HELP!! How to ask a girl out with a simple witty Python code??

[Xrrific]

Guys, please Help!!!

I am trying to impress a girl who is learning python and want ask her out at the same time.

Could you please come up with something witty incorporating a simple python line like If...then... but..etc.

You will make me a very happy man!!!

Thank you very much!!!

[Marcos Almeida Azevedo]

Why does it need to be nerdy. Why not just buy her a good book on Python?

--
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list

--

Marcos | I love PHP, Linux, and Java

[sohca...@gmail.com]

Something something don't top post. Add responses to the bottom. BLah blah blah

> Marcos | I love PHP, Linux, and Java

Because nothing is quite as romantic as a Python book, right?

[Roy Smith]

In article <8c09473e-92df-40ac...@googlegroups.com>,

I don't know about witty, but I'm sure you guys will make a cute tuple.

[Terry Reedy]

On 3/4/2015 8:34 PM, Xrrific wrote:
> Guys, please Help!!!

Gals might know better how to impress a girl.

> I am trying to impress a girl who is learning python and want ask her out at the same time.

Start by not being sexist about the fitness of females for Python
programming. Make sure she knows that at least parts of the Python
community welcomes anybody and everybody. PyLadies is one example of that.

--
Terry Jan Reedy

[Ryan Stuart]

On Thu, 5 Mar 2015 at 11:35 Xrrific <xiao...@gmail.com> wrote:

Could you please come up with something witty incorporating a simple python line like If...then... but..etc.

Send her this:

import base64

print(base64.b64decode('CkhpLCAKVGhpcyBpcyBzb21lb25lIGZyb20gdGhlIHB5dGhvbiBtYWlsaW5nIGxpc3QuIFRoaXMgZ3V5IChoZSBwb3N0ZWQgdW5kZXIgdGhlIG5hbWUgYFhycmlmaWNgKSBwb3N0ZWQgaGVyZSBhc2tpbmcgZm9yIHNvbWUgY29kZSB0aGF0IHdvdWxkIGltcHJlc3MgeW91LiBJdCB3YXMgdmVyeSB0ZW1wdGluZyB0byBwdXQgc29tZXRoaW5nIHZlcnkgb2ZmZW5zaXZlIGluIHRoaXMgbWVzc2FnZSEgUmF0aGVyLCBoZXJlIGlzIHNvbWUgYXNjaWkgYXJ0LgoKICAgICAgICAgICAsCiAgICAgICwsICAgJSUgICAsICAgLAogICAgIDolJSU7IDslJSUgOyUgICUlOgogICAgICA6JSUlICUlJSUgJSUgJSU6ICAgCiAgICAgOiUlJSUlICUlJSUgJSAlJSU6IAogICAgIDolJSUlJSUgJSUlJSAlJSUlOgogICAgICA6JSUlJSUgJSUlICUlJSU6CiAgICAgICA6JSUlJSAlJSAlJSUlOgogICAgICAgIDolJSUlJSAlJSUlOgogICAgICAgICA6JSUlJSAlJSU6IAogICAgICAgICAgJiU6JSY6JSYKICAgICAgICAgICAmJjomOiYKICAgICAgICAgICAgJiYmJgogICAgICAgICAgICA7JiY7ICAgICA7CiAgICAgICAgICAgICA6OiAgICA7Ozs7CiAgICAgICAgICAgICA6OiAgIDs7Ozs7CiAgICAgICAgICAgICA6OiAgOzs7Ozs7CiAgICAgICAgICAgICA6OiA7Ozs7OzsKICAgICAgIDsgICAgIDo6IDs7Ozs7CiAgICAgIDs7ICAgICA6Ojs7OzsgCiAgICAgOzs7OyAgICA6OjsgCiAgICAgOzs7OzsgICA6OgogICAgIDs7Ozs7OyAgOjoKICAgICAgOzs7OzsgIDo6CiAgICAgICAgOzs7OyA6OgogICAgICAgICAgIDs7OjoKICAgICAgICAgICAgOzo6CiAgICAgICAgICAgICA6OgogICAgICAgICAgICAgOjoKICAgICAgICAgICAgIDo6CiAgICAgICAgICAgICA6OgogICAgICAgICAgICAgOjoKICAgICAgICAgICAgIDo6CiAgICAgICAgICAgICA6OgogICAgICAgICAgICAgOjoKClAuUy4gWWVzIGl0IGlzIGEgbGl0dGxlIGxhbWUgdGhhdCBoZSBwb3N0ZWQgb24gdGhlIG1haWxpbmcgbGlzdCBmb3IgdGhpcywgYnV0IGl0J3MgdGhlIHRob3VnaHQgdGhhdCBjb3VudHMhCg=='))

Cheers

 

You will make me a very happy man!!!

Thank you very much!!!

--
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list

[Ben Finney]

Terry Reedy <tjr...@udel.edu> writes:

> On 3/4/2015 8:34 PM, Xrrific wrote:

> > I am trying to impress a girl who is learning python and want ask
> > her out at the same time.
>

> Start by not being sexist about the fitness of females for Python
> programming. Make sure she knows that at least parts of the Python
> community welcomes anybody and everybody.

Impress her by approaching her with the intent to befriend her.

Demonstrate that, by learning Python, she hasn't exposed herself to more
men trying to “ask her out” as a result. That would really make a good
impression.

--
\ “The good thing about science is that it's true whether or not |
`\ you believe in it.” —Neil deGrasse Tyson, 2011-02-04 |
_o__) |
Ben Finney

[Mario Figueiredo]

On Wed, 4 Mar 2015 17:34:04 -0800 (PST), Xrrific <xiao...@gmail.com>
wrote:

>I am trying to impress a girl who is learning python and want ask her out at the same time.
>
>Could you please come up with something witty incorporating a simple python line like If...then... but..etc.

How about not using python at all. Not even talking about it, unless
she brings it up. And if she brings it up you say that there's perhaps
better things for you two to be doing than talking about programming?

[sohca...@gmail.com]

You're asking a bunch of nerds for dating advice?

[Chris Angelico]

Some of these nerds are married, others have at least had a successful
romantic life. Granted, dating advice isn't _quite_ on-topic for
python-list, but still, I'm sure there are plenty of people here who
are not the stereotypical nerd "all brains, no ..." that Chris Knight
didn't want to appear as.

ChrisA

[km]

show her your python and and impress her.

Regards,

Krishna

--
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list

[sohca...@gmail.com]

I should have known better than to make a joke on this mailing list. Someone is bound to get their panties all up in a bunch.

[Ben Finney]

sohca...@gmail.com writes:

> I should have known better than to make a joke on this mailing list.
> Someone is bound to get their panties all up in a bunch.

You should have known better than to make gendered slurs. Claiming “it
was a joke” doesn't alter the sexism of your remarks. Cut that out.

--
\ “True greatness is measured by how much freedom you give to |
`\ others, not by how much you can coerce others to do what you |
_o__) want.” —Larry Wall |
Ben Finney

[Steven D'Aprano]

Ben Finney wrote:

> sohca...@gmail.com writes:
>
>> I should have known better than to make a joke on this mailing list.
>> Someone is bound to get their panties all up in a bunch.
>
> You should have known better than to make gendered slurs. Claiming “it
> was a joke” doesn't alter the sexism of your remarks. Cut that out.

"You're asking a bunch of nerds for dating advice?"

Sohcatoa's lousy joke applies to all sexes equally, whether they are male,
female, intersex, or indeed non-gendered advanced alien intelligences.
(Possibly not *that* advanced if they are hanging around here...)

Sorry to say that the only sexism displayed here is your apparent assumption
that nerds are all [fe]male, or that the people on this list are all
[fe]males. Both men and women can be nerds too, and I know people of both
cis-genders and at least three of trans-genders who are clueless about
dating. Funnily enough, all but one of them are nerds of one type or
another.

Despite the efforts of a lot of neo-Victorian feminists determined to repeat
the sins of the past, "sexism" does not mean "anything even vaguely related
to sexual activity or the potential for sexual activity". Nor is any mild
joke made at the (self-)expense of some random subgroup of people "sexism",
whether than joke is based on a stereotype or not.



--
Steven

[Ben Finney]

Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp....@pearwood.info> writes:

> Ben Finney wrote:
>
> > sohca...@gmail.com writes:
> >
> >> I should have known better than to make a joke on this mailing
> >> list. Someone is bound to get their panties all up in a bunch.
> >
> > You should have known better than to make gendered slurs. Claiming
> > “it was a joke” doesn't alter the sexism of your remarks. Cut that
> > out.
>
> "You're asking a bunch of nerds for dating advice?"

“get their panties all up in a bunch” is a gendered slur. It is implying
the person is female, as though the person should feel insulted by that.
It uses the female gender as an insult.

That's not welcoming to anyone female, and we should all be welcoming to
anyone of any gender here — which includes not using any gender as the
punch-line of a joke.

--
\ “Pinky, are you pondering what I'm pondering?” “I think so, |
`\ Brain, but Zero Mostel times anything will still give you Zero |
_o__) Mostel.” —_Pinky and The Brain_ |
Ben Finney

[Mark Lawrence]

On 05/03/2015 22:59, Ben Finney wrote:
> Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp....@pearwood.info> writes:
>

>> Ben Finney wrote:
>>
>>> sohca...@gmail.com writes:
>>>
>>>> I should have known better than to make a joke on this mailing
>>>> list. Someone is bound to get their panties all up in a bunch.
>>>
>>> You should have known better than to make gendered slurs. Claiming
>>> “it was a joke” doesn't alter the sexism of your remarks. Cut that
>>> out.
>>
>> "You're asking a bunch of nerds for dating advice?"
>

> “get their panties all up in a bunch” is a gendered slur. It is implying
> the person is female, as though the person should feel insulted by that.
> It uses the female gender as an insult.
>
> That's not welcoming to anyone female, and we should all be welcoming to
> anyone of any gender here — which includes not using any gender as the
> punch-line of a joke.
>

I just wish this kind of approach was used consistently across the
board. That way we wouldn't have had to put up with the appalling slurs
from our RUE (Resident Unicode Expert) for perhaps two years.

--
My fellow Pythonistas, ask not what our language can do for you, ask
what you can do for our language.

Mark Lawrence

[Steven D'Aprano]

Ben Finney wrote:

> Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp....@pearwood.info> writes:
>
>> Ben Finney wrote:
>>
>> > sohca...@gmail.com writes:
>> >
>> >> I should have known better than to make a joke on this mailing
>> >> list. Someone is bound to get their panties all up in a bunch.
>> >
>> > You should have known better than to make gendered slurs. Claiming
>> > “it was a joke” doesn't alter the sexism of your remarks. Cut that
>> > out.
>>
>> "You're asking a bunch of nerds for dating advice?"
>
> “get their panties all up in a bunch” is a gendered slur.

Ah, sorry about misunderstanding you. It wasn't clear to me that you were
referring to that specific comment rather than the original comment.

> It is implying
> the person is female, as though the person should feel insulted by that.
> It uses the female gender as an insult.

Why do you interpret that as insulting to women merely on the basis of being
*female*?

Wearing panties/knickers is something anyone can do, of any gender and
sexual orientation. "Panties in a bunch" (or "knickers in a twist") is a
put-down on the basis of excessive sensitivity, not femaleness.

It seems to me that far from challenging sexual stereotypes, mainstream
feminist thought actually *reinforces* it: as evidence, you assumed that
only women wear panties, therefore any reference to panty-wearing is
therefore a slur on women.

It's only gender specific if you accept the sexist gendered stereotype that
all women are by definition thin-skinned and excessively sensitive. The
women I know are nothing like that, and consequently most of them are quite
happy to use "knickers in a twist" as a *non-gendered* put-down on the
basis of perceived behaviour, not sex.

It seems to my wife, and I agree with her, that mainstream feminism has lost
its way and is no longer about gender equality, but is now about enforcing
a neo-Victorian pseudo-politeness where nobody ever has to be exposed to
anything uncomfortable or that threatens to disturb them out of their
comfort zone. Hence the focus on codes of conduct, so-called "safe places",
trigger warnings and the like. Once upon a time, a safe place meant
somewhere where a battered woman could take shelter from her batterer. Now,
it apparently means a way to ostracise an actor for his personal religious
beliefs. (I'm referring to the Internet storm-in-a-teacup over Adam Baldwin
at Supanova.)

I do not buy into that philosophy, and neither do most of the woman I know.



--
Steven

[Ben Finney]

Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp....@pearwood.info> writes:

> Ben Finney wrote:
>
> > “get their panties all up in a bunch” is a gendered slur.
>

> Why do you interpret that as insulting to women merely on the basis of
> being *female*?

I think your question is in bad faith. You know as well as I do, and I'm
confident the person who wrote the slur knows, that “panties” strongly
connotes *female* underwear.

> It seems to me that far from challenging sexual stereotypes,
> mainstream feminist thought actually *reinforces* it: as evidence, you
> assumed that only women wear panties, therefore any reference to
> panty-wearing is therefore a slur on women.

No. I'm saying that it's clear the person saying “get their panties all
up in a bunch” fully intends to convey specifically *female* underwear,
and thereby to use implied femininity as an insult.

Yes, of course I know some people who aren't female wear panties. Yes,
of course I know some women wear underwear that isn't panties. Don't try
to change the topic with absurd logical extremes that I didn't raise.

I'm talking about the implication of the comment as a gendered insult.

> It's only gender specific if you accept the sexist gendered stereotype
> that all women are by definition thin-skinned and excessively
> sensitive.

Bullshit. I said nothing about the sensitivity of anyone. Individual
women you may know – even *all* women, everywhere – could be as tough as
nails, and it doesn't address the point I'm raising.

Whether any particular woman is targeted or not, the comment I'm
responding to invokes female gender as an implied insult. That's
unwelcoming to women, and I don't want such unwelcoming attitudes in
this community.

--
\ “Too many pieces of music finish too long after the end.” —Igor |
`\ Stravinskey |
_o__) |
Ben Finney

[Chris Angelico]

On Fri, Mar 6, 2015 at 2:23 PM, Ben Finney <ben+p...@benfinney.id.au> wrote:
> Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp....@pearwood.info> writes:
>
>> Ben Finney wrote:
>>
>> > “get their panties all up in a bunch” is a gendered slur.
>>

>> Why do you interpret that as insulting to women merely on the basis of
>> being *female*?
>

> I think your question is in bad faith. You know as well as I do, and I'm
> confident the person who wrote the slur knows, that “panties” strongly
> connotes *female* underwear.

Allow me to summarize this subthread:

* sohcahtoa makes a comment implying that this list is full of nerds
who know nothing about dating. Gender-nonspecific and most likely
self-deprecating as much as insulting.
* I responded with a reference to a nerdy movie ("Real Genius", and if
you haven't seen it, go grab it - it's funny), which perhaps was not
recognized, leading to the post in which:
* sohcahtoa misunderstands me and thinks I was offended at his post
(which I wasn't), and gets his hackles up, thinking the original
nerd-dating-advice comment shouldn't have been offensive
* Two people then go back and forth about whether or not the previous
three posts were offensive.

The whole field of getting vicariously offended is a mess. It's
virtually impossible to judge what will and what will not cause
offense (sure, there are some easy cases, and if you use a six-letter
word beginning with "n" to refer to someone with more skin melanin
than yourself, then you will be very rightly shouted down - but most
cases aren't anything like that clear, and even that word wasn't
originally offensive in itself), and we have interminable debates
about what should and shouldn't be said. Can we please keep these
sub-threads short? Once it's gone through a couple of rounds of
response, it's not going to get anywhere new. All we have is people
getting annoyed on behalf of an unspecified person or group of people,
and offense being given and taken and regifted like Christmas presents
from your distant relatives. I'm sure there's something more
interesting to talk about... like the rate at which the grass is
growing.

Thanks!

ChrisA

[Ethan Furman]

On 03/05/2015 07:37 PM, Chris Angelico wrote:

> I'm sure there's something more interesting to talk about... like the
> rate at which the grass is growing.

My grass doesn't grow -- I ripped it all out and put down pea-gravel and planter boxes.

Oh, wait, I have some bamboo in the back -- that's a grass, isn't it? Hmmm, well, it grows fast enough that my dogs
haven't managed to eat it gone yet. :)

--
~Ethan~

[Mark Lawrence]

On 06/03/2015 03:23, Ben Finney wrote:
> Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp....@pearwood.info> writes:
>
>> Ben Finney wrote:
>>
>>> “get their panties all up in a bunch” is a gendered slur.
>>

>> Why do you interpret that as insulting to women merely on the basis of
>> being *female*?
>

> I think your question is in bad faith. You know as well as I do, and I'm
> confident the person who wrote the slur knows, that “panties” strongly
> connotes *female* underwear.
>

>> It seems to me that far from challenging sexual stereotypes,
>> mainstream feminist thought actually *reinforces* it: as evidence, you
>> assumed that only women wear panties, therefore any reference to
>> panty-wearing is therefore a slur on women.
>

> No. I'm saying that it's clear the person saying “get their panties all
> up in a bunch” fully intends to convey specifically *female* underwear,
> and thereby to use implied femininity as an insult.
>
> Yes, of course I know some people who aren't female wear panties. Yes,
> of course I know some women wear underwear that isn't panties. Don't try
> to change the topic with absurd logical extremes that I didn't raise.
>
> I'm talking about the implication of the comment as a gendered insult.
>

>> It's only gender specific if you accept the sexist gendered stereotype
>> that all women are by definition thin-skinned and excessively
>> sensitive.
>

> Bullshit. I said nothing about the sensitivity of anyone. Individual
> women you may know – even *all* women, everywhere – could be as tough as
> nails, and it doesn't address the point I'm raising.
>
> Whether any particular woman is targeted or not, the comment I'm
> responding to invokes female gender as an implied insult. That's
> unwelcoming to women, and I don't want such unwelcoming attitudes in
> this community.
>

I'd rather be reading about the 4,773 open issues on the bug tracker.
As I consider this rather more important than some completely tangential
load of cobblers, would you and MR D'Aprano be kind enough to go and
have your 12, 3 minute rounds elsewhere, thanks?

[Ben Finney]

Chris Angelico <ros...@gmail.com> writes:

> * Two people then go back and forth about whether or not the previous
> three posts were offensive.

I called out a specific gendered slur as such. Nothing to do with
“offense”, and I made no such claim.

> The whole field of getting vicariously offended is a mess.

It's a good thing I was not doing that, then. I was calling out an
anti-female slur where I saw it.

> All we have is people getting annoyed on behalf of an unspecified
> person or group of people

If you missed the specified group, I'll say it again: Anyone who is
female had their gender used as though it were an insult.

That's not welcoming to women, and if it goes unchallenged then we give
the perception it is acceptable. It is not, so we must say so as clearly
as we can.

Where people have further misrepresented my complaint or my position,
I've necessarily corrected them. Hopefully I've been clear enough that
no-one needs to once more impute words or motivations to me that I never
expressed.

--
\ “The number of UNIX installations has grown to 10, with more |
`\ expected.” —Unix Programmer's Manual, 2nd Ed., 1972-06-12 |
_o__) |
Ben Finney

[Chris Angelico]

Our grass is actually growing at the moment, which is unusual for
Australia at this time of year. Usually it's in a state of bronzing
part way through December, and basically stays that way until well
into February.

ChrisA

[alister]

On Fri, 06 Mar 2015 14:23:22 +1100, Ben Finney wrote:

>
> No. I'm saying that it's clear the person saying “get their panties all
> up in a bunch” fully intends to convey specifically *female* underwear,
> and thereby to use implied femininity as an insult.
>
> Yes, of course I know some people who aren't female wear panties. Yes,
> of course I know some women wear underwear that isn't panties. Don't try
> to change the topic with absurd logical extremes that I didn't raise.
>
> I'm talking about the implication of the comment as a gendered insult.
>
>> It's only gender specific if you accept the sexist gendered stereotype
>> that all women are by definition thin-skinned and excessively
>> sensitive.
>
> Bullshit. I said nothing about the sensitivity of anyone. Individual
> women you may know – even *all* women, everywhere – could be as tough as
> nails, and it doesn't address the point I'm raising.
>
> Whether any particular woman is targeted or not, the comment I'm
> responding to invokes female gender as an implied insult. That's
> unwelcoming to women, and I don't want such unwelcoming attitudes in
> this community.

I have not seen one female poster on this site claim to be offended by
the comment or even consider it to be a slur.

I doubt that the original poster of the comment intended it to be either
& most people reading it would have known that (regardless of their
gender)

one thing i personally find offensive is when someone raises an issue on
someone else's behalf because they THINK they MIGHT get offended without
bothering to check.

I am not female so this particular instance does not relate to me but an
example from a few years ago was when a popular UK soap made an extreme
effort not to show a cross or Christmas tree during a church wedding in
case it "offended not-Christians".

I am a non-Christian & found that decision offensive.




--
Never trust an operating system you don't have sources for.

[Ian Kelly]

On Fri, Mar 6, 2015 at 4:53 AM, alister
<alister.n...@ntlworld.com> wrote:
> I have not seen one female poster on this site claim to be offended by
> the comment or even consider it to be a slur.
>
> I doubt that the original poster of the comment intended it to be either
> & most people reading it would have known that (regardless of their
> gender)
>
> one thing i personally find offensive is when someone raises an issue on
> someone else's behalf because they THINK they MIGHT get offended without
> bothering to check.

"Offended" is a rather vacuous term. It describes a distraught
emotional state without any attempt to reason about what actual
problem might exist. Too often somebody simply says "I'm offended by
X" and then a lot of people kowtow to that statement as if it in
itself were a reason to check behavior.

But that doesn't make it unimportant to measure the kinds of messages
that our actions send, and that's not what's going on here. Ben has
clearly laid out how the comment creates an unwelcoming environment to
women and so marginalizes them. That's a problem even if no women are
speaking up about the comment, because a) there may be some who find
the comment troubling but are unwilling to speak up about it
("suffering in silence"), and b) it doesn't even matter if somebody
says that they don't mind being insulted; it still creates a problem
and it's still not socially acceptable to insult them.

> I am not female so this particular instance does not relate to me but an
> example from a few years ago was when a popular UK soap made an extreme
> effort not to show a cross or Christmas tree during a church wedding in
> case it "offended not-Christians".
>
> I am a non-Christian & found that decision offensive.

I agree that example sounds idiotic. Where is the problem with
depicting Christian paraphernalia in a clearly Christian setting?
There is a great difference between showing Christian imagery and
showing a world that is exclusionary of or hostile to non-Christians.

[llanitedave]

Girls can be nerds too, ya know...

[Mark Lawrence]

When a UK TV station showed the Dam Busters film some years ago and
edited out the part about the burial of Guy Gibson's dog, I wasn't
offended, I was downright livid. How dare they distort history in an
attempt to avoid offending people.

[Rustom Mody]

On Friday, March 6, 2015 at 9:08:07 AM UTC+5:30, Chris Angelico wrote:
> Allow me to summarize this subthread:
>
> * sohcahtoa makes a comment implying that this list is full of nerds
> who know nothing about dating. Gender-nonspecific and most likely
> self-deprecating as much as insulting.
> * I responded with a reference to a nerdy movie ("Real Genius", and if
> you haven't seen it, go grab it - it's funny), which perhaps was not
> recognized, leading to the post in which:
> * sohcahtoa misunderstands me and thinks I was offended at his post
> (which I wasn't), and gets his hackles up, thinking the original
> nerd-dating-advice comment shouldn't have been offensive
> * Two people then go back and forth about whether or not the previous
> three posts were offensive.
>

Nice summary of the ridiculous
Except you missed the subject of the thread

[Steven D'Aprano]

alister wrote:

> I have not seen one female poster on this site claim to be offended by
> the comment or even consider it to be a slur.

In fairness to Ben, it must be recognised that there are very few women
here, and that is a problem Ben (and I) would like to rectify. We just
disagree on the root cause of that, and whether or not mild put-downs such
as the one in question are part of the cause or not.

(Well, I call it a "mild put-down". Ben may or may not agree that it is
mild.)


--
Steven

[Ben Finney]

Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp....@pearwood.info> writes:

> (Well, I call it a "mild put-down". Ben may or may not agree that it is
> mild.)

I agree that the put-down is mild, in that the person uttering it
probably doesn't expect it to be more than a mild insult to the person
they were addressing.

That's quite orthogonal to the fact that invoking gender as an insult is
strongly undermining the goal of making our community welcoming to all
genders. That effect on third parties is completely unrelated to the
intended magnitude of the insult.

I'm glad we have common cause. Let's keep calling out harmful crap when
we see it.

--
\ “Airports are ugly. Some are very ugly. Some attain a degree of |
`\ ugliness that can only be the result of a special effort.” |
_o__) —Douglas Adams, _The Long Dark Tea-Time of the Soul_, 1988 |
Ben Finney

[Gregory Ewing]

alister wrote:
> a popular UK soap made an extreme
> effort not to show a cross or Christmas tree during a church wedding in
> case it "offended not-Christians".

In today's climate, when offending certain varieties
of non-Christian can get you blown up or shot, it might
not be quite as silly as it sounds.

--
Greg

[Rustom Mody]

Best we know, stupidity and geography dont correlate.

Likewise stupidity and religious affiliation:
http://rmitz.org/freebsd.daemon.html

[Grant Edwards]

The same can happen if you offend certain varieties of Christians.

--
Grant

[hamilton]

Does Centennial Olympic Park sound familiar ?

Christians and Republicans forgot what Jesus had to say.

Which means they are NOT Christians.

http://www.amazon.com/How-Republicans-Stole-Religion-Religious/dp/0385516045

>
> --
> Grant
>

[Tim]

On Wednesday, March 4, 2015 at 8:34:16 PM UTC-5, Xrrific wrote:
> Guys, please Help!!!
>
> I am trying to impress a girl who is learning python and want ask her out at the same time.
>
> Could you please come up with something witty incorporating a simple python line like If...then... but..etc.
>
> You will make me a very happy man!!!
>
> Thank you very much!!!

r = False
while r != 'yes':
r = raw_input('do you like me (yes/no): ')
print 'i like you too!'

might make her smile....
--Tim

[Omar Abou Mrad]

On Thu, Mar 5, 2015 at 3:34 AM, Xrrific <xiao...@gmail.com> wrote:

Guys, please Help!!!

I am trying to impress a girl who is learning python and want ask her out at the same time.

Could you please come up with something witty incorporating a simple python line like If...then... but..etc.

You will make me a very happy man!!!

Thank you very much!!!

--
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list

>>> print "Svar lbh jva! V'yy cvpx lbh hc gbzbeebj ng 7 :)".decode('rot13')

[Jonas Wielicki]

That won’t work if she’s actually smart. I mean, that’s python2. ;-)

regards,
jwi

[Albert-Jan Roskam]

----- Original Message -----

Yeah you need from __future__ and codecs to also make it work in Python 3. But then, Python 3 does, alas, not accept rot13 in the shebang

# -*- coding: rot13 -*-
sebz __shgher__ vzcbeg cevag_shapgvba
vzcbeg pbqrpf
cevag(pbqrpf.qrpbqr("Svar lbh jva! V'yy cvpx lbh hc gbzbeebj ng 7 :)", "rot13"))