Wait-- are you honestly saying "let's not actually use free speech and free press because that will stop other countries from giving their citizens these vitally... important rights... that we don't use?"

Yeah, yeah. Sorry about that. I red the summary this time.

Bet their faces are red about this one.

Except that either the kernel patch or the .bashrc hack (and possibly a better version of that hack) will eventually be the default in your distro's setup. *Either way*, you won't care how it gets to you. It sounds like the .bashrc hack or other, similar tricks have the advantage of (a) working now, with current kernels, and (b) letting the distros decide the heuristics of grouping processes, instead of the kernel.

I have a saying: If you're scared of typing, you shouldn't be a programmer. And how is it easier to have to consult the local printf documentation whenever you want to decipher your coworker's code? In most cases, my format strings merely contain {0}, {1}, {2}, and so on.

It's not new. C# had it years ago, and probably other languages before that. And do you really spend a lot of time converting printf statements into Python? That sounds like a royal pain with all of the type differences.

It's still around, for anyone who wants to keep writing inscrutable code to save keystrokes.

I expect they're afraid of Python programmers writing code that looks like Perl.

You've completely ignored what I said, or failed to read the documentation. shell=True allows you to run full shell commands, including the piping you want to do. If you want to make it shorter, you can write a function:

def p(a):
        subprocess.Popen(a, shell=True)

And then just tell anyone that reads your code that p() obviously stands for process. Or you can use s() for shell.

Or you can just stick to an older version of Python. No one's forcing you to upgrade.

I disagree completely. Warlock's printf("0x%08xn", x) becomes print('0x{0:08x}'.format(x)) in Python 3. It's cleaner and easier to read, and has the advantage of positional formatting.

Call me crazy-- I don't use popen-- but isn't that the purpose of the shell=True argument? (http://docs.python.org/library/subprocess.html) Their example is probably intended to work across as many platforms as possible.

But of the three, the televangelist is doing it under false pretenses.

Except that that leaves the deity with nothing to do but supply this process with entropy.

"Survival of the fittest" requires diversity. If you're saying nobody should even attempt to replace X, then you have no diversity, and you have no "survival of the fittest," merely "survival of the incumbent."

Let Ubuntu develop Wayland. If it's a good idea, people will pick it up. If it's not, people will stick to X. THAT is survival of the fittest.

Yeah, sure, go after Intel instead.

...by following the man-made precepts of an imaginary deity who promises to send all peoples who don't follow it to certain doom.

It's possible to get people to help others without lying to them.

Probably not. They won't recognize it.

What I don't get-- and maybe you can explain this to me-- is if Christians aren't under the Mosaic Law (and I'm not so sure they aren't, Jesus made it clear he wasn't abolishing the law at all), then what moral code *are* they under? If the Mosaic Law, uttered by God Himself, isn't reflective of His Most Excellent Moral Code, then what is?

We like our weeks symmetrical.

I wasn't aware there was a difference.