Vaclav Haisman wrote:
They won't let him create that. However he will probably have
success with: <alt.lang.spinoza1111.status-reports>

--
[mail]: Chuck F (cbfalconer at maineline dot net)
[page]: <http://cbfalconer.home.att.net>
Try the download section.

** Posted from http://www.teranews.com **

"Steve O'Hara-Smith" <steveo@eircom.net> wrote in message
news:20080417165557.7d0227a3.steveo@eircom.net...
I'm sure that once John becomes acquainted with the *real* Ed Nilges, he'll
think of something creative! ;-)

On Mon, 14 Apr 2008 23:08:48 -0700, spinoza1111 wrote:

What?! Your XML parser is so slow that you can actually see progress
being reported?

I just tested a standard XML processing library (from Python, no less)
and it managed to parse over 2.55 million lines per second. If I wrote
the program and callbacks in pure C, I would expect it to be faster.

Anonymous said:

It is possible that he's talking about something else, but your
interpretation does seem to be the obvious one. Please remember that haste
is waste, and a good parser should chew its data thoroughly many times
before swallowing. A slow parser is obviously better than a fast parser
for all kinds of reasons that I can't quite put my finger on right now,
and in any case a mindless efficiency is self-evidently dehumanising; we
should focus not on a theoretical gain of perhaps thousands of hours (or
more) of real people's useful time over the years that the program is
used, but on the practical reality that the number of times this parser
will be used in the real world fully justifies its leisurely approach to
computational achievement.

If *you* wrote the program, possibly, yes. But you're not writing /this/
parser, are you?

--
Richard Heathfield <http://www.cpax.org.uk>
Email: -http://www. +rjh@
Google users: <http://www.cpax.org.uk/prg/writings/googly.php>
"Usenet is a strange place" - dmr 29 July 1999

Anonymous wrote:

Perhaps he has fed it a few of his posts to c.p (after suitably tagging
them)...

"Anonymous" <no-response@no-server.com> wrote in message
news:IQVNj.52685$dA2.30699@read2.cgocable.net...
I can't imagine Python doing anything much 2.5 million times a second. Just
an empty for-loop with 2.5m iterations takes about a second on my machine.

Probably it's using some library implemented in C and accessed from Python.

--
Bartc

On 18 Apr., 14:18, "Bartc" <b...@freeuk.com> wrote:
Is Python really that slow?
An empty loop with 2.5m iterations inclusive reading the program
(3666 lines total) needs approx. 0.141 seconds (measured with time)
when the Seed7 program is interpreted.
Said that: Empty loops are not an optimal benchmark.

Greetings Thomas Mertes

Seed7 Homepage: http://seed7.sourceforge.net
Seed7 - The extensible programming language: User defined statements
and operators, abstract data types, templates without special
syntax, OO with interfaces and multiple dispatch, statically typed,
interpreted or compiled, portable, runs under linux/unix/windows.

<thomas.mertes@gmx.at> wrote in message
news:5b19cc53-9ae8-47d3-9137-35626c87b555@a1g2000hsb.googlegroups.com...
I don't think Python can have a proper empty loop; the following code:

for i in xrange(2500000):
pass

executed in some 700ms on a slow 1GHz pentium laptop. However this was
version 2.2.3 from 2003. When I tried 2.5.2, this was reduced to under
400ms.

My own toy bytecode language did it in 30ms (but has optimised for-loops). C
took 17ms, down to 6ms when optimised.

The point was that parsing 2.5m lines of XML in one second seems unlikely in
pure Python code, given that it has enough trouble doing nothing in the same
time, even if Anonymous' machine is somewhat faster.

It must have a lot of help, in which case Python is just used as a scripting
language, which strangely enough, is exactly what it is.

--
Bart

On Fri, 18 Apr 2008 12:18:49 +0000, Bartc wrote:


Yes, I believe it is. However, it's still calling back into the Python
interpreter to handle callbacks, which is a significant overhead.

On Apr 17, 5:50*pm, Vaclav Haisman <v.hais...@sh.cvut.cz> wrote:
This would be inappropriate for a language where the compiler hasn't
been finished.

As to the "purpose of this group", I love it when baby boomers as well
as subsequent generations of rug rats get all pompous in midlife and
speak of things having a *telos* when theretofore they've used things
like discussion groups to assault non-anonymous posters like Jacob
Navia.

There are rules. But as soon as they are based on something other than
common decency they are the "rules" of a Fascist society, and the
"rules" of the nightmare of childhood.

BTW, you pukes (and you know who you are) are back trying to destroy
Herb Schildt's reputation on wikipedia. I am in communication with
him, and he has thanked me for my efforts on his behalf. I've also
formed stopWikipediaAbuse as a yahoo group to END these attacks on
people who, unlike members of standards teams with too much time on
their hands, actually accomplish things, such as lccwin or Herb's
books, which help actual people.

Having worked always inside the IBM and then the Microsoft computing
culture, while having been aware of alternatives through reading and
some experience since 1971, I am aware that the attacks on Schildt are
partly fueled by dislike of Microsoft. My brother in law from his anti-
Microsoft perspective has told me some real horror stories about
Microsoft technology.

But you pukes (and you know who you are) lack the courage to attack
institutions or speak truth to power. It always has to be a re-
enactment of the geek's "nightmare of childhood".

Having experienced or beheld scenes of bullying, and lacking a social
account of how childhood bullying, insofar as it is a social mechanism
in which the dominated carry out the tasks of domination, frightening
us all into sexual and other forms of conformity, people come here to
simulate many-to-one domination in which they falsely re-enact
imagined or real childhood dramas, with them on the side of the
victorious many.

Being a brave critic today means harassing Kathy Sierra, Herb Schildt,
or Jacob Navia.

On Apr 18, 1:50*pm, Richard Heathfield <r...@see.sig.invalid> wrote:
The sincerest form of flattery, dear Richard. You are far from
mastering my inimitable style but this is an excellent first effort.

And, slow computing is humanistic computing. Speed violates the spirit
of contract law since contract law assumes equality, but if a Northern
Rock saver is overwhelmed by contract details produced at warp speed,
she is only formalistically equal to Northern Rock's legal person.

By constantly focusing, in a negative register at all times, on what's
"human, all to human", by constant repression of it in yourself, and
by psychological transfer mechanisms, you've become to a certain
extent a servant of Moloch, the heavy judger of men.

I gotta get back to work.

On Apr 16, 1:02*pm, Qwertyioup <Qwertyi...@none.com> wrote:
Alan, a lot of people on Lamma Island are getting real tired of the
way in which you anonymously hound people, and they know who you are.
I suggest you get a life. Nobody is going to call you on your online
BS because it's a small place, and we have to get along, but you need
to stop pursuing, stalking, and harassing me.
Coulda fooled me. I was taken seriously when I was invited, based on
my internet conduct, to an online panel on how bias is embedded in the
Internet by people like you, who might have jobs as writers but in
"the secret contour of their weakness" can't write and strain to
complete a correct sentence, and for this reason are filled with the
dull, staring resentment seen in your avatar on www.lamma.com.HK.

I was taken seriously when I got internet content changed on wikipedia
when that content assaulted two computer writers.

I get taken seriously and you uh don't, and you're filled with
resentment. Get help.

I will return to www.lamma.com.HK when you and Granola Eater are no
longer moderators.
Adult affairs take time, son.

And BTW, that was my seat on the ferry you took the other day. The
seat in front of the upper salon staircase is mine, and you are not to
use that seat anymore.

spinoza1111 <spinoza1111@yahoo.com> writes:


You pride yourself as the untouchable authority on bullying, and yet
you post such bollocks as "...you are not to use that seat anymore"?
This is a seat on a public ferry, right?
Fascinating.

--
Chris.

Chris McDonald wrote:
--
+-------------------+ .:\:\:/:/:.
| PLEASE DO NOT F :.:\:\:/:/:.:
| FEED THE TROLLS | :=.' - - '.=:
| | '=(\ 9 9 /)='
| Thank you, | ( (_) )
| Management | /`-vvv-'\
+-------------------+ / \
| | @@@ / /|,,,,,|\ \
| | @@@ /_// /^\ \\_\
@x@@x@ | | |/ WW( ( ) )WW
\||||/ | | \| __\,,\ /,,/__
\||/ | | | jgs (______Y______)
/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\//\/\\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\
================================================== ============

fix (vb.): 1. to paper over, obscure, hide from public view; 2.
to work around, in a way that produces unintended consequences
that are worse than the original problem. Usage: "Windows ME
fixes many of the shortcomings of Windows 98 SE". - Hutchinson


** Posted from http://www.teranews.com **

CBFalconer <cbfalconer@yahoo.com> writes:

I don't believe that Edward is a troll.

He genuinely, and wrongly, believes himself to be an authority on
everything. He needs to be reminded how wrong he is.

--
Chris.

Chris McDonald said:

It's quite simple. Mr Nilges loves to bully. In a rather childish attempt
to cover this, he accuses everyone *else* and his dog of bullying - the
wilder the accusations, the better. We know this, because it happens often
here in comp.programming. He would have us believe that posting technical
crits of flawed books by insufficiently knowledgeable authors is
"bullying", but "you are not to use that [particular] seat [on a public
ferry]" is somehow acceptable behaviour. His sense of reality appears to
be upside-down.

It is also the case that he is overly sensitive to criticism and negative
comment, especially when people mention "meds". This may be because he is
undergoing, or supposed to be undergoing, a heavy course of medication,
perhaps for a psychiatric condition, and resents the fact - or, of course,
it may not be. But it would fit his observable behaviour rather nicely.

Perhaps the kindest thing to do would be to say "there, there, Edward"
whenever he spits out his nonsense here, and just leave it at that.

--
Richard Heathfield <http://www.cpax.org.uk>
Email: -http://www. +rjh@
Google users: <http://www.cpax.org.uk/prg/writings/googly.php>
"Usenet is a strange place" - dmr 29 July 1999

On Thu, 8 May 2008 11:56:35 -0700 (PDT), spinoza1111
<spinoza1111@yahoo.com> wrote:

"A lot of people?" You and John Nash? Do you have any other buddies?

If I were who you think I am, I would be worried.

Invited to an online panel? How prestigious.
It's really sad, though predictable, that you keep insisting you're
persecuted out of envy.
Your narcissistic personality won't admit any other interpretation of
why you keep being ejected from social groups, jobs and relationships.

<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Spinoza1111>
"This user has been blocked indefinitely because they have used one or
more accounts abusively."


Yep. You get taken seriously by an "online panel".

There's the little matter of the owner of the site who you've
insulted, abused, libelled and threatened. But you have to
rationalise being ejected as your deciding to leave.

No problem. You've got about 300 threats of litigation against people
who have offended you to get through, I understand that will take some
time.

Being an asshole online is one thing. Start harassing people in the
real world and you will be in trouble with real pain and perhaps the
real police. This is a warning, not a threat, because it won't be me
who beats you up, but the poor bastard you think is me.

"Richard Heathfield" <rjh@see.sig.invalid> wrote in message
news:MIednX4L7esNfr7VRVnytQA@bt.com...

[...]

Hear! Hear!

:-)

On May 9, 5:48*pm, Qwertyioup <Qwertyi...@none.com> wrote:
Psychological transference of your anxiety, Alan. I LEAVE social
groups, jobs and relationships when appropriate. Last year, in an
online class in epistemology based at Oxford, I was amazed to discover
how inferior the class was, and realizing that I would jar less well-
qualified people with my online content, I left the class to spare
their feelings, taking the financial loss. When the admin of www.lamma.com
attempted, not to make me leave but to occasion public humiliation, I
left the site for good. And sure, I've left jobs that suck.
Yes. That occured last year. I was adding content on Kant, being the
only content provider, it appeared to me at the time, that had
actually read Kant, and I was being encouraged to do so by a professor
of philosophy. However, this threatened amerindianarts, as you were
threatened last year, as you were challenged, and so he used the fact
that I reply brusquely to personal attacks (knowing from my years with
Princeton that they are toxic as regards productive discourse and
writing) to use mechanisms to tag me as a "vandal". These have been
subsequently amplified by ignorant people even as you and Granola
Eater amplified and positively lied your claims on www.lamma.com.HK.

Years ago, when I started (in 1987) posting to the internet, I thought
it was me. But my recent discoveries that the respected computer
scientist Herb Schildt, the respected computer author Kathy Sierra,
and the well-known and respected programmer Jacques Navia, author of
lccwin as based on a compiler by Dave Hansen (under whom I studied at
Princeton), have demonstrated to me that people like you, who have
crummy little jobs as "writers", but who in "the secret contour of
their weakness" (Adorno) live in fear of exposure, are ADDICTED to
"taking down" ANYONE who can do something they cannot. Lamma Island
has of course "artists" who either sit in the Island Bar or use
Microsoft Paint: I can draw figuratively from memory without sexual
anxiety, therefore you conspired to almost destroy The Cyan Gallery's
exhibit of my work. Lamma Island has of course a lot of fat bastards
who can't make it to the Deli Lamma without puffing: I climbed
Stenhouse and ran right past you as you lumbered past Cath's, so of
course the only response to my essay was that I was lying. Here,
people have "programming" jobs in which they've long been prevented
from actually programming, so they have to assault Navia and Schildt.

People on Lamma Island are disgusted and repelled by you creeps, Alan.
Yes. Your self-hatred is mirrored in the fact that you assume that
because you only show your face online, being ashamed of what I do not
know, any online panel must be fraudulent. Unfortunately, this was
organized by Princeton Univ Press and I was invited by Lawrence
Lessig, a Stanford law professor. A fellow panelist online was Mike
Godwin. If these names I must perforce drop are unknown to you, then
you're even more clueless than I thought.
I left and was not ejected. It's on the record unless the admin gets
cute. He'd better not get gay with erasing files at this point.
Sure. Sit tight, jerk face.
That's a threat right there, Alan. You probably organized last
summer's stalking incident, so I advise you to cut the crap. And stop
using my seat.

On May 9, 5:47*am, Chris McDonald <ch...@csse.uwa.edu.au> wrote:
Sure. "This animal is dangerous. It defends itself when attacked."
When the guy was in my favorite seat, of course, I just sat somewhere
else: and subsequently, made sure I got to the ferry before Jerk Boy.
I would never, of course, confront him. But, I could see by Rocket
Boy's silly smirk that he thought he was getting gay with me.

Standing up to bullies isn't bullying. I don't "start it". Instead, on
Lamma Island, I entered posting longer entries which in a discussion
on China, corrected Rocket Boy (quertyuiop) using references, and this
was I guess "bullying" in only one sense, that it showed him to be a
complete pussy as regards writing and referencing. Since then, I
believe, he has organized a stalking incident and now he's following
me and harassing me anonymously.

Note that in cases like this, of online harassment, the law has a
simple test. The ANONYMOUS poster is the harasser, not the one who
like me hasn't anything at all to be ashamed of, and takes
responsibility like a man for what he writes and what he says. Only
creeps, bullies, thugs and criminals operate under the cover of
cybernetic darkness and anonymity.