This lovely morning, my lovely and incomparable Gentoo machine automagically
downloaded, configured, compiled, and installed, all according to my strict
specifications, the following software packages:

portage
dev-ruby/reline
'=dev-lang/python-3.12.1_p1'
itstool
'=qtxml-5.15.12'
'=qtnetwork-5.15.12'
'=qtconcurrent-5.15.12'
'=linguist-tools-5.15.12:5'
qpdf
hatch-fancy-pypi-readme
'=qtgui-5.15.12'
netpbm
'=qtwidgets-5.15.12'
'=qtmultimedia-5.15.12'
'=qtopengl-5.15.12'
'=qtprintsupport-5.15.12'
'=qtsvg-5.15.12

Note the python version 12. Now I have FOUR separate and distinct python
versions on my system:

python-2.7.18
python-3.8.18
python-3.11.7
python-3.12.1

Holy fuckin' moley! What a fuckin' clusterfuck!

Note also the python package: hatch-fancy-pypi-readme.

What the fuckin' fuck? Who would ever need that cockamamie
load of python malarkey?

Also, the whole friggin' QT system (or only the parts that _I_
want) was updated.

How much time was required to accomplish this highly practical
act of inimitable magic?

Shoot! I stood up to scratch my testicles and when I sat back
down is was complete.

Ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha!

Gentoo Linux. It serves only the Big Boys.

On Sat, 06 Jan 2024 14:08:21 +0000, Farley Flud wrote:

> Now I have FOUR separate and distinct
> python versions on my system:
>
> python-2.7.18
> python-3.8.18
> python-3.11.7
> python-3.12.1

I have had more than that. Very handy to be able to have multiple versions
installed side by side, so I can test a library I write to ensure it works
properly with a suitable range of versions.

Can you do this on M****s*ft W**d*ws? No.

Le 06-01-2024, Farley Flud <ff@linux.rocks> a écrit :
> Note the python version 12. Now I have FOUR separate and distinct python
> versions on my system:
>
> python-2.7.18
> python-3.8.18
> python-3.11.7
> python-3.12.1
>
> Holy fuckin' moley! What a fuckin' clusterfuck!

Yes, it's really funny to read. Now, you just proved how incompetent you
are. In another message you said that on your machine python was used
only to pretty print the install messages. So now, you have to choose:
- either you are unable to clean your computer.
- either you don't know what's running on your computer and why.
Note: I'm claiming only that one of them must be true, both can be true
at the same time.

I have only one version of python, so clearly Linux can run without all
those versions. You rely more heavily on python than me, you should
choose your claims with care.

> What the fuckin' fuck? Who would ever need that cockamamie
> load of python malarkey?

Obviously: you.

--
Si vous avez du temps à perdre :
https://scarpet42.gitlab.io

On 07 Jan 2024 10:18:24 GMT, Stéphane CARPENTIER wrote:

>>
>> python-2.7.18
>> python-3.8.18
>> python-3.11.7
>> python-3.12.1
>>
>
> I have only one version of python, so clearly Linux can run without all
> those versions.
>

Wrong again, Carpenter.

If I remove any of those python versions then certain programs will
not run. They are all necessary.

That's the point I am making. Python is such a fucked up language
that some software will need to be re-written whenever a new Python
version is released.

But many software developers don't want to waste their time
re-writing their programs for each new Python upgrade. Therefore,
any comprehensive GNU/Linux system must contain several different
Python versions.

You don't know this, Carpenter, because you are NOT a programmer.
You are only a simple, stupid user of some lame, Ubuntu-derived,
junk Linux distro. IOW, STFU.

For example, even though python-2.7 is now declared obsolete,
the package "jbig2enc" requires python-2.7 or else it will
not run:

https://github.com/agl/jbig2enc

Check the source code, Carpenter (if you can). The highly
important utility "pdf.py" invokes python-2.7.

Apparently, the contributors to jbig2enc don't want to waste
time re-writing the code to use a new python version.

Why don't you contribute a patch, Carpenter? Huh? Why not?
You have a big, fat mouth when it comes to criticism. Why
don't you put your "expertise" to work for the jbig2enc
project?

We all know the answer.

Ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha!

On 1/7/2024 12:44 AM, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
> On Sat, 06 Jan 2024 14:08:21 +0000, Farley Flud wrote:
>
>> Now I have FOUR separate and distinct
>> python versions on my system:
>>
>> python-2.7.18
>> python-3.8.18
>> python-3.11.7
>> python-3.12.1
>
> I have had more than that. Very handy to be able to have multiple versions
> installed side by side, so I can test a library I write to ensure it works
> properly with a suitable range of versions.
>
> Can you do this on M****s*ft W**d*ws? No.

I've done it for years on Windows 10 and 11 (with 2 python versions).

https://www.c-sharpcorner.com/article/how-to-manage-multiple-versions-of-python-on-windows-11/

On 1/6/2024 9:08 AM, Larry Piet wrote:

> This lovely morning, my lovely and incomparable

Python-administered

> Gentoo machine automagically downloaded, configured, compiled, and installed,

It seems like magic to a non-programmer like you, but it's really just
Python programming.

> all according to my strict
> specifications, the following software packages:
>
> portage
> dev-ruby/reline
> '=dev-lang/python-3.12.1_p1'
> itstool
> '=qtxml-5.15.12'
> '=qtnetwork-5.15.12'
> '=qtconcurrent-5.15.12'
> '=linguist-tools-5.15.12:5'
> qpdf
> hatch-fancy-pypi-readme
> '=qtgui-5.15.12'
> netpbm
> '=qtwidgets-5.15.12'
> '=qtmultimedia-5.15.12'
> '=qtopengl-5.15.12'
> '=qtprintsupport-5.15.12'
> '=qtsvg-5.15.12

Why can't the hobbyist developers alphabetize the list of packages?

> Note the python version 12. Now I have FOUR separate and distinct python
> versions on my system:
>
> python-2.7.18
> python-3.8.18
> python-3.11.7
> python-3.12.1

And you can't write a lick of code in any of them.

> Holy fuckin' moley! What a fuckin' clusterfuck!
>
> Note also the python package: hatch-fancy-pypi-readme.
>
> What the fuckin' fuck? Who would ever need that cockamamie
> load of python malarkey?

Your Gentoo crapbox of course.

> Also, the whole friggin' QT system (or only the parts that _I_
> want) was updated.
>
> How much time was required to accomplish this highly practical
> act of inimitable magic?
>
> Shoot! I stood up to scratch my testicles and when I sat back
> down is was complete.

Quit lying, Ken: you don't have testicles.

> Ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha!
>
> Gentoo Linux. It serves only the Big Boys.

Tinkertime toys for tinkertime boys

On Sun, 7 Jan 2024 10:15:30 -0500, DFS wrote:

> On 1/7/2024 12:44 AM, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
>> On Sat, 06 Jan 2024 14:08:21 +0000, Farley Flud wrote:
>>
>>> Now I have FOUR separate and distinct python versions on my system:
>>>
>>> python-2.7.18 python-3.8.18 python-3.11.7 python-3.12.1
>>
>> I have had more than that. Very handy to be able to have multiple
>> versions installed side by side, so I can test a library I write to
>> ensure it works properly with a suitable range of versions.
>>
>> Can you do this on M****s*ft W**d*ws? No.
>
>
> I've done it for years on Windows 10 and 11 (with 2 python versions).

I can see why you would have trouble with more than that.

> https://www.c-sharpcorner.com/article/how-to-manage-multiple-versions-of-python-on-windows-11/

Quote:

We will now create copies of the python executable and rename them
to python27 and python310. This is necessary so that system knows
the python version to run.

I lost the will to live at that point ...

On Sun, 07 Jan 2024 12:29:26 +0000, Farley Flud wrote:

> Apparently, the contributors to jbig2enc don't want to waste time
> re-writing the code to use a new python version.

Line 165 print(str(doc))

On 1/7/2024 6:29 AM, Farley Flud wrote:
> On 07 Jan 2024 10:18:24 GMT, Stéphane CARPENTIER wrote:
>
>>>
>>> python-2.7.18
>>> python-3.8.18
>>> python-3.11.7
>>> python-3.12.1
>>>
>>
>> I have only one version of python, so clearly Linux can run without all
>> those versions.
>>
>
> Wrong again, Carpenter.
>
> If I remove any of those python versions then certain programs will
> not run. They are all necessary.
>
> That's the point I am making. Python is such a fucked up language
> that some software will need to be re-written whenever a new Python
> version is released.
>
> But many software developers don't want to waste their time
> re-writing their programs for each new Python upgrade. Therefore,
> any comprehensive GNU/Linux system must contain several different
> Python versions.
>
> You don't know this, Carpenter, because you are NOT a programmer.
> You are only a simple, stupid user of some lame, Ubuntu-derived,
> junk Linux distro. IOW, STFU.
>
> For example, even though python-2.7 is now declared obsolete,
> the package "jbig2enc" requires python-2.7 or else it will
> not run:
>
> https://github.com/agl/jbig2enc
>
> Check the source code, Carpenter (if you can). The highly
> important utility "pdf.py" invokes python-2.7.
>
> Apparently, the contributors to jbig2enc don't want to waste
> time re-writing the code to use a new python version.
>
> Why don't you contribute a patch, Carpenter? Huh? Why not?
> You have a big, fat mouth when it comes to criticism. Why
> don't you put your "expertise" to work for the jbig2enc
> project?
>
> We all know the answer.
>
> Ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha!
>

Wtf. Why then it doesn't have backward compatibility?...

What a joke of a situation.

On Sun, 7 Jan 2024 19:18:34 -0000 (UTC), Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:

> We will now create copies of the python executable and rename them
> to python27 and python310. This is necessary so that system knows
> the python version to run.
>
> I lost the will to live at that point ...

That's a little heavy handed but I don't think Windows ever got symlinks
working entirely satisfactorily. With anaconda and virtual environmetns
you can really knock yourself out.

On 1/7/2024 2:18 PM, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
> On Sun, 7 Jan 2024 10:15:30 -0500, DFS wrote:
>
>> On 1/7/2024 12:44 AM, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
>>> On Sat, 06 Jan 2024 14:08:21 +0000, Farley Flud wrote:
>>>
>>>> Now I have FOUR separate and distinct python versions on my system:
>>>>
>>>> python-2.7.18 python-3.8.18 python-3.11.7 python-3.12.1
>>>
>>> I have had more than that. Very handy to be able to have multiple
>>> versions installed side by side, so I can test a library I write to
>>> ensure it works properly with a suitable range of versions.
>>>
>>> Can you do this on M****s*ft W**d*ws? No.
>>
>>
>> I've done it for years on Windows 10 and 11 (with 2 python versions).
>
> I can see why you would have trouble with more than that.

No trouble.

>> https://www.c-sharpcorner.com/article/how-to-manage-multiple-versions-of-python-on-windows-11/
>
> Quote:
>
> We will now create copies of the python executable and rename them
> to python27 and python310. This is necessary so that system knows
> the python version to run.
>
> I lost the will to live at that point ...

Learn to follow through.

On 1/7/2024 2:39 PM, rbowman wrote:
> On Sun, 07 Jan 2024 12:29:26 +0000, Farley Flud wrote:
>
>> Apparently, the contributors to jbig2enc don't want to waste time
>> re-writing the code to use a new python version.
>
> Line 165 print(str(doc))

That syntax will execute in Python 2.x and 3.x.

"print str(doc)" will execute in 2.x but not in 3.x.

3.x will throw:
SyntaxError: Missing parentheses in call to 'print'.

On Mon, 8 Jan 2024 09:08:39 -0500, DFS wrote:

> On 1/7/2024 2:39 PM, rbowman wrote:
>> On Sun, 07 Jan 2024 12:29:26 +0000, Farley Flud wrote:
>>
>>> Apparently, the contributors to jbig2enc don't want to waste time
>>> re-writing the code to use a new python version.
>>
>> Line 165 print(str(doc))
>
>
> That syntax will execute in Python 2.x and 3.x.
>
> "print str(doc)" will execute in 2.x but not in 3.x.
>
>
> 3.x will throw:
> SyntaxError: Missing parentheses in call to 'print'.

While it made the purists happy to have print be a 'real' function it
certainly was a major pain in the ass. I didn't have the files to
actually run the script but the interpreter didn't complain after that
fix.

From its location, indentation, and unneeded inclusion I assume it was a
leftover debug statement.

rbowman wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties:

> On Mon, 8 Jan 2024 09:08:39 -0500, DFS wrote:
>
>> On 1/7/2024 2:39 PM, rbowman wrote:
>>> On Sun, 07 Jan 2024 12:29:26 +0000, Farley Flud wrote:
>>>
>>>> Apparently, the contributors to jbig2enc don't want to waste time
>>>> re-writing the code to use a new python version.
>>>
>>> Line 165 print(str(doc))
>>
>> That syntax will execute in Python 2.x and 3.x.
>>
>> "print str(doc)" will execute in 2.x but not in 3.x.
>>
>> 3.x will throw:
>> SyntaxError: Missing parentheses in call to 'print'.
>
> While it made the purists happy to have print be a 'real' function it
> certainly was a major pain in the ass. I didn't have the files to
> actually run the script but the interpreter didn't complain after that
> fix.
>
> From its location, indentation, ...

That stupid block indentation of Python drives me apeshit.

> and unneeded inclusion I assume it was a
> leftover debug statement.

--
Good day for a change of scene. Repaper the bedroom wall.

Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> wrote:

>Python

I can't imagine having a purpose for it. Linux is a great platform to
just write C code and compile it, can be done the same on NT, but
programmers use a lot of elaborate crap that seems irrelevant to non-
GUI, non-prefab code-dependent work.

--
Joel W. Crump

Amendment XIV
Section 1.

[...] No state shall make or enforce any law which shall
abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the
United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of
life, liberty, or property, without due process of law;
nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal
protection of the laws.

Dobbs rewrites this, it is invalid precedent. States are
liable for denying needed abortions, e.g. TX.

On Mon, 8 Jan 2024 13:07:06 -0500, Chris Ahlstrom wrote:

> That stupid block indentation of Python drives me apeshit.

It's not my favorite feature although I can understand the reason. I've
seen too much code that looked like an entry in an obfuscated code
contest. The major drawback is after pasting a block you need to do a fix
up to get the indentation right.

On 1/8/2024 1:13 PM, Joel wrote:
> Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> wrote:
>
>> Python
>
>
> I can't imagine having a purpose for it.

That's because you don't write computer programs. But once you learn
enough python, you'll question having a purpose for C. It takes 3x to
10x as long to get something done in C as in python, and much more code.

Of course C programs generally execute an order of magnitude faster than
python.

> Linux is a great platform to
> just write C code and compile it, can be done the same on NT, but
> programmers use a lot of elaborate crap that seems irrelevant to non-
> GUI, non-prefab code-dependent work.

DFS <nospam@dfs.com> wrote:
>On 1/8/2024 1:13 PM, Joel wrote:
>> Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> wrote:
>>
>>> Python
>>
>> I can't imagine having a purpose for it.
>
>That's because you don't write computer programs.

I have, though, and I don't find it at all tedious to use C or even
assembly. Why do you think I was interested in this NG, in 2009? I've
always had an interest in the lower level operations of OSes. Even as
a Wintroll, back then, I was talking about cool aspects of Windows,
what is more properly called NT, not just the bells and whistles.
It's the same reason I think Linux is even better, it doesn't require
the commercial layers of crud of Winblows.

> But once you learn
>enough python, you'll question having a purpose for C.

A bold claim.

> It takes 3x to
>10x as long to get something done in C as in python, and much more code.
>
>Of course C programs generally execute an order of magnitude faster than
>python.

Neither reason means much to me. I like lower level coding.

--
Joel W. Crump

Amendment XIV
Section 1.

[...] No state shall make or enforce any law which shall
abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the
United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of
life, liberty, or property, without due process of law;
nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal
protection of the laws.

Dobbs rewrites this, it is invalid precedent. States are
liable for denying needed abortions, e.g. TX.

On Mon, 8 Jan 2024 17:22:30 -0500, DFS wrote:

> Of course C programs generally execute an order of magnitude faster than
> python.

https://www.pypy.org

https://cython.org/

PyPy is less fiddly but there are caveats. The JIT startup time overhead
means you don't want to use it for short scripts and it doesn't offer any
benefits with some modules.

Cython is more work but can give some impressive resuts.

Joel wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties:

> DFS <nospam@dfs.com> wrote:
>
>> But once you learn
>>enough python, you'll question having a purpose for C.
>
> A bold claim.

They each have their sweet spots. Python in fact is written in C, for example.

Python is nice for using associative containers and such, and very useful with
libraries like NumPy and SciPy.

However, my personal preference is to use the vast facilities of C++.

>
>> It takes 3x to
>>10x as long to get something done in C as in python, and much more code.
>>
>>Of course C programs generally execute an order of magnitude faster than
>>python.
>
> Neither reason means much to me. I like lower level coding.

It can be fun to get into the weeds. About 35 years ago I had a job that
involved writing MASM. The downsides were that the project leader required the
CapsLock key to be on all the time (which made the comments difficult to read);
the team had the most turgid and odd way of jumping between 64k segments, and
there was so much code that there was a lot of basically duplicate code. No
source-code control. And they used EDLIN, and one of the modules was about a
megabyte in size. (I eventually bought a copy of VEDIT for myself).

--
You will hear good news from one you thought unfriendly to you.

On Tue, 9 Jan 2024 07:09:37 -0500, Chris Ahlstrom wrote:

> It can be fun to get into the weeds. About 35 years ago I had a job
> that involved writing MASM. The downsides were that the project leader
> required the CapsLock key to be on all the time (which made the comments
> difficult to read);
> the team had the most turgid and odd way of jumping between 64k
> segments, and there was so much code that there was a lot of basically
> duplicate code. No source-code control. And they used EDLIN, and one of
> the modules was about a megabyte in size. (I eventually bought a copy
> of VEDIT for myself).

At one point I wrote a 8048 cross assembler on CP/M. The impetus was the
official company machine was a PDP-11 and cross assemblers for that were
ridiculously expensive.

My 'hello world' project with Java was a Atmel AVR cross assembler. That
was an exercise in futility. I had hopes for Java but they quickly
evaporated.

On Mon, 08 Jan 2024 17:37:00 -0500, Joel wrote:

> ... I don't find it at all tedious to use C or even
> assembly.

A simple example: drawing a suitably-oriented line using Cairo
graphics in C:

x1 = scope_radius * sin(trace_width_angle);
y1 = scope_radius * cos(trace_width_angle);
cairo_line_to(ctx, x1, y1);

versus a high-level Python wrapper I wrote:

ctx.line_to(Vector(0, scope_radius).rotate(trace_width_angle))

On Sun, 14 Jan 2024 07:28:47 -0000 (UTC), Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:

>
> A simple example: drawing a suitably-oriented line using Cairo
> graphics in C:
>
> x1 = scope_radius * sin(trace_width_angle);
> y1 = scope_radius * cos(trace_width_angle);
> cairo_line_to(ctx, x1, y1);
>

This is inefficient because trig functions are expensive.
It should be:

#define _GNU_SOURCE
#include <math.h>

sincos(trace_width_angle, &x1, &y1);
cairo_line_to(ctx, scope_radius*x1, scope_radius*y1);

Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties:

> On Mon, 08 Jan 2024 17:37:00 -0500, Joel wrote:
>
>> ... I don't find it at all tedious to use C or even
>> assembly.
>
> A simple example: drawing a suitably-oriented line using Cairo
> graphics in C:
>
> x1 = scope_radius * sin(trace_width_angle);
> y1 = scope_radius * cos(trace_width_angle);
> cairo_line_to(ctx, x1, y1);
>
> versus a high-level Python wrapper I wrote:
>
> ctx.line_to(Vector(0, scope_radius).rotate(trace_width_angle))

Even ignoring the wrapper you had to figure out and write, that line
is just as tedious :-D

You could write a C function, too, y'know.

--
Your sister swims out to meet troop ships.

On 1/8/2024 5:37 PM, Joel wrote:
> DFS <nospam@dfs.com> wrote:
>> On 1/8/2024 1:13 PM, Joel wrote:
>>> Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Python
>>>
>>> I can't imagine having a purpose for it.
>>
>> That's because you don't write computer programs.
>
>
> I have, though, and I don't find it at all tedious to use C or even
> assembly. Why do you think I was interested in this NG, in 2009? I've
> always had an interest in the lower level operations of OSes. Even as
> a Wintroll, back then, I was talking about cool aspects of Windows,
> what is more properly called NT, not just the bells and whistles.
> It's the same reason I think Linux is even better, it doesn't require
> the commercial layers of crud of Winblows.
>
>
>> But once you learn
>> enough python, you'll question having a purpose for C.
>
>
> A bold claim.

It's pretty much a fact. Of course there are exceptions: python is next
to useless for embedded, OSes, compilers, system programming, device
drivers, probably HPC, etc. So if you're primarily involved in those
areas, you'll laugh at Python.

Python
----------------------------------------------------------------------
#count lines in a text file
len(open(filepath).readlines())

#count words in a text file
len(open(filepath).read().split())

#count the unique values in a string
values = "ABDEEABCDFFFZZWXXXX"
x = [(i,values.count(i)) for i in sorted(set(values))]
for val,cnt in x:
print(val + ' ('+ str(cnt) + ') ',end='')
----------------------------------------------------------------------
6 lines of code

C
--------------------------------------------------------------
//count lines in a text file
#include <stdio.h>
int main(void) {
int lines = 0;
char line[1024] = "";
FILE *fin = fopen(filepath,"r");
while (fgets(line,sizeof line, fin)!= NULL) {
lines++;
}
fclose(fin);
return 0;
} -----------------------------------------------------------------
//count words in a text file = count of spaces + 1
#include <stdio.h>
#include <stdlib.h>
#include <string.h>
#include <ctype.h>

int main(int argc, char *argv[])
{ // open file, move to end, get size, allocate memory, back to
// beginning, read contents into memory, close file
FILE *infile = fopen(argv[1], "r");
fseek(infile, 0, SEEK_END);
long buffer = ftell(infile);
char *myStr = malloc(sizeof(char) * (buffer + 1));
rewind(infile);
fread(myStr, sizeof(char), buffer, infile);
fclose(infile);

//word count is number of spaces + 1
int countWords = 1;
for (int i = 0; i < buffer; i++) {
if(isspace(myStr[i]) && !isspace(myStr[i+1])) {countWords++;}
}

free(myStr);
printf("\n%d words", countWords);
}

-----------------------------------------------------------------
//count the unique values in a string
#include <stdio.h>
#include <string.h>
int main(void) {
char *values = "ABDEEABCDFFFZZWXXXX";
int n = 0, cnts[26]={0}, cntsz = sizeof(cnts)/sizeof(cnts[0]);
for (int c = 0; c < strlen(values); c++) {
cnts[values[n]-'A']++;
n++;
}
for (int c = 0; c < cntsz; c++) {
if(cnts[c] > 0) {
printf("%c (%d)",c+'A',cnts[c]);
}
}
return 0;
} -----------------------------------------------------------------
37 LOC

>> It takes 3x to
>> 10x as long to get something done in C as in python, and much more code.
>>
>> Of course C programs generally execute an order of magnitude faster than
>> python.
>
>
> Neither reason means much to me. I like lower level coding.

Supposedly you do, but you've never demonstrated it here. But for some
reason you've talked a lot about drugs and buttfucking and transgenderism.