Edel, is that you?

I am blessed and honoured. Thanks!

Hmmm, even if we allow for empirical scientific evidence, is there a non weird way he knows about the sperm count in the semen of adolescents? I hope he’s making shit up because the alternative is a lot grosser

quote of the day: “Bikes allow us terrestrial folk to be more like fish.”

I guess there are two kinds of magic. There is the magic of Fourrier which is lossy with funny math. But it is understandable that one can get higher compression ratios when it’s lossy. But I find it even more magic that we can still find better ways to encode images losslessly. I would have thought we had already long found the optimal way

Compression algorithms are magic. Especially lossless compression.

I saw something like this next to the train station in Antwerpen Berchem. I always wondered if most of those bike where still in active use, or abandonned. How do they make sure that abamdonned bike don’t clutter the space for eternity?

Hop Swiss!

This is the most definitive argument that type J is superior to all others:

Image showing an arrangement of 3 swiss plugs in the same footprint as one french one

As the least biased swiss person. Type J (or type N, Idk) is so much better. We put three plugs on the same surface as you have 1. I am always frustrated to see how impractical your plugs are when I go to the EU

Hey, mon commentaire apporte rien à la discussion. Mais j’avais pas pensé à ça comme ça, et j’aime beaucoup l’argument. Un haut-vote aurait suffit. Prend ce commentaire de remerciement :3

😨

Don’t tell me it is law already!

I dislike treating None as an equivalent for the empy list, but that does not further the discussion…

I hurt myself in confusion while reading the second quote. Is it the right quote? (also, nazi (relating to the nsdap) is probably not the right word, did you mean fascist?)

I agree. So if None is a valid input we should check it first, and then check if the length is zero. In this situation, we see a type error only if the programmer screwed up and everything is explicit

I don’t really understand the point about exceptions. Yeah “not foo” cannot throw an exception. But the program should crash if an invalid input is provided. If the function expects an optional[list] it should be provided with either a list or None, nothing else.

Passing None to a function expecting a list is the error…

Well, in your case it is not clear whether you intended to branch in the variable foo being None, or on the list being empty which is semantically very different…

Thats why it’s better to explicitly express whether you want an empty collection (len = 0) or a None value.

I really dislike using boolean operators on anything that is not a boolean. I recently made an esception to my rule and got punished… Yeah it is skill issue on my part that I tried to check that a variable equal to 0 was not None using “if variable…”. But many programming rules are there to avoid bugs caused by this kind of inattention.

Des chocolaitines?