I’m here to stay.
I was about to start learning Perl in a proper way, but always decided against it. I just can’t find a good reason for myself to write Perl code. Unless you want to read or edit others Perl code, what is the reason to learn it? GNU+Bash and Python are often enough for me.
So why learning and using Perl in modern age and day as a newcomer to the language? Look, I’m not negative here, just asking honest question. Because I am actually searching for good reasons to learn Perl.
Or on Linux systems as well. Another reason why Open Source / Libre Software is not only important, but essential to keep the freedom of users intact. There is no tracking, no artificial limitation from Oracle and no cost involved as well.
The Java implementation from Oracle needs to die. Everyone should switch to openjdk or stop using Java.
deleted by creator
Ok I see, I stand corrected then. Its a misconception I had without actually going through all of this, so my bad (will edit my replies to mark them). At least in Python we can do this print(foo := (bar := 3)) but not on its own as foo := 3 .
But that mathematical pseudo code has nothing in common with the walrus operator (Edit: I’m so sick of my stupidness.):= in Python and Go. They are just the same symbols, but with a totally different meaning and use case. Its an operator designed specifically for programming languages, because that is not applicable to mathematics at all. In mathematics you don’t have an assignment operator a = 69 that cannot be used as part of an expression. Therefore you don’t need a dedicated := that yields an expression that can be used as part of an expression and create a variable if its not already.
Turns out it was introduced in 3.8, released in 2019, so it was much too late to inspire Go
You are probably right about that. But don’t forget that the operator didn’t made it day one, there was lot of discussion before and probably testing it in the beta releases before. But given how old Golang at that point is, you are right about my take on inspiration. This operator wasn’t a new invention in Python.
It also has a substantially different meaning than in Go.
I don’t know if there’s an “official” rationale for the Go syntax, but := is a fairly common (but not ubiquitous) math notation meaning “define the thing on the left to be equal to the expression on the right”, i.e. to distinguish it from the other use of =, i.e. “the expression on the left must be equal to the expression on the right.”
Does it though? In both cases, Go and Python, the operator will assign a variable a value and also use it as an expression. That is useful in cases like for loops or other cases where you want immediately use the variable content as an expression. This cannot be done with the regular assignment operator (Edit: Read the reply, I learned something myself. That’s why its important that you don’t blindly teach people like I did.)a = 69, which itself is not an expression. So in practical terms, its the same in usability for Go and Python. So its doing the same for both languages and has the same differences to the assignment operator.
deleted by creator
The := operator is called walrus operator and is inspired by Python I think. It’s declaring a variable and assigning it in one go. map[string] int is defining a map (associative array or also known as dictionary in Python), with string as key type and int as value type. And the following {} is the body of the associative array, meaning empty content.
I only played a bit with Go and did basic tutorials. I might go back to it at some point, but Zig is much more appealing to me. Go is too simple in the language to me, but on the other side, this is exactly whats appealing.
I’m not sure if this is relevant, but the first thought reading this is, aren’t the IPs shared too? I mean everyone connecting to the Torrent / page would be able to read from everyone connecting to it. But again, I have no idea if this is applicable in such a case. It’s just what I think when reading Torrent, that’s the extent of my knowledge.
Was posted a few hours before and has many comments: https://beehaw.org/post/13943043
I copied the sub-headings from the document, serving as an overview:
The other person got me the solution. __new__() is no longer needed to be overwritten anymore.
From https://github.com/python/cpython/blob/3.12/Lib/pathlib.py
class PosixPath(Path, PurePosixPath):
"""Path subclass for non-Windows systems.
On a POSIX system, instantiating a Path should return this object.
"""
__slots__ = ()
if os.name == 'nt':
def __new__(cls, *args, **kwargs):
raise NotImplementedError(
f"cannot instantiate {cls.__name__!r} on your system")
Which sub classes PurePosixPath, which itself is basically just PurePath with a Posix flavour to it. And Path itself is PurePath as well. Not sure if I should copy paste them here.
Edit: So I added these to my reply:
def __new__(cls, *args, **kwargs):
"""Construct a PurePath from one or several strings and or existing
PurePath objects. The strings and path objects are combined so as
to yield a canonicalized path, which is incorporated into the
new PurePath object.
"""
if cls is PurePath:
cls = PureWindowsPath if os.name == 'nt' else PurePosixPath
return object.__new__(cls)
def __init__(self, *args):
paths = []
for arg in args:
if isinstance(arg, PurePath):
if arg._flavour is ntpath and self._flavour is posixpath:
# GH-103631: Convert separators for backwards compatibility.
paths.extend(path.replace('\\', '/') for path in arg._raw_paths)
else:
paths.extend(arg._raw_paths)
else:
try:
path = os.fspath(arg)
except TypeError:
path = arg
if not isinstance(path, str):
raise TypeError(
"argument should be a str or an os.PathLike "
"object where __fspath__ returns a str, "
f"not {type(path).__name__!r}")
paths.append(path)
self._raw_paths = paths
def __init__(self, *args, **kwargs):
if kwargs:
msg = ("support for supplying keyword arguments to pathlib.PurePath "
"is deprecated and scheduled for removal in Python {remove}")
warnings._deprecated("pathlib.PurePath(**kwargs)", msg, remove=(3, 14))
super().__init__(*args)
def __new__(cls, *args, **kwargs):
if cls is Path:
cls = WindowsPath if os.name == 'nt' else PosixPath
return object.__new__(cls)
Oh that’s good to know! Yeah, I never liked the “or later” too. To be fair, the software you licensed won’t change the license if a new updated version comes out. It’s just a third party can opt-in. So this is not a situation like a software agreement where the publisher can change the agreements at any time with full effect, despite you agreed to a prior agreement. I don’t think “or later” is evil, but I personally don’t like anything that is not explicit.
And I appreciate the help in understanding the subject. I am actually someone who reads licenses and sometimes dig into terms to get an understanding of very specific subjects, but got a bit too comfortable lately and need to catch up. I plan on reading the GPLv3 too, but this needs a bit time and effort. So until then I’ll ask around.
I always found it a bit nebulous to have the “or later” statement / option. Because that is not precise and which GPL is meant to? Everyone can write a new version of the GPL. The “or later” does not specify which, it just implies it would be GNU GPL. It’s been a long time since I read and studied the GPLv2, never v3 and I actually never really understood how the “or later” would be allowed.
Licensing is still confusing, even after more than a decade.
When I first read the headline, my first 2 assumptions where:
After your comment (I can’t verify, but assume you are serious) sounds actually good if its just trying to autocomplete stuff. I have yet to see any AI driven autocomplete system that does just that. But the other fact (according to the article) is, it’s not dependent on the internet. This is huge! One of the biggest downsides of AI tools is, that they rely on the internet to send data back and forth.
Unfortunately this is closed source. And when I stop paying subscription, while being addicted and dependent to it, would be bad for me. I get it, its a buisness model and they have to make money without others stealing or using their products for free. But I am super curious to where this leads and if this tech is truly better than its competitor. Sorry for my rambling.
Firefox has a reader view mode, which I can enable by clicking an icon in the address bar. But for some reason, this icon will not appear for this website here. I even have enabled a setting in the about:config that this icon should be shown for all pages, but it will not for this site.
I used darkreader in the past. But I could not find a solution to just enable temporarily for the current page I am reading. I don’t want to enable for all pages. But you actually reminded me of another plugin I totally forgot: Tranquility Reader https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/tranquility-1/ and it does exactly what I want and works for this page too. A click will turn it into a readable text temporarily (default black on white, but changeable). So I guess this is a solved problem for me now? Thanks to you, because otherwise I would not remember and lookup again.
For the language itself, maybe. But never discourage people from learning something new. He seems to be excited and has motivation. There are also lot of legacy code, which would never get ported or maintained if nobody learns the language anymore, only a few old people at that point (look what happens to COBOL).