Catch up on stories from the past week (and beyond) at the Slashdot story archive


Forgot your password?
Check out the new SourceForge HTML5 internet speed test! No Flash necessary and runs on all devices. ×

Comment Re:welcome to python (Score 1) 148

Honestly the changes in Python 3 should not be any obstacle to porting code. Most of it winds up being a find and replace. The major difference is the use of unicode, and if your package really depends heavily on strings not being unicode, you probably did it wrong. The problem is that if one package that lots of people depend on has devs that just say, "I don't wanna," everything breaks down. And more than one package has devs like that.

At this point, if the Python community could make "porting" as simple as adding a header to a .py file, there would still be people that would refuse to do it.

The problem with Python 3 "unicode" is not that text is not Unicode. The problem is that *random binary data* is not Unicode, but when you read data from an unknown source, you MUST assume it is "random binary data". Trusting it to follow some pattern is by far the stupidest thing you can do.

In Python 2 you could put random binary data into a "string" and then write it to disk without any change, and no errors would be produced. Only if you tried to *display* the string would you get an exception. In Python 3 it will immediately throw an exception, at a completely useless point in your program (ie when you are reading data in, not when you are processing it). Changing every "string" to a "bytes" will "fix" it, but then you have to change the type of every single function that is called from "string" to "bytes", and so on, eventually replacing every single "string" in your program with "bytes". And you are out of luck if one of those api's is from a library that you don't control.

Python 3 will NEVER get accepted unless you can put totally arbitrary patterns of 8-bit data into a "string" and get them back out unchanged. All exceptions must be deferred until something actually tries to split the data into Unicode code points. Even then they should be providing a more useful iterator based api that returns an object that says "the code point is this" or "there is a UTF-8 parsing error here and the first byte is this".

Comment Re:Pathetic Crybaby As#hole (Score 1) 412

The reason for the earlier cutoff is that people apply "millennials" to those who were growing up during the turn of the millennium, not born around it. Otherwise why would you include 1985 at the lower end (seems kind of far away) and why would it not be symmetrical?

It's like if we were defining a "hippie generation" -- you wouldn't say "people born while hippies were prevalent" you'd say "people born who became young adults while hippies were prevalent", meaning the people who grew into hippies.

For what it's worth I've usually seen millennials defined as born between 1980 and 1995.

Comment Re:An earthquake is an accident waiting to happen (Score 1) 130

I don't know if you are trying to make a joke, but global warming is not going to do too much to the earthquakes. Greenland is already rising steadily due to the loss of the glaciers from the last ice age. It is really slow and will still happen for tens of thousands of years. Even if all the current ice cap disappeared tomorrow it would, at best, speed this up a tiny amount (the current ice cap is a fraction of the ice age ice cap so the amount of lost mass is only a small change). The weight of the new ice added to the ocean is insignificant (if it raised the ocean 30 feet that would still only be a tiny fraction of mass increase, think about how deep the ocean is).

Comment Re:It's not Bechdel - it's puritan test (Score 1) 321

No. Example: a scene where a woman is dressing not done in a sexually suggestive manner isn't a problem

The quote says "depicted in sexually suggestive clothing" not "dressing done in a sexually suggestive manner."

If you think it's the manner and not the clothing that matters, then you should have said "yes" not "no" because you are agreeing that the quoted criteria are stupid.

Comment Re:More proof (Score 1) 415

And it makes sense the gap would widen without significant societal assistance.

And as others have pointed out, that's false. Significant societal assistance wasn't needed to make Chinese immigrants, who used to be among the poorest, into one of the most successful immigrant groups.

or that school districts with better funding often provide better education

Anybody who pays attention to education funding knows that's not true. Obviously there has to be a baseline of funding as well, but past a certain minimum (which we're well past) it stops making much difference. Hence examples like Washington DC and NYC public schools that have the highest funding per student in the nation and some of the worst results.

Comment Re:More proof (Score 1) 415

You can't have it both ways though. You can't say it's good to game the indicator by having things like "bonus points" for hiring minorities, but bad to game the indicator by hiring more white guys in retail.

The reason gaming the indicator actually works is that it has an effect upstream. If blacks see that they have a good shot at a good job in Silicon Valley, then they will be more likely to go into computer science and end up working in the industry.

Yet apparently you're not willing to concede the same for whites, that white people who right now are poor, on welfare, etc won't see "hey look at that, white guys can also get good jobs working retail, it's not all girls and minorities hired to prop up diversity stats" and do the same thing.

Comment Re:More proof (Score 2, Insightful) 415

If some people want to believe affirmative action is even on the same magnitude as believing other races are sub-human they are deluding themselves and making a very weak argument.

That's exactly what affirmative action is. It says blacks are not as good as whites, can't compete, and thus need a loving, guiding hand to help them up.

Slashdot Top Deals

All extremists should be taken out and shot.