Need cleanup advice for multiline string
Robert Dailey
close to the location in which they will be used. This improves
readability in many ways. However, when I have a multi-line string
definition at function level scope, things get tricky because of the
indents. In this case indents are serving two purposes: For syntax and
actual text output. The tabs for function scope should not be included
in the contents of the string. Below is the code I am trying to
improve. Notice how it looks ugly/unreadable because of the way the
string contents are shifted all the way to the left edge of the
document. This breaks the flow of scope. Would you guys solve this
problem by moving failMsg into global scope? Perhaps through some
other type of syntax?
Help is appreciated!
def RunCommand( commandList ):
commandString =
print( 'Running Command:', )
cmd = subprocess.Popen( commandList )
returnCode = cmd.wait()
if returnCode:
failMsg = '''\
*************************************************
The following command returned exit code [{:#x}].
This represents failure of some form. Please review
the command output for more details on the issue.
------------
{}
*************************************************
'''
commandString = ' '.join( commandList )
raise CommandFailure( failMsg.format( returnCode,
commandString ) )
Robert Dailey
And yes, I recognize there are syntax errors. Ignore those for now.
Mark Lawrence
combination of string concatenation going there. I assume that one of
these will let you leave failMsg where it belongs.
--
Kindest regards.
Mark Lawrence.
Bearophile
> This breaks the flow of scope. Would you guys solve this
> problem by moving failMsg into global scope?
> Perhaps through some other type of syntax?
There are gals too here.
This may help:
http://docs.python.org/library/textwrap.html#textwrap.dedent
Bye,
bearophile
Robert Dailey
It's a figure of speech. And besides, why would I want programming
advice from a woman? lol. Thanks for the help.
Dave Angel
readily localized for international markets.
DaveA
Simon Brunning
> advice from a woman? lol. Thanks for the help.
Give the attitudes still prevalent in our industry (cf
<http://tinyurl.com/c5nqju> and many more), I'm sorry to say that I
don't think this is funny.
--
Cheers,
Simon B.
Hendrik van Rooyen
Well it may come as a surprise to you, but it was a woman who
wrote one of the first compilers.
She became an Admiral in the US navy as a result.
If I recall correctly, her name was Grace Hooper.
How many compilers have you written from scratch,
without a compiler to help you?
:-)
- Hendrik
MRAB
> On Tuesday 11 August 2009 22:52:34 Robert Dailey wrote:
> wrote one of the first compilers.
>
> She became an Admiral in the US navy as a result.
>
> If I recall correctly, her name was Grace Hooper.
>
get permission" is attributed to her.
Jean-Michel Pichavant
> 2009/8/11 Robert Dailey <rcda...@gmail.com>:
>
>> On Aug 11, 3:40 pm, Bearophile <bearophileH...@lycos.com> wrote:
>>
>>> There are gals too here.
>>>
>> advice from a woman? lol. Thanks for the help.
>>
>
> <http://tinyurl.com/c5nqju> and many more), I'm sorry to say that I
> don't think this is funny.
>
>
be qualified as "prevalent in our industry". I would even dare to say
this is the opposite, it is almost unique.
I would also add that Robert was very far from this attitude, I consider
his joke as a friendly tickle, not a male chauvinist aggression. I'm no
women, but I'm sure they are as capable as me, not to say more, of
making the distinction.
It has been said this list is not very friendly to newbies, let's not
make it hostile to gentle jokes (even those not funny) when thanking
helpers.
JM
exa...@twistedmatrix.com
>Simon Brunning wrote:
>>2009/8/11 Robert Dailey <rcda...@gmail.com>:
>>>advice from a woman? lol. Thanks for the help.
>>
>><http://tinyurl.com/c5nqju> and many more), I'm sorry to say that I
>>don't think this is funny.
>Having someone present technical informations with porn content cannot
>be qualified as "prevalent in our industry". I would even dare to say
>this is the opposite, it is almost unique.
>I would also add that Robert was very far from this attitude, I
>consider his joke as a friendly tickle, not a male chauvinist
>aggression. I'm no women, but I'm sure they are as capable as me, not
>to say more, of making the distinction.
>
>It has been said this list is not very friendly to newbies, let's not
>make it hostile to gentle jokes (even those not funny) when thanking
>helpers.
It's lots of little things like this which combine to create an
environment which is less friendly towards women than it is towards
others. You might read it as a joke, others might not. Even if it is a
joke, it's in poor taste and doesn't really belong on python-list.
There's a difference between pointing out inappropriate behavior and
being unfriendly. Hopefully Robert got help with his problem. That's
what the list is here for. Having accomplished that, it is not
unfriendly to ask him not to make disparaging comments, "jokes" or
otherwise, about groups of people.
Jean-Paul
Robert Dailey
Hey everyone,
I was actually joking about my remark, I was making fun of the fact
that Bearophile took my figure of speech literally. I have worked with
a lot of women in the past and they even use "guys" to refer to
everyone in a room (When there were obviously other females in that
room as well).
On a more serious note, I do apologize to those offended by my remark.
I realize that these things can be a touchy subject for some people. I
expected more of a laid-back attitude from everyone. No need to be so
serious all the time. I cannot completely doubt that there are logical
women out there. I just haven't seen one yet. But that doesn't mean
I'm a sexist.
With my apology presented, I would like to propose that we end the
discussion here. As I said, this is a very sensitive subject and this
thread could spin way out of control if we don't just ignore the
issue. For those that took it as a friendly, harmless joke, hopefully
you had a laugh. For those that took it seriously or as an offense,
please take my apology to heart. Thanks once again to everyone for
your help. I've long been a member of this community and I really
appreciate the continuous support I've been receiving!
Take care everyone!
Robert Dailey
Oh, one last thing... So everyone knows, I chose the following
formatting solution to multiline strings:
def MyFunction():
multilineString = (
'This is a string that spans '
'multiple lines.'
)
print( multilineString )
I think this is as good as it is going to get for my personal needs.
However, I do not like having to put a space at the end of each
string. I've also done this in the past, which is slightly more ugly:
multilineString = (
'This is a string that spans',
'multiple lines.'
)
print( ' '.join( multilineString ) )
This will add the spaces between lines for you. However, in a
production quality application I would always have strings external to
the scripts and have an advanced localization system. However this is
useful for quick little scripts that I want to keep tidy.
Simon Forman
Oh my. And you were doing so well. You haven't seen a logical
woman? Perhaps you're blind because your eyes were torn out by a
raging marmoset?
Guess what? Thinking (or just saying) that /does/ mean you're a
sexist. (Even if it was just another "friendly, harmless joke".)
Steven D'Aprano
> On Aug 12, 9:41 am, Robert Dailey <rcdai...@gmail.com> wrote:
...
> > I was actually joking about my remark, I was making fun of the fact
> > that Bearophile took my figure of speech literally.
Keep in mind that the Internet is a global forum, and not everyone here
speaks English as a first language. I believe Bearophile is one of those.
Although his, or possibly her, English is excellent, it wouldn't surprise
me that (s)he would misinterpret "guys" as just referring to men. I'm a
native English speaker, and I would have done the same.
> > I have worked with
> > a lot of women in the past and they even use "guys" to refer to
> > everyone in a room (When there were obviously other females in that
> > room as well).
Yes, I've seen this myself, but it's still uncommon enough to surprise me
every time I see it.
> > On a more serious note, I do apologize to those offended by my remark.
> > I realize that these things can be a touchy subject for some people. I
> > expected more of a laid-back attitude from everyone. No need to be so
> > serious all the time. I cannot completely doubt that there are logical
> > women out there. I just haven't seen one yet.
That's okay, I haven't seen terribly many logical men out there either.
> Oh, one last thing... So everyone knows, I chose the following
> formatting solution to multiline strings:
>
> def MyFunction():
> multilineString = (
> 'This is a string that spans '
> 'multiple lines.'
> )
> print( multilineString )
>
> I think this is as good as it is going to get for my personal needs.
> However, I do not like having to put a space at the end of each
> string.
So put them at the beginning of the next line. It makes the space more
obvious, so it's clearer what you have done. That's what I sometimes do.
> I've also done this in the past, which is slightly more ugly:
>
> multilineString = (
> 'This is a string that spans',
> 'multiple lines.'
> )
> print( ' '.join( multilineString ) )
It's also less efficient, as it does the concatenation at runtime instead
of compile time. But for a small script, that's not likely to be a
problem worth worrying about.
--
Steven
Steven D'Aprano
[quoting Robert Dailey]
>> I cannot completely doubt that there are logical
>> women out there. I just haven't seen one yet. But that doesn't mean I'm
>> a sexist.
>
> Oh my. And you were doing so well. You haven't seen a logical woman?
> Perhaps you're blind because your eyes were torn out by a raging
> marmoset?
>
> Guess what? Thinking (or just saying) that /does/ mean you're a sexist.
> (Even if it was just another "friendly, harmless joke".)
It was an incredibly insensitive thing for Robert to say, having just
been slapped for a previous insensitive "joke" about women. But still,
most people, male or female, *aren't* logical. I know I've never met
somebody who is entirely logical, of either sex, and I'm pretty sure I've
not met very many people who are even mostly logical. Vulcans we are not.
Does this mean I'm equally sexist against men *and* women? ("I'm not
biased, I hate everyone equally!" *wink*)
Hell, here I am, at 2am, defending somebody I don't know, for saying
something I don't approve of, against somebody who is saying something I
agree with, out of some sort of misguided sense of fairness. Logic? Ha,
what's logic got to do with it?
--
Steven
David Bolen
> Hey guys. Being a C++ programmer, I like to keep variable definitions
> close to the location in which they will be used. This improves
> readability in many ways. However, when I have a multi-line string
> definition at function level scope, things get tricky because of the
> indents. In this case indents are serving two purposes: For syntax and
> actual text output. The tabs for function scope should not be included
> in the contents of the string. (...)
Personally I'm in the camp that something like this should be hoisted
out of the code path (whether to global scope, a dedicated message
module or configuration file is a design choice).
But if it's going to stay inline, one approach that can maintain some
of the attractive qualities of a triple quoted string is to make use
of the textwrap module:
import textwrap
def RunCommand( commandList ):
# ...
if returnCode:
failMsg = textwrap.dedent('''\
*************************************************
The following command returned exit code [{:#x}].
This represents failure of some form. Please review
the command output for more details on the issue.
------------
{}
*************************************************
''')
which removes any common leading whitespace (must be identical in terms
of any tabs/spaces).
This is still additional run-time processing, and most likely less
efficient than the joining of individual strings, but it does permit a
clean triple-quoted string so IMO is easier to read/maintain in the
source - providing the code indentation level doesn't get in the way
of the desired line length of the string. You can also choose to
dedent the string a bit (say to the level of "failMsg") if needed
without being forced all the way back to the left margin.
You can also combine textwrap.dedent with some of the other options if
where the strings are defined makes it nicer if they still have some
indentation (say in a global Python module). In that case, you'd most
likely just process them once when the module was imported, so any
inefficiency in textwrap.dedent is far less important.
-- David
Aahz
Robert Dailey <rcda...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>It's a figure of speech. And besides, why would I want programming
>advice from a woman? lol. Thanks for the help.
Well, I'm sorry to see this, it means I was wrong about the lack of
sexism in the Python community. I encourage anyone who wants to improve
the situation to join the new diversity list:
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/diversity
--
Aahz (aa...@pythoncraft.com) <*> http://www.pythoncraft.com/
"I saw `cout' being shifted "Hello world" times to the left and stopped
right there." --Steve Gonedes
Grant Edwards
> Robert Dailey:
>
>> This breaks the flow of scope. Would you guys solve this
>> problem by moving failMsg into global scope? Perhaps through
>> some other type of syntax?
>
> There are gals too here.
Straying a bit OT, but I find this particular issue rather
fascinating.
At least in the US, "guys" is now pretty much gender-neutral
according to my casual research (mostly just paying attention
to informal speach).
Oddly, it still seems to be masculine when singular. Though one
commonly hears a group of females addressed as "you guys" or
refered to as "those guys", one never hears a single female
referred to as "a guy" or "that guy".
It is a bit tricky, however, since a phrase like "a group of
guys" still seems to refer to just males since the word "guys"
in that case is being applied individually to a plurality of
persons rather being applied collectivelly to a single group --
if that makes any sense.
I've actually discussed this with a a number of female friends,
and they almost all thought the term "gals" was condescending
and actually preferred to be referred to collectively as
"guys".
--
Grant Edwards grante Yow! You can't hurt me!!
at I have an ASSUMABLE
visi.com MORTGAGE!!
Jean-Michel Pichavant
group as "guys", no matter that group gender configuration. It's even
used for group composed exclusively of women. Moreover it looks like a
*very* friendly form, so there is really nothing to worry about it.
Forms like:
"Hi guys", "You guys should do something...", "Come on guys..." are very
friendly and gender-neutral.
JM
Piet van Oostrum
>SB> 2009/8/11 Robert Dailey <rcda...@gmail.com>:
>>> On Aug 11, 3:40�pm, Bearophile <bearophileH...@lycos.com> wrote:
>>>> There are gals too here.
>>>
>>> It's a figure of speech. And besides, why would I want programming
>>> advice from a woman? lol. Thanks for the help.
>SB> Give the attitudes still prevalent in our industry (cf
>SB> <http://tinyurl.com/c5nqju> and many more), I'm sorry to say that I
>SB> don't think this is funny.
seconded
--
Piet van Oostrum <pi...@cs.uu.nl>
URL: http://pietvanoostrum.com [PGP 8DAE142BE17999C4]
Private email: pi...@vanoostrum.org
Jean-Michel Pichavant
> In article <461cc6f1-fc23-4bc7...@o15g2000yqm.googlegroups.com>,
> Robert Dailey <rcda...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> It's a figure of speech. And besides, why would I want programming
>> advice from a woman? lol. Thanks for the help.
>>
>
> Well, I'm sorry to see this, it means I was wrong about the lack of
> sexism in the Python community. I encourage anyone who wants to improve
> the situation to join the new diversity list:
>
> http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/diversity
>
sexual orientation, ethnicity, size, culture? If that was the case I'd
like to know about it.
I would really want to know how you'd guess my gender (could be some
clue somewhere), my sexual orientation, my religion and so on.
How can you reject someone regarding informations you don't have ?
That's the beauty of this mailing list, it has diversity, by design.
We even welcome people that mixes up joke with sexist aggression, not to
mention how open minded we are :o)
Beside, the day you'll meet a real act of sexism in this list, please
know that people talk and act on their own, do not assign their attitude
to the whole community.
You'll know that Python is sexist the day you'll find the title 'No
women allowed' on the python main document page.
JM
PS : Newbies are not welcome here !
Rami Chowdhury
> women allowed' on the python main document page.
Good God I hope you're being ironic.
On Mon, 17 Aug 2009 10:23:39 -0700, Jean-Michel Pichavant
<jeanm...@sequans.com> wrote:
> Aahz wrote:
>> In article
>> <461cc6f1-fc23-4bc7...@o15g2000yqm.googlegroups.com>,
>> Robert Dailey <rcda...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> It's a figure of speech. And besides, why would I want programming
>>> advice from a woman? lol. Thanks for the help.
>>>
>>
>> Well, I'm sorry to see this, it means I was wrong about the lack of
>> sexism in the Python community. I encourage anyone who wants to improve
>> the situation to join the new diversity list:
>>
>> http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/diversity
>>
> Are you suggesting this list reject part of the community regarding its
> sexual orientation, ethnicity, size, culture? If that was the case I'd
> like to know about it.
> I would really want to know how you'd guess my gender (could be some
> clue somewhere), my sexual orientation, my religion and so on.
> How can you reject someone regarding informations you don't have ?
>
> That's the beauty of this mailing list, it has diversity, by design.
> We even welcome people that mixes up joke with sexist aggression, not to
> mention how open minded we are :o)
>
> Beside, the day you'll meet a real act of sexism in this list, please
> know that people talk and act on their own, do not assign their attitude
> to the whole community.
> You'll know that Python is sexist the day you'll find the title 'No
> women allowed' on the python main document page.
>
> JM
>
> PS : Newbies are not welcome here !
>
>
--
Rami Chowdhury
"Never attribute to malice that which can be attributed to stupidity" --
Hanlon's Razor
408-597-7068 (US) / 07875-841-046 (UK) / 0189-245544 (BD)
Paul Boddie
wrote:
>
> Are you suggesting this list reject part of the community regarding its
> sexual orientation, ethnicity, size, culture? If that was the case I'd
> like to know about it.
Careful: you probably meant to write "rejects", not "reject". That
changes the meaning of what you've written somewhat.
> I would really want to know how you'd guess my gender (could be some
> clue somewhere), my sexual orientation, my religion and so on.
> How can you reject someone regarding informations you don't have ?
Well, everyone can of course hide their actual identity on the
Internet, but when someone references a group of people with a
juvenile remark (if we are being charitable about the matter), it has
nothing to do with guessing the characteristics of individuals. The
whole excuse that anonymity defends against insults and harassment is
a bit like saying that slinging mud at everyone is acceptable as long
as everyone is encouraged to do it and nobody is wearing their nicest
clothes. And unless your idea of a Python-related conference is
something close to a fancy-dress event with everyone "in character" -
which would obviously limit the effectiveness of such an event - you
presumably understand that there is a genuine need for continuity
between interactions on and off the Internet. This somewhat undermines
your argument.
> That's the beauty of this mailing list, it has diversity, by design.
An explanation is needed here for this not to sound like
conversational padding.
> We even welcome people that mixes up joke with sexist aggression, not to
> mention how open minded we are :o)
Well, jokes actually need an amusing side, regardless of how
"edgy" ("juvenile" is typically the more accurate term) the joke-
teller is trying to be, and that was completely absent from the remark
in question. There's little room for error in communication over a
medium like this one, as I pointed out with your opening sentence. And
much as it probably upsets the "unfettered free speech" advocates, we
should be able to assert that "sexist aggression" is not acceptable
behaviour amongst those who seek to participate in our community.
Paul
Carl Banks
wrote:
> I'm no English native, but I already heard women/men referring to a
> group as "guys", no matter that group gender configuration. It's even
> used for group composed exclusively of women. Moreover it looks like a
> *very* friendly form, so there is really nothing to worry about it.
I like how being very friendly means calling people after a guy who
tried to blow up the English Parliament.
Carl Banks
Carl Banks
> In article <461cc6f1-fc23-4bc7-a719-6f29babf8...@o15g2000yqm.googlegroups.com>,
> Robert Dailey <rcdai...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> >It's a figure of speech. And besides, why would I want programming
> >advice from a woman? lol. Thanks for the help.
>
> Well, I'm sorry to see this, it means I was wrong about the lack of
> sexism in the Python community.
Oh come on, one newbie making an off-color joke is not any sort of
reflection of the community as a whole.
Anyway it's pretty naive to expect what is now a large community to
avoid bad eggs altogether. Price you pay for popularity.
Carl Banks
Chris Rebert
Agreed on both points, but the lack of any reprimanding for making
said inappropriate joke /would/ reflect badly on the community.
Fortunately, said person's behavior has now been condemned by virtue
of this thread; it's a step in the right direction.
Cheers,
Chris
MRAB
Low Countries:
Ben Finney
> On Aug 11, 3:40 pm, Bearophile <bearophileH...@lycos.com> wrote:
> > Robert Dailey:
> > > This breaks the flow of scope. Would you guys solve this
> > > problem by […]
> > There are gals too here.
>
> It's a figure of speech.
Indeed. When I use the term “guys” as a form of address, it's intended
to be gender-neutral.
> And besides, why would I want programming advice from a woman? lol.
No, that's not worth any laughter, especially because there are still
too many people who seriously think that way. It's totally unacceptable.
Please don't promote sexist garbage like that here.
--
\ “With Lisp or Forth, a master programmer has unlimited power |
`\ and expressiveness. With Python, even a regular guy can reach |
_o__) for the stars.” —Raymond Hettinger |
Ben Finney
John Machin
Please consider having an attitude transplant.
Mensanator
So?
>
> Carl Banks
Carl Banks
I also like how making an amusing pointless observation gets people
all huffy.
(BTW, lest anyone is not aware, that is the origin of the word "guy",
this was not some random association.)
Carl Banks
Mensanator
> On Aug 17, 5:40�pm, Mensanator <mensana...@aol.com> wrote:
>
> > On Aug 17, 4:06�pm, Carl Banks <pavlovevide...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > On Aug 17, 10:03�am, Jean-Michel Pichavant <jeanmic...@sequans.com>
> > > wrote:
>
> > > > I'm no English native, but I already heard women/men referring to a
> > > > group as "guys", no matter that group gender configuration. It's even
> > > > used for group composed exclusively of women. Moreover it looks like a
> > > > *very* friendly form, so there is really nothing to worry about it.
>
> > > I like how being very friendly means calling people after a guy who
> > > tried to blow up the English Parliament.
>
> > So?
>
> I also like how making an amusing pointless observation
Pointless, yes, but what was amusing abot the observation?
> gets people all huffy.
That wasn't huffy. You want to see huffy, make a wisecrack
comparing mothballs to Zyklon B, you'll REALLY get a load
of huffy replies.
>
> (BTW, lest anyone is not aware, that is the origin of the word "guy",
It most certainly is not. Maybe the origin of that
word's useage as a genric reference to a male, but
you didn't say that.
> this was not some random association.)
Penny for the guy?
>
> Carl Banks
Steven D'Aprano
>> Oh come on, one newbie making an off-color joke is not any sort of
>> reflection of the community as a whole.
>>
>> Anyway it's pretty naive to expect what is now a large community to
>> avoid bad eggs altogether. Price you pay for popularity.
>
> Agreed on both points, but the lack of any reprimanding for making said
> inappropriate joke /would/ reflect badly on the community. Fortunately,
> said person's behavior has now been condemned by virtue of this thread;
> it's a step in the right direction.
Pardon me, but he has been slapped, a number of times. Check the original
thread, you'll see that the OP was slapped for his stupid joke, then
slapped again for another dismissive comment after the first reprimand.
You might argue he wasn't slapped *enough*, but that's another story.
Personally, I thought he was either trolling for a reaction, or he was an
old-fuddy-duddy (regardless of biological age), and either way reacting
to his comments would just draw attention to something which is best
dealt with with a cold-shoulder. Reinforce the good behaviour, shun the
bad.
The comments were made a week ago -- why the sudden flurry of attention?
--
Steven
Carl Banks
> On Aug 17, 8:04 pm, Carl Banks <pavlovevide...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Aug 17, 5:40 pm, Mensanator <mensana...@aol.com> wrote:
>
> > > On Aug 17, 4:06 pm, Carl Banks <pavlovevide...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > On Aug 17, 10:03 am, Jean-Michel Pichavant <jeanmic...@sequans.com>
> > > > wrote:
>
> > > > > I'm no English native, but I already heard women/men referring to a
> > > > > group as "guys", no matter that group gender configuration. It's even
> > > > > used for group composed exclusively of women. Moreover it looks like a
> > > > > *very* friendly form, so there is really nothing to worry about it.
>
> > > > I like how being very friendly means calling people after a guy who
> > > > tried to blow up the English Parliament.
>
> > > So?
>
> > I also like how making an amusing pointless observation
>
> Pointless, yes, but what was amusing abot the observation?
The irony that in being friendly that you're calling someone a
terrorist. I guess I shouldn't have expected you to get it.
> > gets people all huffy.
>
> That wasn't huffy. You want to see huffy, make a wisecrack
> comparing mothballs to Zyklon B, you'll REALLY get a load
> of huffy replies.
>
> > (BTW, lest anyone is not aware, that is the origin of the word "guy",
>
> It most certainly is not.
My dictionary disagrees with you.
> Maybe the origin of that
> word's useage as a genric reference to a male, but
> you didn't say that.
>
> > this was not some random association.)
>
> Penny for the guy?
Probably that phrase was part of the word's gradual common adoption.
Carl Banks
Steven D'Aprano
Yes, apparently the slang term "guy" for "man" (and these days, "person")
was derived from Guy Fawkes:
http://www.worldwidewords.org/weirdwords/ww-guy1.htm
but the name itself is much older, and comes from Old German for "wood"
or "warrior". In old French, it was "Gy", and in Italian (and presumably
Dutch) it is "Guido".
http://www.thinkbabynames.com/meaning/1/Guy
http://www.blurtit.com/q113276.html
You'll also note that "guy" the noun has a number of meanings:
http://wordnetweb.princeton.edu/perl/webwn?s=guy
I don't know if there's any point to all this, but it's interesting, even
if off-topic.
--
Steven
Aahz
Steven D'Aprano <ste...@REMOVE.THIS.cybersource.com.au> wrote:
>
>The comments were made a week ago -- why the sudden flurry of attention?
Mainly an opportunity to flog the new diversity list.
Ben Finney
> The comments were made a week ago -- why the sudden flurry of
> attention?
In my case, it's because I was ignoring the thread in which they were
made. The change of subject drew them to my attention, where I saw the
community response was (IMO) insufficient at the time, so I acted to
correct that.
Now that the community response is (IMO) more appropriate, there's no
further need to beat on those particular comments. Additional
transgressions could warrant additional responses, of course.
--
\ “I got some new underwear the other day. Well, new to me.” —Emo |
`\ Philips |
_o__) |
Ben Finney
Steven D'Aprano
>> > > > I like how being very friendly means calling people after a guy
>> > > > who tried to blow up the English Parliament.
>>
>> > > So?
>>
>> > I also like how making an amusing pointless observation
>>
>> Pointless, yes, but what was amusing abot the observation?
>
> The irony that in being friendly that you're calling someone a
> terrorist.
Please, the term is Freedom Fighter.
> I guess I shouldn't have expected you to get it.
Ouch! Nasty!
Is there something in the air today? People are short-tempered and
grouchy all over the place...
--
Steven
Hendrik van Rooyen
+1 QOTW - Hendrik
Hendrik van Rooyen
> In article <pan.2009.08...@REMOVE.THIS.cybersource.com.au>,
>
> Steven D'Aprano <ste...@REMOVE.THIS.cybersource.com.au> wrote:
> >The comments were made a week ago -- why the sudden flurry of attention?
>
> Mainly an opportunity to flog the new diversity list.
Here my English fails me - flog as in "whip", or flog as in "sell"?
- Hendrik
Ben Finney
Yes :-)
--
\ “The most common of all follies is to believe passionately in |
`\ the palpably not true. It is the chief occupation of mankind.” |
_o__) —Henry L. Mencken |
Ben Finney
Jean-Michel Pichavant
> Low Countries:
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guy_Fawkes
>
parliament is from the movie V for Vendetta (no comment please !).
Now thanks to your link:
"In 18th-century England, the term "guy" was used to refer to an effigy
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Effigy> of Fawkes, which would be paraded
around town by children on the anniversary of the conspiracy"
Well, my knowledge is much too low to get this kind of reference from
the start. :-/
JM
Steven D'Aprano
"Guy" is an old English name, related to the old French name "Gy" and
Italian "Guido". It's originally derived from the Old German for "wood"
or "warrior".
After Guy Fawkes tried to blow up the English Parliament house, and was
executed, the British government encouraged people to burn effigies of
him. These became known as "guys", which eventually became slang for an
ugly man, which later became slang for any man, and in recent years, any
person.
So the irony is that the friendly term "guys", referring to a group of
people, is derived from the name of an 18th century religious terrorist.
One can only wonder whether in 200 years time people will walk into the
office and say "Hey you osamas, they're giving away free donuts down
stairs, anyone want some?"
--
Steven
Steven D'Aprano
Almost certainly "flog" as in sell.
But not literally sell, for money, but sell in the sense of convincing
others it is a good list to join.
--
Steven
Grant Edwards
> On Aug 17, 10:03?am, Jean-Michel Pichavant <jeanmic...@sequans.com>
Everybody likes fireworks!
--
Grant Edwards grante Yow! Where do your SOCKS
at go when you lose them in
visi.com th' WASHER?
Steve Holden
[...]
>
> It's a figure of speech. And besides, why would I want programming
> advice from a woman? lol. Thanks for the help.
Sorry, Robert, simply not acceptable. Whether designed to be funny or
not it's the kind of inane remark I would be really happy never to see
again.
The problem is that we can't just "let these things go by" all the
time (even though we aren't discussing a major crime here). If we do
that it encourages (at best) an atmosphere of complacency and a
feeling that it's OK to demean people in Python forums. I'd really
like to see those *not* get a hold.
regards
Steve
Jean-Michel Pichavant
joke out of its context is totally unfair.
Anyway the hysteria that is surrounding this thread is just amazing. I'm
waiting for more.
JM
Simon Forman
Pichavant<jeanm...@sequans.com> wrote:
> out of its context is totally unfair.
Unfair to whom?
In any event, the context here seems to be a mixture of Guy Fawkes
trivia and general disapproval of sexist remarks on c.l.p, so I don't
see this comment as "out of context".
(For the record, I use "guys" to refer to groups of people regardless
of their gender. I also use "dude" to refer to people regardless of
their gender. The only person who has taken offense to this is my
mom. "I am not a dude." But she means she's not a cowboy, not not a
male.) (Uh, she is, in fact, female.)
> Anyway the hysteria that is surrounding this thread is just amazing. I'm
> waiting for more.
I don't feel hysterical, only appalled.
The OP used a common slang term, someone mentioned that the term
implies a group of males when in fact the group being addressed is
mixed gender, and the OP replied that it was "just a figure of
speech".
So far, so good. But then the OP made a sexist "joke". He was called
on it and issued a rather gracious apology, but then he dropped
another sexist turd right in the middle of his otherwise model
apology.
I won't speak for anyone else, but I was appalled.
Sexism, racism, homophobia, religious intolerance, etc., all stem from
a fundamental forgetfulness of our Unity in God (as I would put it)
and this is perhaps the single greatest cause of human misery.
We are one family.
Grant Edwards
> Sexism, racism, homophobia, religious intolerance, etc., all
> stem from a fundamental forgetfulness of our Unity in God (as
> I would put it) and this is perhaps the single greatest cause
> of human misery.
You mean the single greatest cause of human misery isn't
Microsoft Windows?
--
Grant Edwards grante Yow! What I want to find
at out is -- do parrots know
visi.com much about Astro-Turf?
Ben Finney
> Anyway the hysteria that is surrounding this thread is just amazing.
If the calm reproach that has been the maximum response so far seems
like “hysteria” to you, I can only conclude you have only been using the
internet for a few hours.
--
\ “The fact that I have no remedy for all the sorrows of the |
`\ world is no reason for my accepting yours. It simply supports |
_o__) the strong probability that yours is a fake.” —Henry L. Mencken |
Ben Finney
Emile van Sebille
> You mean the single greatest cause of human misery isn't
> Microsoft Windows?
Either that or users...
Sick-of-both-today-ly y'rs,
Emile
Steven D'Aprano
> Sexism, racism, homophobia, religious intolerance, etc., all stem from a
> fundamental forgetfulness of our Unity in God (as I would put it) and
Of the tens of thousands of Gods that people have invented, which is the
one we're supposed to believe in? I always forget which ones we're
supposed to dismiss as nonsense, and which one we're not.
> this is perhaps the single greatest cause of human misery.
Okay, we're Unified in God. Great. What does that actually mean, really?
In the struggle to survive in a world of shortages, disease, natural
disasters and disputes between well-meaning but incompatible viewpoints
(to say nothing of the selfish and greedy), what practical difference
does it make?
--
Steven
Ben Finney
> Sexism, racism, homophobia, religious intolerance, etc., all stem from
> a fundamental forgetfulness of our Unity in God (as I would put it)
It seems odd, for someone who cites religious intolerance as a problem,
to then assert an extremely divisive religious idea.
We're all unified by our humanity. Bringing any god into the picture is
surely counter to any goals of unity.
> We are one family.
Agreed.
--
\ “Are you thinking what I'm thinking, Pinky?” “Uh... yeah, |
`\ Brain, but where are we going to find rubber pants our size?” |
_o__) —_Pinky and The Brain_ |
Ben Finney
Grant Edwards
> Simon Forman <sajm...@gmail.com> writes:
>> We are one family.
>
> Agreed.
That's not much comfort if you've seen the way many families
get along with each other.
--
Grant
Simon Forman
D'Aprano<st...@remove-this-cybersource.com.au> wrote:
> On Tue, 18 Aug 2009 17:13:02 -0400, Simon Forman wrote:
>
>> Sexism, racism, homophobia, religious intolerance, etc., all stem from a
>> fundamental forgetfulness of our Unity in God (as I would put it) and
>
> Of the tens of thousands of Gods that people have invented, which is the
> one we're supposed to believe in? I always forget which ones we're
> supposed to dismiss as nonsense, and which one we're not.
Why the heck are you asking me? (I'd say "/you/ are the God you
should believe in.")
>> this is perhaps the single greatest cause of human misery.
>
> Okay, we're Unified in God. Great. What does that actually mean, really?
> In the struggle to survive in a world of shortages, disease, natural
> disasters and disputes between well-meaning but incompatible viewpoints
> (to say nothing of the selfish and greedy), what practical difference
> does it make?
It means (to me, at least) that underlying all the BS and misery
there's a reason to hope, a reality the transcends this squalid
mud-ball Earth, and can overcome it completely if tapped.
It's more than a symbol with meaning, Unity is a phenomenon that can
be lived, experienced. It can be practiced and deepened. Done well,
the practical difference it makes defies measurement.
(That's why calling folks on sexist behavior is important enough to
butt in on a thread on usenet with an OT reprimand. IMHO)
Regards,
~Simon
Ben Finney
Demonstrable facts, by nature of being independently verifiable, are a
better point of unification than comforting illusions, however
confidently asserted.
--
\ “Life does not cease to be funny when people die any more than |
`\ it ceases to be serious when people laugh.” —George Bernard Shaw |
_o__) |
Ben Finney
Simon Forman
> Simon Forman <sajm...@gmail.com> writes:
>
>> Sexism, racism, homophobia, religious intolerance, etc., all stem from
>> a fundamental forgetfulness of our Unity in God (as I would put it)
>
> It seems odd, for someone who cites religious intolerance as a problem,
> to then assert an extremely divisive religious idea.
Well, I did say, "(as I would put it)" to try to cushion the blow.
> We're all unified by our humanity. Bringing any god into the picture is
> surely counter to any goals of unity.
Unity "in humanity" is, to my way of thinking, the same as Unity "in
God". I think Unity, like None, is a built-in singleton, so to speak.
>> We are one family.
>
> Agreed.
<3
Ben Finney
> On Tue, Aug 18, 2009 at 8:42 PM, Ben Finney<ben+p...@benfinney.id.au> wrote:
> > We're all unified by our humanity. Bringing any god into the picture
> > is surely counter to any goals of unity.
>
> Unity "in humanity" is, to my way of thinking, the same as Unity "in
> God".
Then you're playing Humpty-Dumpty games with words. You know very well
that “God” has established meanings entirely different from “humanity”,
and those meanings played a part in your choice of that word.
I maintain that you can't consistently make a declaration in favour of
human unity and unfounded religious assertions.
> I think Unity, like None, is a built-in singleton, so to speak.
This is white noise.
> >> We are one family.
> >
> > Agreed.
>
> <3
I think we can peaceably leave it at that.
--
\ “Spam will be a thing of the past in two years' time.” —Bill |
`\ Gates, 2004-01-24 |
_o__) |
Ben Finney
Carl Banks
> Grant Edwards <gra...@visi.com> writes:
> > > Simon Forman <sajmik...@gmail.com> writes:
> > >> We are one family.
>
> > > Agreed.
>
> > That's not much comfort if you've seen the way many families get along
> > with each other.
>
> Demonstrable facts, by nature of being independently verifiable, are a
> better point of unification than comforting illusions, however
> confidently asserted.
You know, if you're going to escalate a budding flame war the least
you could do is to choose to do it some other way than by following up
to an obvious joke, probably one designed to diffuse the ill-feeling.
Carl Banks
Mensanator
You're off by at least a century.
> religious terrorist.
As were all members of parliament including the king.
>
> One can only wonder whether in 200 years time people will walk into the
> office and say "Hey you osamas, they're giving away free donuts down
> stairs, anyone want some?"
<joke>
Q: What's white and flies across the ocean?
A: Lord Mountbatten's tennis shoes.
</joke>
Ain't so fuckin' funny, is it?
(Unless you're Irish, in which case it's hysterical).
>
> --
> Steven
Mensanator
> On Aug 17, 8:49�pm, Mensanator <mensana...@aol.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Aug 17, 8:04 pm, Carl Banks <pavlovevide...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > On Aug 17, 5:40 pm, Mensanator <mensana...@aol.com> wrote:
>
> > > > On Aug 17, 4:06 pm, Carl Banks <pavlovevide...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > On Aug 17, 10:03 am, Jean-Michel Pichavant <jeanmic...@sequans.com>
> > > > > wrote:
>
> > > > > > I'm no English native, but I already heard women/men referring to a
> > > > > > group as "guys", no matter that group gender configuration. It's even
> > > > > > used for group composed exclusively of women. Moreover it looks like a
> > > > > > *very* friendly form, so there is really nothing to worry about it.
>
> > > > > I like how being very friendly means calling people after a guy who
> > > > > tried to blow up the English Parliament.
>
>
> > > I also like how making an amusing pointless observation
>
> > Pointless, yes, but what was amusing abot the observation?
>
> The irony that in being friendly that you're calling someone a
People of Irish Catholic heritage find that extremely offensive,
like asking how many Jews you can fit into a Volswagen.
> I guess I shouldn't have expected you to get it.
Oh, I got it alright, moreso than you could possibly
imagine.
>
> > > gets people all huffy.
>
> > That wasn't huffy. You want to see huffy, make a wisecrack
> > comparing mothballs to Zyklon B, you'll REALLY get a load
> > of huffy replies.
>
> > > (BTW, lest anyone is not aware, that is the origin of the word "guy",
>
> > It most certainly is not.
>
> My dictionary disagrees with you.
hen yor dictionary is wrong. Or, more likely, you have
comprehension problems. People have been named "Guy"
for centuries prior to Mr. Fawkes.
Try reading my whole post before shouting your mouth off.
>
> > Maybe the origin of that
> > word's useage as a genric reference to a male, but
> > you didn't say that.
>
> > > this was not some random association.)
>
> > Penny for the guy?
>
> Probably that phrase was part of the word's gradual common adoption.
Kinda why I mentioned it. Duh.
>
> Carl Banks
Mensanator
So I guess you have no clue WHY Mr. Fawkes would want
to blow up the parliment and assassinate the king.
Read up a bit on how just how the Church of England
came to be and it will be quite obvious.
On some TV show, someone did a re-creation of that event
to see what would have happened had he not gotten caught.
They built a life-size mockuup of the room under which
the gunpowder kegs were stashed and filled the room
with dummys. The blast was spectacular. They eventually
found the head of the dummy representing king James a
couple miles away. Or maybe it was kilometers. Either way,
the conclusion was it was very lucky to have worked out
the way it did.
>
> JM
Hendrik van Rooyen
> Hendrik van Rooyen <hen...@microcorp.co.za> writes:
> > On Tuesday 18 August 2009 06:45:39 Aahz wrote:
> > > Mainly an opportunity to flog the new diversity list.
> >
> > Here my English fails me - flog as in "whip", or flog as in "sell"?
>
> Yes :-)
Thank you that clears it up.
:-)
- Hendrik
Jean-Michel Pichavant
> On 2009-08-18, Simon Forman <sajm...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>> Sexism, racism, homophobia, religious intolerance, etc., all
>> stem from a fundamental forgetfulness of our Unity in God (as
>> I would put it) and this is perhaps the single greatest cause
>> of human misery.
>>
>
> You mean the single greatest cause of human misery isn't
> Microsoft Windows?
>
>
JM
Jean-Michel Pichavant
> On Tue, Aug 18, 2009 at 8:03 PM, Steven
> D'Aprano<st...@remove-this-cybersource.com.au> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>>> Sexism, racism, homophobia, religious intolerance, etc., all stem from a
>>> fundamental forgetfulness of our Unity in God (as I would put it) and
>>>
>> Of the tens of thousands of Gods that people have invented, which is the
>> one we're supposed to believe in? I always forget which ones we're
>> supposed to dismiss as nonsense, and which one we're not.
>>
>
> should believe in.")
>
Steven, a God... funny :o)
No the only God we should surely worship is Guido, our BDFL :bow:. That
is not questionable, and those who dare will be hung by the balls. (In
order to be fairly cruel we should find an appropriate torture for our
ladies, I don't want to be tagged as sexist).
JM
Aahz
Jean-Michel Pichavant <jeanm...@sequans.com> wrote:
>MRAB wrote:
>> Carl Banks wrote:
>>> On Aug 17, 10:03 am, Jean-Michel Pichavant <jeanmic...@sequans.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> I'm no English native, but I already heard women/men referring to a
>>>> group as "guys", no matter that group gender configuration. It's even
>>>> used for group composed exclusively of women. Moreover it looks like a
>>>> *very* friendly form, so there is really nothing to worry about it.
>>>
>>> I like how being very friendly means calling people after a guy who
>>> tried to blow up the English Parliament.
>>
>> Guy Fawkes adopted the name Guido while fighting for the Spanish in the
>> Low Countries:
>>
>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guy_Fawkes
>
>I didn't get Carl's reference. The only thing I know about blowing the
>parliament is from the movie V for Vendetta (no comment please !).
You should read the original comic book, it's much more interesting (and
clearly mentions the Guy Fawkes connection).
--
Aahz (aa...@pythoncraft.com) <*> http://www.pythoncraft.com/
"I saw `cout' being shifted "Hello world" times to the left and stopped
right there." --Steve Gonedes
Simon Forman
> Simon Forman <sajmik...@gmail.com> writes:
> > On Tue, Aug 18, 2009 at 8:42 PM, Ben Finney<ben+pyt...@benfinney.id.au> wrote:
> > > We're all unified by our humanity. Bringing any god into the picture
> > > is surely counter to any goals of unity.
>
> > Unity "in humanity" is, to my way of thinking, the same as Unity "in
> > God".
>
> Then you're playing Humpty-Dumpty games with words. You know very well
> that “God” has established meanings entirely different from “humanity”,
> and those meanings played a part in your choice of that word.
>
> I maintain that you can't consistently make a declaration in favour of
> human unity and unfounded religious assertions.
>
> > I think Unity, like None, is a built-in singleton, so to speak.
>
> This is white noise.
>
> > >> We are one family.
>
> > > Agreed.
>
> > <3
>
> I think we can peaceably leave it at that.
Hear hear!
(FWIW, I've always admired Humpty Dumpty's attitude to words. Have
you ever read R.A. Wilson's "Quantum Psychology"?)
Regards,
~Simon
Steven D'Aprano
> (FWIW, I've always admired Humpty Dumpty's attitude to words.
"When I use a word," Humpty Dumpty said in rather a scornful tone, "it
means just what I choose it to mean -- neither more nor less."
When you say "admired", do you mean what the rest of us understand by
"admired", or something completely different?
How about "always", "attitude", "to" and "words"?
For all I know, you're talking about baking a birthday cake for your cat,
by which I mean shaving off all your hair, and by "hair" I mean "lunch"
and by "shaving off" I mean "eating".
> Have you
> ever read R.A. Wilson's "Quantum Psychology"?)
Perhaps I have, perhaps I haven't, it depends on who asks first.
--
Steven
Cameron Laird
MRAB <pyt...@mrabarnett.plus.com> wrote:
.
.
.
>> Well it may come as a surprise to you, but it was a woman who
>> wrote one of the first compilers.
>>
>> She became an Admiral in the US navy as a result.
>>
>> If I recall correctly, her name was Grace Hooper.
>>
>Grace Hopper. The saying "It's easier to ask forgiveness than it is to
>get permission" is attributed to her.
.
.
.
SEVERAL women, including Hopper, Holbertson, Countess Lovelace,
Sammet, and Liskov, all advanced early compiler theory and practice;
I can make a case for at least the first three of these as having
written "the first compiler".
This thread has surprised me: it gives more of an impression
than I expected that a significant portion of practitioners
sincerely believe that "women don't do computers". Abundant
resources are available to those who choose to pursue the facts;
<URL: http://www.indwes.edu/Faculty/bcupp/lookback/hist-10.htm >
and <URL: http://cs-www.cs.yale.edu/homes/tap/past-women-cs.html >
are accessible starting points.
Incidentally, I feel particularly ignorant myself about contri-
butions from Eastern Europe during 1950-1970, say; if I just
wanted to accumulate debating points, I'd look there.
Stefan Behnel
> 2009/8/11 Robert Dailey:
>> On Aug 11, 3:40 pm, Bearophile wrote:
>>> There are gals too here.
>> It's a figure of speech. And besides, why would I want programming
>> advice from a woman? lol. Thanks for the help.
>
> <http://tinyurl.com/c5nqju> and many more), I'm sorry to say that I
> don't think this is funny.
Me neither.
I used to reply with comments like "you just missed more than half of the
world's population" to people who started their postings with "hi guys!",
and I stopped doing that as a) it became too tiring, especially on a
potentially-for-newbees group like c.l.py, and b) to many people it
actually *is* a figure of speech.
But reading statements like the above really makes me feel that it's best
to comment even on simple things like "hi guys!".
Stefan
Stefan Behnel
Heck, where's Godwin's law when you need it?
Stefan
Stefan Behnel
> asking how many Jews you can fit into a Volswagen.
None, because it's already full.
(or "voll" as those who design Volkswagens would put it...)
Stefan
Steven D'Aprano
> Simon Brunning wrote:
>> 2009/8/11 Robert Dailey:
>>> On Aug 11, 3:40 pm, Bearophile wrote:
>>>> There are gals too here.
>>> It's a figure of speech. And besides, why would I want programming
>>> advice from a woman? lol. Thanks for the help.
>>
>> Give the attitudes still prevalent in our industry (cf
>> <http://tinyurl.com/c5nqju> and many more), I'm sorry to say that I
>> don't think this is funny.
>
> Me neither.
>
> I used to reply with comments like "you just missed more than half of
> the world's population" to people who started their postings with "hi
> guys!",
If you start your post with "Hi guys", you've missed more than EIGHTY
percent of the world's population, namely the 5.5 to 6 billion people who
speak no English. To say nothing of the 99.9% of the world's population
who couldn't help you with your query, even if they spoke English, and
even if they were on the Internet.
In that case, missing out on the small percentage of English-speaking
women who don't know that "guys" has become sexless probably doesn't
matter.
(I'm amused and somewhat perplexed that somebody with the non-English
name of Stefan, writing from a .de email address, seems to be assuming
that (1) everybody is on the Internet, and (2) everybody on the Internet
speaks English. Awareness of sexism is a good thing, but so is awareness
of cultural chauvinism.)
> and I stopped doing that as a) it became too tiring, especially
> on a potentially-for-newbees group like c.l.py, and b) to many people it
> actually *is* a figure of speech.
>
> But reading statements like the above really makes me feel that it's
> best to comment even on simple things like "hi guys!".
Or you could enter the 21 century and understand that "guys" has become a
generic term for people of any sex.
--
Steven
Mensanator
> Mensanator wrote:
> > asking how many Jews you can fit into a Volswagen.
>
> None, because it's already full.
A spelling error does not make it any less offensive.
Stefan Behnel
> I'm amused and somewhat perplexed that somebody with the non-English
> name of Stefan, writing from a .de email address, seems to be assuming
> that (1) everybody is on the Internet, and (2) everybody on the Internet
> speaks English.
Oh, I totally don't. But most people who read c.l.py do at least understand
it to a certain extent. I don't commonly read /that/ many
non-english-speaking Python forums thoroughly enough to assume that the OP
posted the question only in English and only in c.l.py. I don't even assume
that he only posted that question to an Internet newsgroup. You know,
there's real-life, too.
>> But reading statements like the above really makes me feel that it's
>> best to comment even on simple things like "hi guys!".
>
> Or you could enter the 21 century and understand that "guys" has become a
> generic term for people of any sex.
Is that true for everyone who understands and/or writes English? In that
case, I'm fine with your above statement. Otherwise, I'd wonder who you
meant with the term "cultural chauvinism". So far, I only learned that most
North-American English native speakers use that term in the way you refer
to. That doesn't even get you close to the majority of English speakers.
Stefan
Stefan Behnel
> On Aug 23, 2:25�pm, Stefan Behnel wrote:
>> Mensanator wrote:
>>> asking how many Jews you can fit into a Volswagen.
>> None, because it's already full.
>
> A spelling error does not make it any less offensive.
As it stands, I find the joke above perfectly acceptable. Using the word
"Jew" in a joke doesn't make it anti-semitic by default.
Stefan
Piet van Oostrum
>CL> This thread has surprised me: it gives more of an impression
>CL> than I expected that a significant portion of practitioners
>CL> sincerely believe that "women don't do computers". Abundant
>CL> resources are available to those who choose to pursue the facts;
>CL> <URL: http://www.indwes.edu/Faculty/bcupp/lookback/hist-10.htm >
>CL> and <URL: http://cs-www.cs.yale.edu/homes/tap/past-women-cs.html >
>CL> are accessible starting points.
>CL> Incidentally, I feel particularly ignorant myself about contri-
>CL> butions from Eastern Europe during 1950-1970, say; if I just
>CL> wanted to accumulate debating points, I'd look there.
I don't know how it's in other countries, but here in the Netherlands
the percentage of girls studying computer science is veeeeery low. I
have been teaching a class of Computer Networks, and in 2008 there were
zero girls attending the course. I think that was also the number of
girls that started CS in our university that year. This year there were
10 out of a population of 100. Still much to low on a university were
55% of the students is female.
Before starting to work at the university I worked at DEC (Digital
Equipment) and in 1978 I had to attend a course at DEC's headquarters in
MA, and there 50% of the attendants was female.
--
Piet van Oostrum <pi...@cs.uu.nl>
URL: http://pietvanoostrum.com [PGP 8DAE142BE17999C4]
Private email: pi...@vanoostrum.org
Steven D'Aprano
>> Or you could enter the 21 century and understand that "guys" has become
>> a generic term for people of any sex.
>
> Is that true for everyone who understands and/or writes English? In that
> case, I'm fine with your above statement. Otherwise, I'd wonder who you
> meant with the term "cultural chauvinism". So far, I only learned that
> most North-American English native speakers use that term in the way you
> refer to. That doesn't even get you close to the majority of English
> speakers.
If you read the entire thread, you'd see that we've already discussed the
issue of "guys" for mixed sex groups and females. In fact, as I'd already
said, I'm one of those old fashioned guys who still gets surprised when
women refer to themselves as guys, but I'm learning to keep up with the
times. I'm Australian, not North American, and the British author Michael
Quinion, one of the researchers for the Oxford Dictionary, also states
that "guys" now refers to both men and women:
http://www.worldwidewords.org/weirdwords/ww-guy1.htm
When "guys" can refer to either sex in English, American, Canadian and
Australian English, I think it should be pretty uncontroversial to treat
it as standard now.
--
Steven
Stefan Behnel
Ok, then I guess I just misread "after being adopted in the USA it started
to change meaning" in one of the cited articles as "it changed meaning in
the USA". I didn't expect Australians (and Oxford dictionary writers, and
potentially others) to be /that/ influenced by shifts in US juvenile word
semantics...
I for one wouldn't start calling my leg "foot", even though the Austrians
kept insisting for ages now.
Stefan