All scare tactics aren't they?