Talk:Padovan sequence: Difference between revisions
m
→Overnight graffiti
| (One intermediate revision by one other user not shown) | |||
Line 24:
::: See below. You can't actually have "no labels", we just need to find useful and inoffensive ones. --[[User:Petelomax|Pete Lomax]] ([[User talk:Petelomax|talk]]) 13:45, 19 March 2021 (UTC)
:::: Perhaps "concise" instead of "idomatic"? --[[User:Rdm|Rdm]] ([[User talk:Rdm|talk]]) 14:06, 2 April 2021 (UTC)
As I stated on your talk page Hout, and without the personal attacks; One could write a lisp interpreter in Python and create examples for Lisp and a very similar example for Python that would pass a linter, but would not be idiomatic Python.
Line 102 ⟶ 103:
::: It ''is'' a venue for sharing contrastive insight in the form of differing solutions to the same problems, and its goals are those '''stated on the landing page'''. They are '''not''' those which you proclaim, in formulations of your own devising, possibly in genuine misunderstanding, but certainly in mockery of PEP8.
::: Rosetta Code is '''not''' a shop-window for parading (poorly linted) regimental uniform.
::: A bad soldier is not improved by a layer of uniform, and weak code is not made more reliable, or clearer, or faster to write or reorganise, by shrill proclamations that it is 'idiomatic', particularly when a standard linter is less than impressed.
::: If there was one Truth and one Way, the Rosetta Stone in the British Museum:
| |||