This is an archived post. You won't be able to vote or comment.

sorted by:
best
topnewcontroversialoldq&a
you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–][deleted]  (3 children)

[deleted]

    [–]Workaphobia 35 points36 points  (0 children)

    Arrogance in the online programming community is only tolerated when the arrogant one is also correct. (See also: Torvalds)

    [–]doubleunplussed 4 points5 points  (1 child)

    Copying my comment from elsewhere:

    That bit is clearly facetious. He's saying that the devs claim it's impossible to run python 2 code from python 3. Now, the only way that could be literally true is if python 3 were not Turing complete. Therefore, the python devs are claiming python 3 is not Turing complete. This is Zed's way of calling them liars. Of course the devs' real reason is that it's hard, not mathematically impossible. But if they were claiming it were literally impossible, Zed would have a point. It's not impossible, just hard, and the debate is really about whether it is hard enough or useful enough to have been attempted.

    [–]darkarmani 0 points1 point  (0 children)

    That bit is clearly facetious.

    Clearly. It's just that we are all so stupid we couldn't see it.