You can't do that because I hate you

Post by ryandrake » Fri, Dec 29, 2023, 2:13 AM UTC

lacrimacida wrote: post #115

bvisness wrote: post #80

All this time after writing this article, I’m now realizing a better way to sum up the issue: It’s like when you ask “can I go to the bathroom” and the teacher says “I dunno, CAN you?”

Your rant is very valid by the way. I didn’t have these particular problems but you captured the essence of similar experiences I’ve had with other tools. Just the thougt of tinkering with something im not familiar gives me the goosebumps, maybe a little nausea, shortness of breath. Maybe it’s some form of PTSD gradually accumulated over the years. In the end it’s no big deal if you don’t expect things to work logica…

Post by amluto » Fri, Dec 29, 2023, 2:17 AM UTC

edflsafoiewq wrote: post #60

dmurray wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How about def __repr__(self): import warnings warnings.warn("Use exit() or Ctrl-Z plus Return to exit") return super().repr()

What if you aren't in the REPL? Using __repr__ at all seems like an abstraction violation. It should be the REPL's job to layer on special casing for exit.

    >>> print('%r' % str)
    
    >>> def whatisit(x):
    ...     print('It is %r' % x)
    ... 
    >>> whatisit(min)
    It is 
    >>> whatisit(exit)
    It is Use exit() or Ctrl-D (i.e. EOF) to exit

Post by LoganDark » Fri, Dec 29, 2023, 2:34 AM UTC

shepherdjerred wrote: post #47

LoganDark wrote: post #46

I feel the same way about Rust unstable features. Either you can only use features that are "stabilized"—guaranteed to never change—or you can throw all guarantees out the window, and use the unstable, experimental version of the toolchain. This would be fine if "unstable" features were actually experimental messes, but all sorts of completely-benign utility functions are "unstable". You have to throw out all guarant…

> but is still unstable due to being "newly added". Where did you get this from? The tracking issue says nothing of the sort: https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/61695

    #[unstable(feature = "unwrap_infallible", reason = "newly added", issue = "61695")]

Post by saulpw » Fri, Dec 29, 2023, 2:44 AM UTC

andrewaylett wrote: post #43

phs318u wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Except in the case of the 'exit' clearly this is accepting and parsing imprecise input in order to guide the user. If the code wasn't looking for 'exit' in order to correct the user (to use 'exit()'), it would just spit out some other error for 'I don't know what you're talking about'. Instead, they actually detect the intent by specifically coding for it... and then ignore it anyway. That's bloody minded.

Except they didn't -- the result of a statement is turned into a string, and the string is printed. There are standard ways of turning objects into strings, and the `__repr__` function on the `exit` object returns that string. If you call that object then it raises an exception that triggers a REPL to cleanly quit. The code is here: https://github.com/python/cpython/blob/3.12/Lib/_sitebuiltin...

Post by throwaway143829 » Fri, Dec 29, 2023, 2:57 AM UTC

AceJohnny2 wrote: post #128

LordShredda wrote: post #117

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Emacs is unbelievably full of them, but at the very least if it's missing a switch you can program it yourself easily (and fix any bugs yourself too). Not sure if that's a pro or a con, but the option is there.

> you can program it yourself easily I consider myself a seasoned programmer, but after a decade I continue to fail to do any significant customization (other than a tidy .emacs leveraging use-package (since before it was cool^H^H integrated by default)). Lisp's syntax is easy, but Emacs' API surface and concepts are bewildering, especially due to its aforementioned mismatch with modern terms.