# How to migrate a Hue database from an existing Amazon EMR cluster

Hadoop User Experience (Hue) is an open-source, web-based, graphical user interface for use with Amazon EMR and Apache Hadoop. The Hue database stores things like users, groups, authorization permissions, Apache Hive queries, Apache Oozie workflows, and so on.

There might come a time when you want to migrate your Hue database to a new EMR cluster. For example, you might want to upgrade from an older version of the Amazon EMR AMI (Amazon Machine Image), but your Hue application and its database have had a lot of customization.You can avoid re-creating these user entities and retain query/workflow histories in Hue by migrating the existing Hue database, or remote database in Amazon RDS, to a new cluster.

By default, Hue user information and query histories are stored in a local MySQL database on the EMR cluster’s master node. However, you can create one or more Hue-enabled clusters using a configuration stored in Amazon S3 and a remote MySQL database in Amazon RDS. This allows you to preserve user information and query history that Hue creates without keeping your Amazon EMR cluster running.

This post describes the step-by-step process for migrating the Hue database from an existing EMR cluster.

Note: Amazon EMR supports different Hue versions across different AMI releases. Keep in mind the compatibility of Hue versions between the old and new clusters in this migration activity. Currently, Hue 3.x.x versions are not compatible with Hue 4.x.x versions, and therefore a migration between these two Hue versions might create issues. In addition, Hue 3.10.0 is not backward compatible with its previous 3.x.x versions.

## Before you begin

First, let’s create a new testUser in Hue on an existing EMR cluster, as shown following:

You will use these credentials later to log in to Hue on the new EMR cluster and validate whether you have successfully migrated the Hue database.

Let’s get started!

## Migration how-to

Follow these steps to migrate your database to a new EMR cluster and then validate the migration process.

1.) Make a backup of the existing Hue database.

Use SSH to connect to the master node of the old cluster, as shown following (if you are using Linux/Unix/macOS), and dump the Hue database to a JSON file.

$ssh -i ~/key.pem [email protected]$ /usr/lib/hue/build/env/bin/hue dumpdata > ./hue-mysql.json

Edit the hue-mysql.json output file by removing all JSON objects that have useradmin.userprofile in the model field, and save the file. For example, remove the objects as shown following:

{
"pk": 1,
"fields": {
"last_activity": "2018-01-10T11:41:04",
"creation_method": "HUE",
"user": 1,
}
},

2.) Store the hue-mysql.json file on persistent storage like Amazon S3.

You can copy the file from the old EMR cluster to Amazon S3 using the AWS CLI or Secure Copy (SCP) client. For example, the following uses the AWS CLI:

$aws s3 cp ./hue-mysql.json s3://YourBucketName/folder/ 3.) Recover/reload the backed-up Hue database into the new EMR cluster. a.) Use SSH to connect to the master node of the new EMR cluster, and stop the Hue service that is already running. $ ssh -i ~/key.pem [email protected]
$sudo stop hue hue stop/waiting b.) Connect to the Hue database—either the local MySQL database or the remote database in Amazon RDS for your cluster as shown following, using the mysql client. $ mysql -h HOST –u USER –pPASSWORD

For a local MySQL database, you can find the hostname, user name, and password for connecting to the database in the /etc/hue/conf/hue.ini file on the master node.

[[database]]
engine = mysql
name = huedb
case_insensitive_collation = utf8_unicode_ci
test_charset = utf8
test_collation = utf8_bin
host = ip-172-31-37-133.us-west-2.compute.internal
user = hue
test_name = test_huedb
port = 3306

Based on the preceding example configuration, the sample command is as follows. (Replace the host, user, and password details based on your EMR cluster settings.)

$mysql -h ip-172-31-37-133.us-west-2.compute.internal -u hue -pQdWbL3Ai6GcBqk26 c.) Drop the existing Hue database with the name huedb from the MySQL server. mysql> DROP DATABASE IF EXISTS huedb; d.) Create a new empty database with the same name huedb. mysql> CREATE DATABASE huedb DEFAULT CHARACTER SET utf8 DEFAULT COLLATE=utf8_bin; e.) Now, synchronize Hue with its database huedb. $ sudo /usr/lib/hue/build/env/bin/hue syncdb --noinput
$sudo /usr/lib/hue/build/env/bin/hue migrate (This populates the new huedb with all Hue tables that are required.) f.) Log in to MySQL again, and drop the foreign key to clean tables. mysql> SHOW CREATE TABLE huedb.auth_permission; In the following example, replace <id value> with the actual value from the preceding output. mysql> ALTER TABLE huedb.auth_permission DROP FOREIGN KEY content_type_id_refs_id_<id value>; g.) Delete the contents of the django_content_type mysql> DELETE FROM huedb.django_content_type; h.) Download the backed-up Hue database dump from Amazon S3 to the new EMR cluster, and load it into Hue. $ aws s3 cp s3://YourBucketName/folder/hue-mysql.json ./
$sudo /usr/lib/hue/build/env/bin/hue loaddata ./hue-mysql.json i.) In MySQL, add the foreign key content_type_id back to the auth_permission mysql> use huedb; mysql> ALTER TABLE huedb.auth_permission ADD FOREIGN KEY (content_type_id) REFERENCES django_content_type (id); j.) Start the Hue service again. $ sudo start hue
hue start/running, process XXXX

That’s it! Now, verify whether you can successfully access the Hue UI, and sign in using your existing testUser credentials.

After a successful sign in to Hue on the new EMR cluster, you should see a similar Hue homepage as shown following with testUser as the user signed in:

## Conclusion

You have now learned how to migrate an existing Hue database to a new Amazon EMR cluster and validate the migration process. If you have any similar Amazon EMR administration topics that you want to see covered in a future post, please let us know in the comments below.

If you found this post useful, be sure to check out Anomaly Detection Using PySpark, Hive, and Hue on Amazon EMR and Dynamically Create Friendly URLs for Your Amazon EMR Web Interfaces.

Anvesh Ragi is a Big Data Support Engineer with Amazon Web Services. He works closely with AWS customers to provide them architectural and engineering assistance for their data processing workflows. In his free time, he enjoys traveling and going for hikes.

# Random with care

Post Syndicated from Eevee original https://eev.ee/blog/2018/01/02/random-with-care/

Hi! Here are a few loose thoughts about picking random numbers.

This is all aimed at frivolous pursuits like video games. Hell, even video games where money is at stake should be deferring to someone who knows way more than I do. Otherwise you might find out that your deck shuffles in your poker game are woefully inadequate and some smartass is cheating you out of millions. (If your random number generator has fewer than 226 bits of state, it can’t even generate every possible shuffling of a deck of cards!)

## Use the right distribution

Most languages have a random number primitive that spits out a number uniformly in the range [0, 1), and you can go pretty far with just that. But beware a few traps!

### Random pitches

Say you want to pitch up a sound by a random amount, perhaps up to an octave. Your audio API probably has a way to do this that takes a pitch multiplier, where I say “probably” because that’s how the only audio API I’ve used works.

Easy peasy. If 1 is unchanged and 2 is pitched up by an octave, then all you need is rand() + 1. Right?

No! Pitch is exponential — within the same octave, the “gap” between C and C♯ is about half as big as the gap between B and the following C. If you pick a pitch multiplier uniformly, you’ll have a noticeable bias towards the higher pitches.

One octave corresponds to a doubling of pitch, so if you want to pick a random note, you want 2 ** rand().

### Random directions

For two dimensions, you can just pick a random angle with rand() * TAU.

If you want a vector rather than an angle, or if you want a random direction in three dimensions, it’s a little trickier. You might be tempted to just pick a random point where each component is rand() * 2 - 1 (ranging from −1 to 1), but that’s not quite right. A direction is a point on the surface (or, equivalently, within the volume) of a sphere, and picking each component independently produces a point within the volume of a cube; the result will be a bias towards the corners of the cube, where there’s much more extra volume beyond the sphere.

No? Well, just trust me. I don’t know how to make a diagram for this.

Anyway, you could use the Pythagorean theorem a few times and make a huge mess of things, or it turns out there’s a really easy way that even works for two or four or any number of dimensions. You pick each coordinate from a Gaussian (normal) distribution, then normalize the resulting vector. In other words, using Python’s random module:

 1 2 3 4 5 6 def random_direction(): x = random.gauss(0, 1) y = random.gauss(0, 1) z = random.gauss(0, 1) r = math.sqrt(x*x + y*y + z*z) return x/r, y/r, z/r 

Why does this work? I have no idea!

Note that it is possible to get zero (or close to it) for every component, in which case the result is nonsense. You can re-roll all the components if necessary; just check that the magnitude (or its square) is less than some epsilon, which is equivalent to throwing away a tiny sphere at the center and shouldn’t affect the distribution.

### Beware Gauss

Since I brought it up: the Gaussian distribution is a pretty nice one for choosing things in some range, where the middle is the common case and should appear more frequently.

That said, I never use it, because it has one annoying drawback: the Gaussian distribution has no minimum or maximum value, so you can’t really scale it down to the range you want. In theory, you might get any value out of it, with no limit on scale.

In practice, it’s astronomically rare to actually get such a value out. I did a hundred million trials just to see what would happen, and the largest value produced was 5.8.

But, still, I’d rather not knowingly put extremely rare corner cases in my code if I can at all avoid it. I could clamp the ends, but that would cause unnatural bunching at the endpoints. I could reroll if I got a value outside some desired range, but I prefer to avoid rerolling when I can, too; after all, it’s still (astronomically) possible to have to reroll for an indefinite amount of time. (Okay, it’s really not, since you’ll eventually hit the period of your PRNG. Still, though.) I don’t bend over backwards here — I did just say to reroll when picking a random direction, after all — but when there’s a nicer alternative I’ll gladly use it.

And lo, there is a nicer alternative! Enter the beta distribution. It always spits out a number in [0, 1], so you can easily swap it in for the standard normal function, but it takes two “shape” parameters α and β that alter its behavior fairly dramatically.

With α = β = 1, the beta distribution is uniform, i.e. no different from rand(). As α increases, the distribution skews towards the right, and as β increases, the distribution skews towards the left. If α = β, the whole thing is symmetric with a hump in the middle. The higher either one gets, the more extreme the hump (meaning that value is far more common than any other). With a little fiddling, you can get a number of interesting curves.

Screenshots don’t really do it justice, so here’s a little Wolfram widget that lets you play with α and β live:

Note that if α = 1, then 1 is a possible value; if β = 1, then 0 is a possible value. You probably want them both greater than 1, which clamps the endpoints to zero.

Also, it’s possible to have either α or β or both be less than 1, but this creates very different behavior: the corresponding endpoints become poles.

Anyway, something like α = β = 3 is probably close enough to normal for most purposes but already clamped for you. And you could easily replicate something like, say, NetHack’s incredibly bizarre rnz function.

### Random frequency

Say you want some event to have an 80% chance to happen every second. You (who am I kidding, I) might be tempted to do something like this:

 1 2 if random() < 0.8 * dt: do_thing() 

In an ideal world, dt is always the same and is equal to 1 / f, where f is the framerate. Replace that 80% with a variable, say P, and every tic you have a P / f chance to do the… whatever it is.

Each second, f tics pass, so you’ll make this check f times. The chance that any check succeeds is the inverse of the chance that every check fails, which is $$1 – \left(1 – \frac{P}{f}\right)^f$$.

For P of 80% and a framerate of 60, that’s a total probability of 55.3%. Wait, what?

Consider what happens if the framerate is 2. On the first tic, you roll 0.4 twice — but probabilities are combined by multiplying, and splitting work up by dt only works for additive quantities. You lose some accuracy along the way. If you’re dealing with something that multiplies, you need an exponent somewhere.

But in this case, maybe you don’t want that at all. Each separate roll you make might independently succeed, so it’s possible (but very unlikely) that the event will happen 60 times within a single second! Or 200 times, if that’s someone’s framerate.

If you explicitly want something to have a chance to happen on a specific interval, you have to check on that interval. If you don’t have a gizmo handy to run code on an interval, it’s easy to do yourself with a time buffer:

 1 2 3 4 5 6 timer += dt # here, 1 is the "every 1 seconds" while timer > 1: timer -= 1 if random() < 0.8: do_thing() 

Using while means rolls still happen even if you somehow skipped over an entire second.

(For the curious, and the nerds who already noticed: the expression $$1 – \left(1 – \frac{P}{f}\right)^f$$ converges to a specific value! As the framerate increases, it becomes a better and better approximation for $$1 – e^{-P}$$, which for the example above is 0.551. Hey, 60 fps is pretty accurate — it’s just accurately representing something nowhere near what I wanted. Er, you wanted.)

### Rolling your own

Of course, you can fuss with the classic [0, 1] uniform value however you want. If I want a bias towards zero, I’ll often just square it, or multiply two of them together. If I want a bias towards one, I’ll take a square root. If I want something like a Gaussian/normal distribution, but with clearly-defined endpoints, I might add together n rolls and divide by n. (The normal distribution is just what you get if you roll infinite dice and divide by infinity!)

It’d be nice to be able to understand exactly what this will do to the distribution. Unfortunately, that requires some calculus, which this post is too small to contain, and which I didn’t even know much about myself until I went down a deep rabbit hole while writing, and which in many cases is straight up impossible to express directly.

Here’s the non-calculus bit. A source of randomness is often graphed as a PDF — a probability density function. You’ve almost certainly seen a bell curve graphed, and that’s a PDF. They’re pretty nice, since they do exactly what they look like: they show the relative chance that any given value will pop out. On a bog standard bell curve, there’s a peak at zero, and of course zero is the most common result from a normal distribution.

(Okay, actually, since the results are continuous, it’s vanishingly unlikely that you’ll get exactly zero — but you’re much more likely to get a value near zero than near any other number.)

For the uniform distribution, which is what a classic rand() gives you, the PDF is just a straight horizontal line — every result is equally likely.

If there were a calculus bit, it would go here! Instead, we can cheat. Sometimes. Mathematica knows how to work with probability distributions in the abstract, and there’s a free web version you can use. For the example of squaring a uniform variable, try this out:

 1 PDF[TransformedDistribution[u^2, u \[Distributed] UniformDistribution[{0, 1}]], u] 

(The \[Distributed] is a funny tilde that doesn’t exist in Unicode, but which Mathematica uses as a first-class operator. Also, press shiftEnter to evaluate the line.)

This will tell you that the distribution is… $$\frac{1}{2\sqrt{u}}$$. Weird! You can plot it:

 1 Plot[%, {u, 0, 1}] 

(The % refers to the result of the last thing you did, so if you want to try several of these, you can just do Plot[PDF[…], u] directly.)

The resulting graph shows that numbers around zero are, in fact, vastly — infinitely — more likely than anything else.

What about multiplying two together? I can’t figure out how to get Mathematica to understand this, but a great amount of digging revealed that the answer is -ln x, and from there you can plot them both on Wolfram Alpha. They’re similar, though squaring has a much better chance of giving you high numbers than multiplying two separate rolls — which makes some sense, since if either of two rolls is a low number, the product will be even lower.

What if you know the graph you want, and you want to figure out how to play with a uniform roll to get it? Good news! That’s a whole thing called inverse transform sampling. All you have to do is take an integral. Good luck!

This is all extremely ridiculous. New tactic: Just Simulate The Damn Thing. You already have the code; run it a million times, make a histogram, and tada, there’s your PDF. That’s one of the great things about computers! Brute-force numerical answers are easy to come by, so there’s no excuse for producing something like rnz. (Though, be sure your histogram has sufficiently narrow buckets — I tried plotting one for rnz once and the weird stuff on the left side didn’t show up at all!)

By the way, I learned something from futzing with Mathematica here! Taking the square root (to bias towards 1) gives a PDF that’s a straight diagonal line, nothing like the hyperbola you get from squaring (to bias towards 0). How do you get a straight line the other way? Surprise: $$1 – \sqrt{1 – u}$$.

### Okay, okay, here’s the actual math

I don’t claim to have a very firm grasp on this, but I had a hell of a time finding it written out clearly, so I might as well write it down as best I can. This was a great excuse to finally set up MathJax, too.

Say $$u(x)$$ is the PDF of the original distribution and $$u$$ is a representative number you plucked from that distribution. For the uniform distribution, $$u(x) = 1$$. Or, more accurately,

$$u(x) = \begin{cases} 1 & \text{ if } 0 \le x \lt 1 \\ 0 & \text{ otherwise } \end{cases}$$

Remember that $$x$$ here is a possible outcome you want to know about, and the PDF tells you the relative probability that a roll will be near it. This PDF spits out 1 for every $$x$$, meaning every number between 0 and 1 is equally likely to appear.

We want to do something to that PDF, which creates a new distribution, whose PDF we want to know. I’ll use my original example of $$f(u) = u^2$$, which creates a new PDF $$v(x)$$.

The trick is that we need to work in terms of the cumulative distribution function for $$u$$. Where the PDF gives the relative chance that a roll will be (“near”) a specific value, the CDF gives the relative chance that a roll will be less than a specific value.

The conventions for this seem to be a bit fuzzy, and nobody bothers to explain which ones they’re using, which makes this all the more confusing to read about… but let’s write the CDF with a capital letter, so we have $$U(x)$$. In this case, $$U(x) = x$$, a straight 45° line (at least between 0 and 1). With the definition I gave, this should make sense. At some arbitrary point like 0.4, the value of the PDF is 1 (0.4 is just as likely as anything else), and the value of the CDF is 0.4 (you have a 40% chance of getting a number from 0 to 0.4).

Calculus ahoy: the PDF is the derivative of the CDF, which means it measures the slope of the CDF at any point. For $$U(x) = x$$, the slope is always 1, and indeed $$u(x) = 1$$. See, calculus is easy.

Okay, so, now we’re getting somewhere. What we want is the CDF of our new distribution, $$V(x)$$. The CDF is defined as the probability that a roll $$v$$ will be less than $$x$$, so we can literally write:

$$V(x) = P(v \le x)$$

(This is why we have to work with CDFs, rather than PDFs — a PDF gives the chance that a roll will be “nearby,” whatever that means. A CDF is much more concrete.)

What is $$v$$, exactly? We defined it ourselves; it’s the do something applied to a roll from the original distribution, or $$f(u)$$.

$$V(x) = P\!\left(f(u) \le x\right)$$

Now the first tricky part: we have to solve that inequality for $$u$$, which means we have to do something, backwards to $$x$$.

$$V(x) = P\!\left(u \le f^{-1}(x)\right)$$

Almost there! We now have a probability that $$u$$ is less than some value, and that’s the definition of a CDF!

$$V(x) = U\!\left(f^{-1}(x)\right)$$

Hooray! Now to turn these CDFs back into PDFs, all we need to do is differentiate both sides and use the chain rule. If you never took calculus, don’t worry too much about what that means!

$$v(x) = u\!\left(f^{-1}(x)\right)\left|\frac{d}{dx}f^{-1}(x)\right|$$

Wait! Where did that absolute value come from? It takes care of whether $$f(x)$$ increases or decreases. It’s the least interesting part here by far, so, whatever.

There’s one more magical part here when using the uniform distribution — $$u(\dots)$$ is always equal to 1, so that entire term disappears! (Note that this only works for a uniform distribution with a width of 1; PDFs are scaled so the entire area under them sums to 1, so if you had a rand() that could spit out a number between 0 and 2, the PDF would be $$u(x) = \frac{1}{2}$$.)

$$v(x) = \left|\frac{d}{dx}f^{-1}(x)\right|$$

So for the specific case of modifying the output of rand(), all we have to do is invert, then differentiate. The inverse of $$f(u) = u^2$$ is $$f^{-1}(x) = \sqrt{x}$$ (no need for a ± since we’re only dealing with positive numbers), and differentiating that gives $$v(x) = \frac{1}{2\sqrt{x}}$$. Done! This is also why square root comes out nicer; inverting it gives $$x^2$$, and differentiating that gives $$2x$$, a straight line.

Incidentally, that method for turning a uniform distribution into any distribution — inverse transform sampling — is pretty much the same thing in reverse: integrate, then invert. For example, when I saw that taking the square root gave $$v(x) = 2x$$, I naturally wondered how to get a straight line going the other way, $$v(x) = 2 – 2x$$. Integrating that gives $$2x – x^2$$, and then you can use the quadratic formula (or just ask Wolfram Alpha) to solve $$2x – x^2 = u$$ for $$x$$ and get $$f(u) = 1 – \sqrt{1 – u}$$.

Multiply two rolls is a bit more complicated; you have to write out the CDF as an integral and you end up doing a double integral and wow it’s a mess. The only thing I’ve retained is that you do a division somewhere, which then gets integrated, and that’s why it ends up as $$-\ln x$$.

And that’s quite enough of that! (Okay but having math in my blog is pretty cool and I will definitely be doing more of this, sorry, not sorry.)

## Random vs varied

Sometimes, random isn’t actually what you want. We tend to use the word “random” casually to mean something more like chaotic, i.e., with no discernible pattern. But that’s not really random. In fact, given how good humans can be at finding incidental patterns, they aren’t all that unlikely! Consider that when you roll two dice, they’ll come up either the same or only one apart almost half the time. Coincidence? Well, yes.

If you ask for randomness, you’re saying that any outcome — or series of outcomes — is acceptable, including five heads in a row or five tails in a row. Most of the time, that’s fine. Some of the time, it’s less fine, and what you really want is variety. Here are a couple examples and some fairly easy workarounds.

### NPC quips

The nature of games is such that NPCs will eventually run out of things to say, at which point further conversation will give the player a short brush-off quip — a slight nod from the designer to the player that, hey, you hit the end of the script.

Some NPCs have multiple possible quips and will give one at random. The trouble with this is that it’s very possible for an NPC to repeat the same quip several times in a row before abruptly switching to another one. With only a few options to choose from, getting the same option twice or thrice (especially across an entire game, which may have numerous NPCs) isn’t all that unlikely. The notion of an NPC quip isn’t very realistic to start with, but having someone repeat themselves and then abruptly switch to something else is especially jarring.

The easy fix is to show the quips in order! Paradoxically, this is more consistently varied than choosing at random — the original “order” is likely to be meaningless anyway, and it already has the property that the same quip can never appear twice in a row.

If you like, you can shuffle the list of quips every time you reach the end, but take care here — it’s possible that the last quip in the old order will be the same as the first quip in the new order, so you may still get a repeat. (Of course, you can just check for this case and swap the first quip somewhere else if it bothers you.)

That last behavior is, in fact, the canonical way that Tetris chooses pieces — the game simply shuffles a list of all 7 pieces, gives those to you in shuffled order, then shuffles them again to make a new list once it’s exhausted. There’s no avoidance of duplicates, though, so you can still get two S blocks in a row, or even two S and two Z all clumped together, but no more than that. Some Tetris variants take other approaches, such as actively avoiding repeats even several pieces apart or deliberately giving you the worst piece possible.

### Random drops

Random drops are often implemented as a flat chance each time. Maybe enemies have a 5% chance to drop health when they die. Legally speaking, over the long term, a player will see health drops for about 5% of enemy kills.

Over the short term, they may be desperate for health and not survive to see the long term. So you may want to put a thumb on the scale sometimes. Games in the Metroid series, for example, have a somewhat infamous bias towards whatever kind of drop they think you need — health if your health is low, missiles if your missiles are low.

I can’t give you an exact approach to use, since it depends on the game and the feeling you’re going for and the variables at your disposal. In extreme cases, you might want to guarantee a health drop from a tough enemy when the player is critically low on health. (Or if you’re feeling particularly evil, you could go the other way and deny the player health when they most need it…)

The problem becomes a little different, and worse, when the event that triggers the drop is relatively rare. The pathological case here would be something like a raid boss in World of Warcraft, which requires hours of effort from a coordinated group of people to defeat, and which has some tiny chance of dropping a good item that will go to only one of those people. This is why I stopped playing World of Warcraft at 60.

Dialing it back a little bit gives us Enter the Gungeon, a roguelike where each room is a set of encounters and each floor only has a dozen or so rooms. Initially, you have a 1% chance of getting a reward after completing a room — but every time you complete a room and don’t get a reward, the chance increases by 9%, up to a cap of 80%. Once you get a reward, the chance resets to 1%.

The natural question is: how frequently, exactly, can a player expect to get a reward? We could do math, or we could Just Simulate The Damn Thing.

  1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 from collections import Counter import random histogram = Counter() TRIALS = 1000000 chance = 1 rooms_cleared = 0 rewards_found = 0 while rewards_found < TRIALS: rooms_cleared += 1 if random.random() * 100 < chance: # Reward! rewards_found += 1 histogram[rooms_cleared] += 1 rooms_cleared = 0 chance = 1 else: chance = min(80, chance + 9) for gaps, count in sorted(histogram.items()): print(f"{gaps:3d} | {count / TRIALS * 100:6.2f}%", '#' * (count // (TRIALS // 100))) 
  1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15  1 | 0.98% 2 | 9.91% ######### 3 | 17.00% ################ 4 | 20.23% #################### 5 | 19.21% ################### 6 | 15.05% ############### 7 | 9.69% ######### 8 | 5.07% ##### 9 | 2.09% ## 10 | 0.63% 11 | 0.12% 12 | 0.03% 13 | 0.00% 14 | 0.00% 15 | 0.00% 

We’ve got kind of a hilly distribution, skewed to the left, which is up in this histogram. Most of the time, a player should see a reward every three to six rooms, which is maybe twice per floor. It’s vanishingly unlikely to go through a dozen rooms without ever seeing a reward, so a player should see at least one per floor.

Of course, this simulated a single continuous playthrough; when starting the game from scratch, your chance at a reward always starts fresh at 1%, the worst it can be. If you want to know about how many rewards a player will get on the first floor, hey, Just Simulate The Damn Thing.

 1 2 3 4 5 6 7  0 | 0.01% 1 | 13.01% ############# 2 | 56.28% ######################################################## 3 | 27.49% ########################### 4 | 3.10% ### 5 | 0.11% 6 | 0.00% 

Cool. Though, that’s assuming exactly 12 rooms; it might be worth changing that to pick at random in a way that matches the level generator.

(Enter the Gungeon does some other things to skew probability, which is very nice in a roguelike where blind luck can make or break you. For example, if you kill a boss without having gotten a new gun anywhere else on the floor, the boss is guaranteed to drop a gun.)

### Critical hits

I suppose this is the same problem as random drops, but backwards.

Say you have a battle sim where every attack has a 6% chance to land a devastating critical hit. Presumably the same rules apply to both the player and the AI opponents.

Consider, then, that the AI opponents have exactly the same 6% chance to ruin the player’s day. Consider also that this gives them an 0.4% chance to critical hit twice in a row. 0.4% doesn’t sound like much, but across an entire playthrough, it’s not unlikely that a player might see it happen and find it incredibly annoying.

Perhaps it would be worthwhile to explicitly forbid AI opponents from getting consecutive critical hits.

## In conclusion

An emerging theme here has been to Just Simulate The Damn Thing. So consider Just Simulating The Damn Thing. Even a simple change to a random value can do surprising things to the resulting distribution, so unless you feel like differentiating the inverse function of your code, maybe test out any non-trivial behavior and make sure it’s what you wanted. Probability is hard to reason about.

# [$] HarfBuzz brings professional typography to the desktop Post Syndicated from jake original https://lwn.net/Articles/741722/rss By their nature, low-level libraries go mostly unnoticed by users and even some programmers. Usually, they are only noticed when something goes wrong. However, HarfBuzz deserves to be an exception. Not only does the adoption of HarfBuzz mean that free software’s ability to convert Unicode characters to a font’s specific glyphs is as advanced as any proprietary equivalent, but its increasing use means that professional typography can now be done from the Linux desktop as easily as at a print shop. # [$] Python 3, ASCII, and UTF-8

Post Syndicated from jake original https://lwn.net/Articles/741176/rss

The dreaded UnicodeDecodeError exception is one of the signature
“features”
of Python 3. It is raised when the language encounters a byte sequence
that it cannot decode into a string; strictly treating strings
differently from arrays of byte values was something that came with
Python 3. Two Python Enhancement Proposals (PEPs) bound for
Python 3.7 look toward
reducing those errors (and the related UnicodeEncodeError) for
environments where they are prevalent—and often
unexpected.

# JavaScript got better while I wasn’t looking

Post Syndicated from Eevee original https://eev.ee/blog/2017/10/07/javascript-got-better-while-i-wasnt-looking/

IndustrialRobot has generously donated in order to inquire:

In the last few years there seems to have been a lot of activity with adding emojis to Unicode. Has there been an equal effort to add ‘real’ languages/glyph systems/etc?

And as always, if you don’t have anything to say on that topic, feel free to choose your own. :p

Yes.

I mean, each release of Unicode lists major new additions right at the top — Unicode 10, Unicode 9, Unicode 8, etc. They also keep fastidious notes, so you can also dig into how and why these new scripts came from, by reading e.g. the proposal for the addition of Zanabazar Square. I don’t think I have much to add here; I’m not a real linguist, I only play one on TV.

So with that out of the way, here’s something completely different!

## A brief history of JavaScript

JavaScript was created in seven days, about eight thousand years ago. It was pretty rough, and it stayed rough for most of its life. But that was fine, because no one used it for anything besides having a trail of sparkles follow your mouse on their Xanga profile.

Then people discovered you could actually do a handful of useful things with JavaScript, and it saw a sharp uptick in usage. Alas, it stayed pretty rough. So we came up with polyfills and jQuerys and all kinds of miscellaneous things that tried to smooth over the rough parts, to varying degrees of success.

And… that’s it. That’s pretty much how things stayed for a while.

I have complicated feelings about JavaScript. I don’t hate it… but I certainly don’t enjoy it, either. It has some pretty neat ideas, like prototypical inheritance and “everything is a value”, but it buries them under a pile of annoying quirks and a woefully inadequate standard library. The DOM APIs don’t make things much better — they seem to be designed as though the target language were Java, rarely taking advantage of any interesting JavaScript features. And the places where the APIs overlap with the language are a hilarious mess: I have to check documentation every single time I use any API that returns a set of things, because there are at least three totally different conventions for handling that and I can’t keep them straight.

The funny thing is that I’ve been fairly happy to work with Lua, even though it shares most of the same obvious quirks as JavaScript. Both languages are weakly typed; both treat nonexistent variables and keys as simply false values, rather than errors; both have a single data structure that doubles as both a list and a map; both use 64-bit floating-point as their only numeric type (though Lua added integers very recently); both lack a standard object model; both have very tiny standard libraries. Hell, Lua doesn’t even have exceptions, not really — you have to fake them in much the same style as Perl.

And yet none of this bothers me nearly as much in Lua. The differences between the languages are very subtle, but combined they make a huge impact.

• Lua has separate operators for addition and concatenation, so + is never ambiguous. It also has printf-style string formatting in the standard library.

• Lua’s method calls are syntactic sugar: foo:bar() just means foo.bar(foo). Lua doesn’t even have a special this or self value; the invocant just becomes the first argument. In contrast, JavaScript invokes some hand-waved magic to set its contextual this variable, which has led to no end of confusion.

• Lua has an iteration protocol, as well as built-in iterators for dealing with list-style or map-style data. JavaScript has a special dedicated Array type and clumsy built-in iteration syntax.

• Lua allows the keys of a map to be any value (though non-scalars are always compared by identity). JavaScript implicitly converts keys to strings — and since there’s no operator overloading, there’s no way to natively fix this.

These are fairly minor differences, in the grand scheme of language design. And almost every feature in Lua is implemented in a ridiculously simple way; in fact the entire language is described in complete detail in a single web page. So writing JavaScript is always frustrating for me: the language is so close to being much more ergonomic, and yet, it isn’t.

Or, so I thought. As it turns out, while I’ve been off doing other stuff for a few years, browser vendors have been implementing all this pie-in-the-sky stuff from “ES5” and “ES6”, whatever those are. People even upgrade their browsers now. Lo and behold, the last time I went to write JavaScript, I found out that a number of papercuts had actually been solved, and the solutions were sufficiently widely available that I could actually use them in web code.

The weird thing is that I do hear a lot about JavaScript, but the feature I’ve seen raved the most about by far is probably… built-in types for working with arrays of bytes? That’s cool and all, but not exactly the most pressing concern for me.

Anyway, if you also haven’t been keeping tabs on the world of JavaScript, here are some things we missed.

## let

MDN docs — supported in Firefox 44, Chrome 41, IE 11, Safari 10

I’m pretty sure I first saw let over a decade ago. Firefox has supported it for ages, but you actually had to opt in by specifying JavaScript version 1.7. Remember JavaScript versions? You know, from back in the days when people actually suggested you write stuff like this:

 1 

Yikes.

Anyway, so, let declares a variable — but scoped to the immediately containing block, unlike var, which scopes to the innermost function. The trouble with var was that it was very easy to make misleading:

 1 2 3 4 5 6 // foo exists here while (true) { var foo = ...; ... } // foo exists here too 

If you reused the same temporary variable name in a different block, or if you expected to be shadowing an outer foo, or if you were trying to do something with creating closures in a loop, this would cause you some trouble.

But no more, because let actually scopes the way it looks like it should, the way variable declarations do in C and friends. As an added bonus, if you refer to a variable declared with let outside of where it’s valid, you’ll get a ReferenceError instead of a silent undefined value. Hooray!

There’s one other interesting quirk to let that I can’t find explicitly documented. Consider:

 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 let closures = []; for (let i = 0; i < 4; i++) { closures.push(function() { console.log(i); }); } for (let j = 0; j < closures.length; j++) { closures[j](); } 

If this code had used var i, then it would print 4 four times, because the function-scoped var i means each closure is sharing the same i, whose final value is 4. With let, the output is 0 1 2 3, as you might expect, because each run through the loop gets its own i.

But wait, hang on.

The semantics of a C-style for are that the first expression is only evaluated once, at the very beginning. So there’s only one let i. In fact, it makes no sense for each run through the loop to have a distinct i, because the whole idea of the loop is to modify i each time with i++.

I assume this is simply a special case, since it’s what everyone expects. We expect it so much that I can’t find anyone pointing out that the usual explanation for why it works makes no sense. It has the interesting side effect that for no longer de-sugars perfectly to a while, since this will print all 4s:

 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 closures = []; let i = 0; while (i < 4) { closures.push(function() { console.log(i); }); i++; } for (let j = 0; j < closures.length; j++) { closures[j](); } 

This isn’t a problem — I’m glad let works this way! — it just stands out to me as interesting. Lua doesn’t need a special case here, since it uses an iterator protocol that produces values rather than mutating a visible state variable, so there’s no problem with having the loop variable be truly distinct on each run through the loop.

## Classes

MDN docs — supported in Firefox 45, Chrome 42, Safari 9, Edge 13

Prototypical inheritance is pretty cool. The way JavaScript presents it is a little bit opaque, unfortunately, which seems to confuse a lot of people. JavaScript gives you enough functionality to make it work, and even makes it sound like a first-class feature with a property outright called prototype… but to actually use it, you have to do a bunch of weird stuff that doesn’t much look like constructing an object or type.

The funny thing is, people with almost any background get along with Python just fine, and Python uses prototypical inheritance! Nobody ever seems to notice this, because Python tucks it neatly behind a class block that works enough like a Java-style class. (Python also handles inheritance without using the prototype, so it’s a little different… but I digress. Maybe in another post.)

The point is, there’s nothing fundamentally wrong with how JavaScript handles objects; the ergonomics are just terrible.

Lo! They finally added a class keyword. Or, rather, they finally made the class keyword do something; it’s been reserved this entire time.

  1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 class Vector { constructor(x, y) { this.x = x; this.y = y; } get magnitude() { return Math.sqrt(this.x * this.x + this.y * this.y); } dot(other) { return this.x * other.x + this.y * other.y; } } 

This is all just sugar for existing features: creating a Vector function to act as the constructor, assigning a function to Vector.prototype.dot, and whatever it is you do to make a property. (Oh, there are properties. I’ll get to that in a bit.)

The class block can be used as an expression, with or without a name. It also supports prototypical inheritance with an extends clause and has a super pseudo-value for superclass calls.

It’s a little weird that the inside of the class block has its own special syntax, with function omitted and whatnot, but honestly you’d have a hard time making a class block without special syntax.

One severe omission here is that you can’t declare values inside the block, i.e. you can’t just drop a bar = 3; in there if you want all your objects to share a default attribute. The workaround is to just do this.bar = 3; inside the constructor, but I find that unsatisfying, since it defeats half the point of using prototypes.

## Properties

MDN docs — supported in Firefox 4, Chrome 5, IE 9, Safari 5.1

JavaScript historically didn’t have a way to intercept attribute access, which is a travesty. And by “intercept attribute access”, I mean that you couldn’t design a value foo such that evaluating foo.bar runs some code you wrote.

Exciting news: now it does. Or, rather, you can intercept specific attributes, like in the class example above. The above magnitude definition is equivalent to:

 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Object.defineProperty(Vector.prototype, 'magnitude', { configurable: true, enumerable: true, get: function() { return Math.sqrt(this.x * this.x + this.y * this.y); }, }); 

Beautiful.

And what even are these configurable and enumerable things? It seems that every single key on every single object now has its own set of three Boolean twiddles:

• configurable means the property itself can be reconfigured with another call to Object.defineProperty.
• enumerable means the property appears in for..in or Object.keys().
• writable means the property value can be changed, which only applies to properties with real values rather than accessor functions.

The incredibly wild thing is that for properties defined by Object.defineProperty, configurable and enumerable default to false, meaning that by default accessor properties are immutable and invisible. Super weird.

Nice to have, though. And luckily, it turns out the same syntax as in class also works in object literals.

 1 2 3 4 5 6 Vector.prototype = { get magnitude() { return Math.sqrt(this.x * this.x + this.y * this.y); }, ... }; 

Alas, I’m not aware of a way to intercept arbitrary attribute access.

Another feature along the same lines is Object.seal(), which marks all of an object’s properties as non-configurable and prevents any new properties from being added to the object. The object is still mutable, but its “shape” can’t be changed. And of course you can just make the object completely immutable if you want, via setting all its properties non-writable, or just using Object.freeze().

I have mixed feelings about the ability to irrevocably change something about a dynamic runtime. It would certainly solve some gripes of former Haskell-minded colleagues, and I don’t have any compelling argument against it, but it feels like it violates some unwritten contract about dynamic languages — surely any structural change made by user code should also be able to be undone by user code?

## Slurpy arguments

MDN docs — supported in Firefox 15, Chrome 47, Edge 12, Safari 10

Officially this feature is called “rest parameters”, but that’s a terrible name, no one cares about “arguments” vs “parameters”, and “slurpy” is a good word. Bless you, Perl.

 1 2 3 function foo(a, b, ...args) { // ... } 

Now you can call foo with as many arguments as you want, and every argument after the second will be collected in args as a regular array.

You can also do the reverse with the spread operator:

 1 2 3 4 5 let args = []; args.push(1); args.push(2); args.push(3); foo(...args); 

It even works in array literals, even multiple times:

 1 2 let args2 = [...args, ...args]; console.log(args2); // [1, 2, 3, 1, 2, 3] 

Apparently there’s also a proposal for allowing the same thing with objects inside object literals.

## Default arguments

MDN docs — supported in Firefox 15, Chrome 49, Edge 14, Safari 10

Yes, arguments can have defaults now. It’s more like Sass than Python — default expressions are evaluated once per call, and later default expressions can refer to earlier arguments. I don’t know how I feel about that but whatever.

 1 2 3 function foo(n = 1, m = n + 1, list = []) { ... } 

Also, unlike Python, you can have an argument with a default and follow it with an argument without a default, since the default default (!) is and always has been defined as undefined. Er, let me just write it out.

 1 2 3 function bar(a = 5, b) { ... } 

## Arrow functions

MDN docs — supported in Firefox 22, Chrome 45, Edge 12, Safari 10

Perhaps the most humble improvement is the arrow function. It’s a slightly shorter way to write an anonymous function.

 1 2 3 (a, b, c) => { ... } a => { ... } () => { ... } 

An arrow function does not set this or some other magical values, so you can safely use an arrow function as a quick closure inside a method without having to rebind this. Hooray!

Otherwise, arrow functions act pretty much like regular functions; you can even use all the features of regular function signatures.

Arrow functions are particularly nice in combination with all the combinator-style array functions that were added a while ago, like Array.forEach.

 1 2 3 [7, 8, 9].forEach(value => { console.log(value); }); 

## Symbol

MDN docs — supported in Firefox 36, Chrome 38, Edge 12, Safari 9

This isn’t quite what I’d call an exciting feature, but it’s necessary for explaining the next one. It’s actually… extremely weird.

symbol is a new kind of primitive (like number and string), not an object (like, er, Number and String). A symbol is created with Symbol('foo'). No, not new Symbol('foo'); that throws a TypeError, for, uh, some reason.

The only point of a symbol is as a unique key. You see, symbols have one very special property: they can be used as object keys, and will not be stringified. Remember, only strings can be keys in JavaScript — even the indices of an array are, semantically speaking, still strings. Symbols are a new exception to this rule.

Also, like other objects, two symbols don’t compare equal to each other: Symbol('foo') != Symbol('foo').

The result is that symbols solve one of the problems that plauges most object systems, something I’ve talked about before: interfaces. Since an interface might be implemented by any arbitrary type, and any arbitrary type might want to implement any number of arbitrary interfaces, all the method names on an interface are effectively part of a single global namespace.

I think I need to take a moment to justify that. If you have IFoo and IBar, both with a method called method, and you want to implement both on the same type… you have a problem. Because most object systems consider “interface” to mean “I have a method called method, with no way to say which interface’s method you mean. This is a hard problem to avoid, because IFoo and IBar might not even come from the same library. Occasionally languages offer a clumsy way to “rename” one method or the other, but the most common approach seems to be for interface designers to avoid names that sound “too common”. You end up with redundant mouthfuls like IFoo.foo_method.

This incredibly sucks, and the only languages I’m aware of that avoid the problem are the ML family and Rust. In Rust, you define all the methods for a particular trait (interface) in a separate block, away from the type’s “own” methods. It’s pretty slick. You can still do obj.method(), and as long as there’s only one method among all the available traits, you’ll get that one. If not, there’s syntax for explicitly saying which trait you mean, which I can’t remember because I’ve never had to use it.

Symbols are JavaScript’s answer to this problem. If you want to define some interface, you can name its methods with symbols, which are guaranteed to be unique. You just have to make sure you keep the symbol around somewhere accessible so other people can actually use it. (Or… not?)

The interesting thing is that JavaScript now has several of its own symbols built in, allowing user objects to implement features that were previously reserved for built-in types. For example, you can use the Symbol.hasInstance symbol — which is simply where the language is storing an existing symbol and is not the same as Symbol('hasInstance')! — to override instanceof:

 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 // oh my god don't do this though class EvenNumber { static [Symbol.hasInstance](obj) { return obj % 2 == 0; } } console.log(2 instanceof EvenNumber); // true console.log(3 instanceof EvenNumber); // false 

Oh, and those brackets around Symbol.hasInstance are a sort of reverse-quoting — they indicate an expression to use where the language would normally expect a literal identifier. I think they work as object keys, too, and maybe some other places.

The equivalent in Python is to implement a method called __instancecheck__, a name which is not special in any way except that Python has reserved all method names of the form __foo__. That’s great for Python, but doesn’t really help user code. JavaScript has actually outclassed (ho ho) Python here.

Of course, obj[BobNamespace.some_method]() is not the prettiest way to call an interface method, so it’s not perfect. I imagine this would be best implemented in user code by exposing a polymorphic function, similar to how Python’s len(obj) pretty much just calls obj.__len__().

I only bring this up because it’s the plumbing behind one of the most incredible things in JavaScript that I didn’t even know about until I started writing this post. I’m so excited oh my gosh. Are you ready? It’s:

## Iteration protocol

MDN docs — supported in Firefox 27, Chrome 39, Safari 10; still experimental in Edge

Yes! Amazing! JavaScript has first-class support for iteration! I can’t even believe this.

It works pretty much how you’d expect, or at least, how I’d expect. You give your object a method called Symbol.iterator, and that returns an iterator.

What’s an iterator? It’s an object with a next() method that returns the next value and whether the iterator is exhausted.

Wait, wait, wait a second. Hang on. The method is called next? Really? You didn’t go for Symbol.next? Python 2 did exactly the same thing, then realized its mistake and changed it to __next__ in Python 3. Why did you do this?

Well, anyway. My go-to test of an iterator protocol is how hard it is to write an equivalent to Python’s enumerate(), which takes a list and iterates over its values and their indices. In Python it looks like this:

 1 2 3 4 5 for i, value in enumerate(['one', 'two', 'three']): print(i, value) # 0 one # 1 two # 2 three 

It’s super nice to have, and I’m always amazed when languages with “strong” “support” for iteration don’t have it. Like, C# doesn’t. So if you want to iterate over a list but also need indices, you need to fall back to a C-style for loop. And if you want to iterate over a lazy or arbitrary iterable but also need indices, you need to track it yourself with a counter. Ridiculous.

Here’s my attempt at building it in JavaScript.

  1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 function enumerate(iterable) { // Return a new iter*able* object with a Symbol.iterator method that // returns an iterator. return { [Symbol.iterator]: function() { let iterator = iterable[Symbol.iterator](); let i = 0; return { next: function() { let nextval = iterator.next(); if (! nextval.done) { nextval.value = [i, nextval.value]; i++; } return nextval; }, }; }, }; } for (let [i, value] of enumerate(['one', 'two', 'three'])) { console.log(i, value); } // 0 one // 1 two // 2 three 

Incidentally, for..of (which iterates over a sequence, unlike for..in which iterates over keys — obviously) is finally supported in Edge 12. Hallelujah.

Oh, and let [i, value] is destructuring assignment, which is also a thing now and works with objects as well. You can even use the splat operator with it! Like Python! (And you can use it in function signatures! Like Python! Wait, no, Python decided that was terrible and removed it in 3…)

 1 let [x, y, ...others] = ['apple', 'orange', 'cherry', 'banana']; 

It’s a Halloween miracle. 🎃

## Generators

MDN docs — supported in Firefox 26, Chrome 39, Edge 13, Safari 10

That’s right, JavaScript has goddamn generators now. It’s basically just copying Python and adding a lot of superfluous punctuation everywhere. Not that I’m complaining.

Also, generators are themselves iterable, so I’m going to cut to the chase and rewrite my enumerate() with a generator.

  1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 function enumerate(iterable) { return { [Symbol.iterator]: function*() { let i = 0; for (let value of iterable) { yield [i, value]; i++; } }, }; } for (let [i, value] of enumerate(['one', 'two', 'three'])) { console.log(i, value); } // 0 one // 1 two // 2 three 

Amazing. function* is a pretty strange choice of syntax, but whatever? I guess it also lets them make yield only act as a keyword inside a generator, for ultimate backwards compatibility.

JavaScript generators support everything Python generators do: yield* yields every item from a subsequence, like Python’s yield from; generators can return final values; you can pass values back into the generator if you iterate it by hand. No, really, I wasn’t kidding, it’s basically just copying Python. It’s great. You could now built asyncio in JavaScript!

In fact, they did that! JavaScript now has async and await. An async function returns a Promise, which is also a built-in type now. Amazing.

## Sets and maps

MDN docs for MapMDN docs for Set — supported in Firefox 13, Chrome 38, IE 11, Safari 7.1

I did not save the best for last. This is much less exciting than generators. But still exciting.

The only data structure in JavaScript is the object, a map where the strings are keys. (Or now, also symbols, I guess.) That means you can’t readily use custom values as keys, nor simulate a set of arbitrary objects. And you have to worry about people mucking with Object.prototype, yikes.

But now, there’s Map and Set! Wow.

Unfortunately, because JavaScript, Map couldn’t use the indexing operators without losing the ability to have methods, so you have to use a boring old method-based API. But Map has convenient methods that plain objects don’t, like entries() to iterate over pairs of keys and values. In fact, you can use a map with for..of to get key/value pairs. So that’s nice.

Perhaps more interesting, there’s also now a WeakMap and WeakSet, where the keys are weak references. I don’t think JavaScript had any way to do weak references before this, so that’s pretty slick. There’s no obvious way to hold a weak value, but I guess you could substitute a WeakSet with only one item.

## Template literals

MDN docs — supported in Firefox 34, Chrome 41, Edge 12, Safari 9

Template literals are JavaScript’s answer to string interpolation, which has historically been a huge pain in the ass because it doesn’t even have string formatting in the standard library.

They’re just strings delimited by backticks instead of quotes. They can span multiple lines and contain expressions.

 1 2 console.log(one plus two is ${1 + 2});  Someone decided it would be a good idea to allow nesting more sets of backticks inside a ${} expression, so, good luck to syntax highlighters.

However, someone also had the most incredible idea ever, which was to add syntax allowing user code to do the interpolation — so you can do custom escaping, when absolutely necessary, which is virtually never, because “escaping” means you’re building a structured format by slopping strings together willy-nilly instead of using some API that works with the structure.

  1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 // OF COURSE, YOU SHOULDN'T BE DOING THIS ANYWAY; YOU SHOULD BUILD HTML WITH // THE DOM API AND USE .textContent FOR LITERAL TEXT. BUT AS AN EXAMPLE: function html(literals, ...values) { let ret = []; literals.forEach((literal, i) => { if (i > 0) { // Is there seriously still not a built-in function for doing this? // Well, probably because you SHOULDN'T BE DOING IT ret.push(values[i - 1] .replace(/&/g, '&') .replace(//g, '>') .replace(/"/g, '"') .replace(/'/g, ''')); } ret.push(literal); }); return ret.join(''); } let username = 'Bob

It’s a shame this feature is in JavaScript, the language where you are least likely to need it.

## Trailing commas

Remember how you couldn’t do this for ages, because ass-old IE considered it a syntax error and would reject the entire script?

 1 2 3 4 5 { a: 'one', b: 'two', c: 'three', // <- THIS GUY RIGHT HERE } 

Well now it’s part of the goddamn spec and if there’s anything in this post you can rely on, it’s this. In fact you can use AS MANY GODDAMN TRAILING COMMAS AS YOU WANT. But only in arrays.

 1 [1, 2, 3,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,] 

Apparently that has the bizarre side effect of reserving extra space at the end of the array, without putting values there.

## And more, probably

Like strict mode, which makes a few silent “errors” be actual errors, forces you to declare variables (no implicit globals!), and forbids the completely bozotic with block.

Or String.trim(), which trims whitespace off of strings.

Or… Math.sign()? That’s new? Seriously? Well, okay.

Or the Proxy type, which lets you customize indexing and assignment and calling. Oh. I guess that is possible, though this is a pretty weird way to do it; why not just use symbol-named methods?

You can write Unicode escapes for astral plane characters in strings (or identifiers!), as \u{XXXXXXXX}.

There’s a const now? I extremely don’t care, just name it in all caps and don’t reassign it, come on.

There’s also a mountain of other minor things, which you can peruse at your leisure via MDN or the ECMAScript compatibility tables (note the links at the top, too).

That’s all I’ve got. I still wouldn’t say I’m a big fan of JavaScript, but it’s definitely making an effort to clean up some goofy inconsistencies and solve common problems. I think I could even write some without yelling on Twitter about it now.

On the other hand, if you’re still stuck supporting IE 10 for some reason… well, er, my condolences.

Post Syndicated from jake original https://lwn.net/Articles/726896/rss

Security updates have been issued by CentOS (freeradius, kernel, and mercurial), Debian (libarchive and mercurial), Fedora (chromium-native_client, systemd, and tomcat), Mageia (drupal, golang, libmwaw, libsndfile, rxvt-unicode, and tomcat), Oracle (kernel), Slackware (bind, httpd, kernel, and libgcrypt), SUSE (bind, clamav, kernel, and openvpn-openssl1), and Ubuntu (bind9, eglibc, and linux-hwe).

Post Syndicated from jake original https://lwn.net/Articles/724921/rss

Security updates have been issued by Debian (ettercap), Fedora (mingw-poppler), Mageia (gc, libnl3, libtasn1, nss, puppet, and wireshark), and openSUSE (catdoc, gajim, GraphicsMagick, irssi, java-1_8_0-openjdk, kernel, libxml2, rxvt-unicode, and yodl).

# [$] Classes and types in the Python typing module Post Syndicated from jake original https://lwn.net/Articles/724639/rss Mark Shannon is concerned that the Python core developers may be replaying a mistake: treating two distinct things as being the same. Treating byte strings and Unicode text-strings interchangeably is part of what led to Python 3, so he would rather not see that happen again with types and classes. The Python typing module , which is meant to support type hints, currently implements types as classes. That leads to several kinds of problems, as Shannon described in his session at the 2017 Python Language Summit. # Perl 5.26.0 released Post Syndicated from corbet original https://lwn.net/Articles/724363/rss The Perl 5.26.0 release is out. “Perl 5.26.0 represents approximately 13 months of development since Perl 5.24.0 and contains approximately 360,000 lines of changes across 2,600 files from 86 authors “. See this page for a list of changes in this release; new features include indented here-documents, the ability to declare references to variables, Unicode 9.0 support, and the removal of the current directory (“.“) from @INC by default. # Is it on AWS? Domain Identification Using AWS Lambda Post Syndicated from Jeff Barr original https://aws.amazon.com/blogs/aws/is-it-on-aws-domain-identification-using-aws-lambda/ In the guest post below, my colleague Tim Bray explains how he built IsItOnAWS.com . Powered by the list of AWS IP address ranges and using a pair of AWS Lambda functions that Tim wrote, the site aims to tell you if your favorite website is running on AWS. Jeff; Is it on AWS? I did some recreational programming over Christmas and ended up with a little Lambda function that amused me and maybe it’ll amuse you too. It tells you whether or not a given domain name (or IP address) (even IPv6!) is in the published list of AWS IP address ranges. You can try it out over at IsItOnAWS.com. Part of the construction involves one Lambda function creating another. That list of of ranges, given as IPv4 and IPv6 CIDRs wrapped in JSON, is here; the how-to documentation is here and there’s a Jeff Barr blog. Here are a few lines of the “IP-Ranges” JSON: { "syncToken": "1486776130", "createDate": "2017-02-11-01-22-10", "prefixes": [ { "ip_prefix": "13.32.0.0/15", "region": "GLOBAL", "service": "AMAZON" }, ... "ipv6_prefixes": [ { "ipv6_prefix": "2400:6500:0:7000::/56", "region": "ap-southeast-1", "service": "AMAZON" }, As soon as I saw it, I thought “I wonder if IsItOnAWS.com is available?” It was, and so I had to build this thing. I wanted it to be: 1. Serverless (because that’s what the cool kids are doing), 2. simple (because it’s a simple problem, look up a number in a range of numbers), and 3. fast. Because well of course. Database or Not? The construction seemed pretty obvious: Simplify the IP-Ranges into a table, then look up addresses in it. So, where to put the table? I thought about Amazon DynamoDB, but it’s not obvious how best to search on what in effect is a numeric range. I thought about SQL databases, where it is obvious, but note #2 above. I thought about Redis or some such, but then you have to provision instances, see #1 above. I actually ended up stuck for a few days scratching my head over this one. Then a question occurred to me: How big is that list of ranges? It turns out to have less than a thousand entries. So who needs a database anyhow? Let’s just sort that JSON into an array and binary-search it. OK then, where does the array go? Amazon S3 would be easy, but hey, look at #3 above; S3’s fast, but why would I want it in the loop for every request? So I decided to just generate a little file containing the ranges as an array literal, and include it right into the IsItOnAWS Lambda function. Which meant I’d have to rebuild and upload the function every time the IP addresses change. It turns out that if you care about those addresses, you can subscribe to an Amazon Simple Notification Service (SNS) topic that will notify you whenever it changes (in my recent experience, once or twice a week). And you can hook your subscription up to a Lambda function. With that, I felt I’d found all the pieces anyone could need. There are two Lambda functions: the first, newranges.js, gets the change notifications, generates the JavaScript form of the IP-Ranges data, and uploads a second Lambda function, isitonaws.js, which includes that JavaScript. Vigilant readers will have deduced this is all with the Node runtime. The new-ranges function, your typical async/waterfall thing, is a little more complex than I’d expected going in. Postmodern IP Addresses Its first task is to fetch the IP-Ranges, a straightforward HTTP GET. Then you take that JSON and smooth it out to make it more searchable. Unsurprisingly, there are both IPv4 and IPv6 ranges, and to make things easy I wanted to mash ’em all together into a single array that I could search with simple string or numeric matching. And since IPv6 addresses are way too big for JavaScript numbers to hold, they needed to be strings. It turns out the way the IPv4 space embeds into IPv6’s ("::ffff:0:0/96") is a little surprising. I’d always assumed it’d be like the BMP mapping into the low bits of Unicode. I idly wonder why it’s this way, but not enough to research it. The code for crushing all those CIDRs together into a nice searchable array ended up being kind of brutish, but it gets the job done. Building Lambda in Lambda Next, we need to construct the lambda that’s going to actually handle the IsItOnAWS request. This has to be a Zipfile, and NPM has tools to make those. Then it was a matter of jamming the zipped bytes into S3 and uploading them to make the new Lambda function. The sharp-eyed will note that once I’d created the zip, I could have just uploaded it to Lambda directly. I used the S3 interim step because I wanted to to be able to download the generated “ranges” data structure and actually look at it; at some point I may purify the flow. The actual IsItOnAWS runtime is laughably simple, aside from a bit of work around hitting DNS to look up addresses for names, then mashing them into the same format we used for the ranges array. I didn’t do any HTML templating, just read it out of a file in the zip and replaced an invisible <div> with the results if there were any. Except for, I got to code up a binary search method, which only happens once a decade or so but makes me happy. Putting the Pieces Together Once I had all this code working, I wanted to connect it to the world, which meant using Amazon API Gateway. I’ve found this complex in the past, but this time around I plowed through Create an API with Lambda Proxy Integration through a Proxy Resource, and found it reasonably linear and surprise-free. However, it’s mostly focused on constructing APIs (i.e. JSON in/out) as opposed to human experiences. It doesn’t actually say how to send HTML for a human to consume in a browser, but it’s not hard to figure out. Here’s how (from Node): context.succeed({ "statusCode": 200, "headers": { "Content-type": "text/html" }, "body": "<html>Your HTML Here</html>" }); Once I had everything hooked up to API Gateway, the last step was pointing isitonaws.com at it. And that’s why I wrote this code in December-January, but am blogging at you now. Back then, Amazon Certificate Manager (ACM) certs couldn’t be used with API Gateway, and in 2017, life is just too short to go through the old-school ceremony for getting a cert approved and hooked up. ACM makes the cert process a real no-brainer. What with ACM and Let’s Encrypt loose in the wild, there’s really no excuse any more for having a non-HTTPS site. Both are excellent, but if you’re using AWS services like API Gateway and CloudFront like I am here, ACM is a smoother fit. Also it auto-renews, which you have to like. So as of now, hooking up a domain name via HTTPS and CloudFront to your API Gateway API is dead easy; see Use Custom Domain Name as API Gateway API Host Name. Worked for me, first time, but something to watch out for (in March 2017, anyhow): When you get to the last step of connecting your ACM cert to your API, you get a little spinner that wiggles at you for several minutes while it hooks things up; this is apparently normal. Fortunately I got distracted and didn’t give up and refresh or cancel or anything, which might have screwed things up. By the way, as a side-effect of using API Gateway, this is all running through CloudFront. So what with that, and not having a database, you’d expect it to be fast. And yep, it sure is, from here in Vancouver anyhow. Fast enough to not bother measuring. I also subscribed my email to the “IP-Ranges changed” SNS topic, so every now and then I get an email telling me it’s changed, and I smile because I know that my Lambda wrote a new Lambda, all automatic, hands-off, clean, and fast. Tim Bray, Senior Principal Engineer # Skillz: editing a web page Post Syndicated from Robert Graham original http://blog.erratasec.com/2017/02/skillz-editing-web-page.html So one of the skillz you ought to have in cybersec is messing with web-pages client-side using Chrome’s Developer Tools. Web-servers give you a bunch of HTML and JavaScript code which, once it reaches your browser, is yours to change and play with. You can do a lot with web-sites that they don’t intend by changing that code. Let me give you an example. It’s only an example — touching briefly on steps to give you an impression what’s going on. It’s not a ground up explanation of everything, which you may find off-putting. Click on the images to expand them so you can see fully what’s going on. Today is the American holiday called “Presidents Day”. It’s actually not a federal holiday, but a holiday in all 50 states. Originally it was just Washington’s birthday (February 22), but some states choose to honor other presidents as well, hence “Presidents Day”. Thus of us who donated to Donald Trump’s campaign (note: I donated to all candidates campaigns back in 2015) received an email today suggesting that to honor Presidents Day, we should “sign a card” for Trump. It’s a gross dis-honoring of the Presidents the day is supposed to commemorate, but whatever, it’s the 21st century. Okay, let’s say we want to honor the current President with a bunch of 🖕🖕🖕🖕 in order to point out his crassness of exploiting this holiday, and clicked on the URL [*], and filled it in as such (with multiple skin tones for the middle finger, just so he knows its from all of us): Okay, now we hit the submit button “Add My Name” in order to send this to his campaign. The only problem is, the web page rejects us, telling us “Please enter a valid name” (note, I’m changing font sizes in these screen shots so you can see the message): This is obviously client side validation of the field. It’s at this point that we go into Developer Tools in order to turn it off. One way is to [right-click] on that button, and from the popup menu, select “Inspect”, which gets you this screen (yes, the original page is squashed to the left-hand side): We can edit the HTML right there and add the “novalidate” flag, as shown below, then hit the “Add My Name” button again: This doesn’t work. The scripts on the webpage aren’t honoring the HTML5 “novalidate” flag. Therefore, we’ll have to go edit those scripts. We do that by clicking on the Sources tab, then press [ctrl-shift-f] to open the ‘find’ window in the sources, and type “Please enter a valid name”, and you’ll find the JavaScript source file (validation.js) where the validation function is located: If at this point you find all these windows bewildering, then yes, you are on the right track. We typed in the search there near the bottom next to the classic search icon 🔍. Then right below that we got the search results. We clicked on the search results, then up above popped up the source file (validation.js) among all the possible source files with the line selected that contains our search term. Remember: when you pull down a single HTML page, like the one from donaldtrump.com, it can pull in a zillion JavaScript files as well. Unlike the HTML, we can’t change the JavaScript on the fly (at least, I don’t know how to). Instead, we have to run more JavaScript. Specifically, we need to run a script that registers a new validation function. If you look in the original source, it contains a function that validates the input by making sure it matches a regular expression: 1. jQuery.validator.addMethod(“isname”, function(value, element) { 2. return this.optional(element) || (/^[a-zA-Z]+[ ]+(([‘,. -][a-zA-Z ])?[a-zA-Z]*)+.?$/.test(value.trim()));
3. }, “Please enter a valid name”);
From the console, we are going to call the addMethod function ourselves to register a different validation function for isname, specifically a validation function that always returns true, meaning the input is valid. This will override the previously registered function. As the Founders of our country say, the solution to bad JavaScript is not to censor it, but to add more JavaScript.
2.     return true});
We just type that in the Console as shown below (in the bottom window where Search used to be) and hit [enter]. It gives us the response “undefined”, but that’s OK. (Note: in the screenshot I misspelled it as isName, it should instead be all lowercase isname).
Now we can close Developer Tools and press the “Add My Name” button, and we get the following response:
Darn, foiled again. But at least this time, our request went to the server. It was on the server side that the request was rejected. We successfully turned off client-side checking. Had the server accepted our Unicode emoji, we would’ve reached the next step, where it asks for donations. (By the way, the entire purpose of “sign this card” is to get users to donate, nothing else).

### Conclusion

So we didn’t actually succeed at doing anything here, but I thought I’d write it up anyway. Editing the web-page client-side, or mucking around with JavaScript client-side, is a skill that every cybersec professional should have. Hopefully, this is an amusing enough example that people will follow the steps to see how this is done.

# КЗП пита защо СМС-ите на кирилица стрували повече отколкото на латиница

Post Syndicated from Delian Delchev original http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/delian/~3/rUccfhWEzQw/blog-post_9.html

КЗП иска обяснение защо е неграмотна и не разбира как работят кодовите (а не криптиращите) таблици. На операторите им е трудно да отговорят с цензорен език и без препоръка да се върнат в училище.
За другите неграмотни, също обяснявам.
Един СМС предава 160 байта данни. Защо 160 байта е друг въпрос, но не е важно.
СМС-а може да транспортира всичко, от текстови съобщения до системна информация и дори данни. Една от ранните имплементации на WAP протокола е върху SMS.
Какво си предават през СМС изпращача и получателя е без значение за оператора. Той не се интересува от съдържанието на съобщението, нито променя начина по който го предава в зависимост от съдържанието. За да го прави, би му трябвало инфраструктура, която би увеличила цената на обработка на СМС многократно, и следователно и цената за крайните потребители.
Само крайните устройства (терминалите/телефоните) избират как да кодират съобщението и какво му е съдържанието.
Ако крайните устрийства използват Concatenated SMS/EMS (допълнителна информация към вашият текст в смс-а, която казваа как текста е кодиран и дали има свързани в едно малки SMS-и), можете да изпращате текст съдържащ едновременно всякакви знаци от Unicode кодовите таблици, както и съобщения по-дълги от 160 байта, и дори файлове и картинки. Те просто се разбиват на съобщения от по 160 байта, в които се слага header, който казва как са кодирани знаците и данните вътре, и на как няколкото SMS-а може да са свързани.
Това не е избор на оператора, отново това е конфигурация и избор на телефонният апарат.
Tелефонният апарат би декодирал байтовете в СМС-а до текст, в зависимост от кодовата си таблица по подразбиране.
И сега, когато изпращате нещо на кирилица, се използва (отново избор на телефоните е, а не на операторите, но за да имате съвместимост този избор трябва да е еднакъв и от двата комуникиращи си телефона, и за това ако променяте настройките може и да не ви разбере получателя) типично UTF-8 кодова таблица. Тоест латинските знаци се предават с 1 байт, но кирилцата, гръцките знаци, и разширените латински знаци, и китайските знаци и математическите символи и т.н. се предават с 2 байта.
Тоест ако пишете СМС само на латиница, може и да имате 160 знака, но ако пишете само с кирилски букви, ще имате 80 знака в съобщение.
Ако добавите EMS/Concatenated SMS (който се включва автоматично, в момента в който напишете по-дълъг текст, на латиница над 160 знака, на кирилица около 80-тина знака), той ще раздели съобщението ви на малки смс-и, и ще добави във всяко едно допълнителен хеадър, с който ще идентифицира например е тези смс-и съставляват едно съобщение и в какъв ред са те.
Тоест, ако напишете текст с 160 латински знака, той ще заеме точно един СМС за да бъде транспортиран.
Но ако напишете текст с 160 кирилски знака, той ще заеме 3 (ТРИ!) СМС-а за да бъде транспортиран. Причината е, че ви трябва минимум 8 байта хеадър за Concatenated SMS, и следователно можете да пренесете само 72 знака в един SMS. Тоест ще ви трябва един SMS за първите 76 знака, един за вторите 76 знака и един за третите 8 знака.
Така реално ще ползвате 3 смс-а и съответно ще платите 3.
А защо кирилицата се кодира с 2 байта а не с 1, обвинявайте тия дето са измислили компюторите, че не са знаели и ползвали всекидневно кирилца.

Дори и не искам да коментирам по същество, защо КЗП се занимава с глупости, от които няма техническа полза за гражданите. В момента над 80% от договорите за мобилни услуги в страната на практика включват неограничено количество СМС-и, и въпреки това средното количество СМС-и, които гражданите изпращат на месец намалява с всеки изминал ден и слиза стабилно под 30-40, половината от които реклами и системни съобщения. За пример преди 10г средното количество СМС-и на абонат бе 3-4 пъти по-голямо. СМС е мъртва услуга, защото е заменена от по ефективни (и предаващи много по големи и мултимедийно богати) услуги работещи върху данни (Skype, Viber, Facebook messenger, Yahoo messenger, Whatsapp, Snapchat, Google Hangouts/Duo/Allo, etc).
Заради ниската употреба на тази услуга, се обмисля на европейско ниво тя да бъде извадена извън системните услуги (тоест да не е задължителна, за да си получаваш например роаминг смс-а). И отново заради ниската и употреба операторите я таксуват на фиксирана такса. Където вече няма значение каква е цената на един СМС (тя е нула) и колко СМС-а са нужни за да напише някой псувня на български.
А усилията на КЗП да вдига патриотичен шум в предизборно време около безсмислена активност, от която реално няма много хора, да могат да се възползват, е изключително интересна

# Eevee gained 2611 experience points

Post Syndicated from Eevee original https://eev.ee/blog/2017/01/21/eevee-gained-2611-experience-points/

Eevee grew to level 30!

Wow! What an incredible fucking year. I’ve never done so much in my life.

I made a video game! Twice! Thrice, even, if you count the one I just finished, which was done on the week surrounding my birthday. Mel and I made Under Construction on the PICO-8 in a few weeks, then I used its engine to make Isaac’s Descent on my own for Ludum Dare, and we just published the more substantial LÖVE-based NEON PHASE for my own week-long game jam. I’ve also got a couple other things in progress, and Mel is at this very second working on NEON PHASE 2.

And we made these from scratch. I wrote a little collision engine! It even mostly works! That’s amazing and I’m so happy about it. It’s also great that Mel and I have something we can actually work on together; before, the most collaborating we really did was on web design.

My interest in Doom waxes and wanes, but I did find time to finally make a real map and later make some speedmaps (which I realize I never fully published, oops!). I even put some effort into embedding Lua in ZDoom, which is an interesting side project but probably not something I’m going to actively champion.

I wrote a few Twitter bots! @perlin_noise puts my post on Perlin noise to use by tweeting images, GIFs, and emoji grids generated from various kinds of Perlin noise. @unicodeveryword tweets every word in the English language that’s also in my wordlist, slightly scrambled by Unicode shenanigans. @calloutbot is mostly an injoke.

I wrote 45 posts comprising 195k words, which is about four novels, and that’s not counting the couple of articles I was paid to write a few months ago. I have Patreon to thank for getting me to write more often, though I recently dropped the writing obligation so I can spend more time on games and a book and other stuff.

Oh, yes, I actually started writing a book, in the sense that I have (quite a bit) more than a few pages written and a concept that I like and am sticking to.

I dipped a toe into music, however briefly, and managed to produce a simple song that’s not too bad. Promising!

I feel like I’ve been slacking a lot on art lately, but looking back, this year saw my first animation (and several more after that), a mountain of ink-on-paper work for Inktober, and of course a lot of exploration of pixel art for games. I haven’t done as much digital illustrating as I’d like in the last few months, perhaps, but I’m definitely creating stuff I’d never have imagined I could do two years ago.

Veekun? Ah, hm. I did write some gen 1 dumping stuff, much of which can be reused for gen 2, so that’s good. Some of the code got modernized a bit, and I made some good progress on gen 6/7. I also wrote that model viewer, which is pretty dang cool. So, still making progress, just slowly. It’s obviously not something that holds my attention as strongly nowadays, but I’d still like to get the site redone — hopefully that’ll make it easier to understand and work on, both for me and other people.

Even after all this, I’m surely forgetting a few more minor things! I’m really happy about how far I’ve come in a year, and I can’t wait to see what this coming year has in store.

# Eevee gained 2611 experience points

Post Syndicated from Eevee original https://eev.ee/blog/2017/01/21/eevee-gained-2611-experience-points/

Eevee grew to level 30!

Wow! What an incredible fucking year. I’ve never done so much in my life.

I made a video game! Twice! Thrice, even, if you count the one I just finished, which was done on the week surrounding my birthday. Mel and I made Under Construction on the PICO-8 in a few weeks, then I used its engine to make Isaac’s Descent on my own for Ludum Dare, and we just published the more substantial LÖVE-based NEON PHASE for my own week-long game jam. I’ve also got a couple other things in progress, and Mel is at this very second working on NEON PHASE 2.

And we made these from scratch. I wrote a little collision engine! It even mostly works! That’s amazing and I’m so happy about it. It’s also great that Mel and I have something we can actually work on together; before, the most collaborating we really did was on web design.

My interest in Doom waxes and wanes, but I did find time to finally make a real map and later make some speedmaps (which I realize I never fully published, oops!). I even put some effort into embedding Lua in ZDoom, which is an interesting side project but probably not something I’m going to actively champion.

I wrote a few Twitter bots! @perlin_noise puts my post on Perlin noise to use by tweeting images, GIFs, and emoji grids generated from various kinds of Perlin noise. @unicodeveryword tweets every word in the English language that’s also in my wordlist, slightly scrambled by Unicode shenanigans. @calloutbot is mostly an injoke.

I wrote 45 posts comprising 195k words, which is about four novels, and that’s not counting the couple of articles I was paid to write a few months ago. I have Patreon to thank for getting me to write more often, though I recently dropped the writing obligation so I can spend more time on games and a book and other stuff.

Oh, yes, I actually started writing a book, in the sense that I have (quite a bit) more than a few pages written and a concept that I like and am sticking to.

I dipped a toe into music, however briefly, and managed to produce a simple song that’s not too bad. Promising!

I feel like I’ve been slacking a lot on art lately, but looking back, this year saw my first animation (and several more after that), a mountain of ink-on-paper work for Inktober, and of course a lot of exploration of pixel art for games. I haven’t done as much digital illustrating as I’d like in the last few months, perhaps, but I’m definitely creating stuff I’d never have imagined I could do two years ago.

Veekun? Ah, hm. I did write some gen 1 dumping stuff, much of which can be reused for gen 2, so that’s good. Some of the code got modernized a bit, and I made some good progress on gen 6/7. I also wrote that model viewer, which is pretty dang cool. So, still making progress, just slowly. It’s obviously not something that holds my attention as strongly nowadays, but I’d still like to get the site redone — hopefully that’ll make it easier to understand and work on, both for me and other people.

Even after all this, I’m surely forgetting a few more minor things! I’m really happy about how far I’ve come in a year, and I can’t wait to see what this coming year has in store.

# Let’s stop copying C

Post Syndicated from Eevee original https://eev.ee/blog/2016/12/01/lets-stop-copying-c/

Ah, C. The best lingua franca language we have… because we have no other lingua franca languages.

C is fairly old — 44 years, now! — and comes from a time when there were possibly more architectures than programming languages. It works well for what it is, and what it is is a relatively simple layer of indirection atop assembly.

Alas, the popularity of C has led to a number of programming languages’ taking significant cues from its design, and parts of its design are… slightly questionable. I’ve gone through some common features that probably should’ve stayed in C and my justification for saying so. The features are listed in rough order from (I hope) least to most controversial. The idea is that C fans will give up when I complain about argument order and not even get to the part where I rag on braces. Wait, crap, I gave it away.

I’ve listed some languages that do or don’t take the same approach as C. Plenty of the listed languages have no relation to C, and some even predate it — this is meant as a cross-reference of the landscape (and perhaps a list of prior art), not a genealogy. The language selections are arbitrary and based on what I could cobble together from documentation, experiments, Wikipedia, and attempts to make sense of Rosetta Code. I don’t know everything about all of them, so I might be missing some interesting quirks. Things are especially complicated for very old languages like COBOL or Fortran, which by now have numerous different versions and variants and de facto standard extensions.

Bash” generally means zsh and ksh and other derivatives as well, and when referring to expressions, means the $(( ... )) syntax; “Unix shells” means Bourne and thus almost certainly everything else as well. I didn’t look too closely into, say, fish. Unqualified “Python” means both 2 and 3; likewise, unqualified “Perl” means both 5 and 6. Also some of the puns are perhaps a little too obtuse, but the first group listed is always C-like. ## Textual inclusion #include is not a great basis for a module system. It’s not even a module system. You can’t ever quite tell what symbols came from which files, or indeed whether particular files are necessary at all. And in languages with C-like header files, most headers include other headers include more headers, so who knows how any particular declaration is actually ending up in your code? Oh, and there’s the whole include guards thing. It’s a little tricky to pick on individual languages here, because ultimately even the greatest module system in the world boils down to “execute this other file, and maybe do some other stuff”. I think the true differentiating feature is whether including/importing/whatevering a file creates a new namespace. If a file gets dumped into the caller’s namespace, that looks an awful lot like textual inclusion; if a file gets its own namespace, that’s a good sign of something more structured happening behind the scenes. This tends to go hand-in-hand with how much the language relies on a global namespace. One surprising exception is Lua, which can compartmentalize required files quite well, but dumps everything into a single global namespace by default. Quick test: if you create a new namespace and import another file within that namespace, do its contents end up in that namespace? Included: ACS, awk, COBOL, Erlang, Forth, Fortran, most older Lisps, Perl 5 (despite that required files must return true), PHP, Ruby, Unix shells. Excluded: Ada, Clojure, D, Haskell, Julia, Lua (the file’s return value is returned from require), Nim, Node (similar to Lua), Perl 6, Python, Rust. Special mention: ALGOL appears to have been designed with the assumption that you could include other code by adding its punch cards to your stack. C#, Java, OCaml, and Swift all have some concept of “all possible code that will be in this program”, sort of like C with inferred headers, so imports are largely unnecessary; Java’s import really just does aliasing. Inform 7 has no namespacing, but does have a first-class concept of external libraries, but doesn’t have a way to split a single project up between multiple files. ## Optional block delimiters Old and busted and responsible for gotofail:  1 2 if (condition) thing;  New hotness, which reduces the amount of punctuation overall and eliminates this easy kind of error:  1 2 3 if condition { thing; }  To be fair, and unlike most of these complaints, the original idea was a sort of clever consistency: the actual syntax was merely if (expr) stmt, and also, a single statement could always be replaced by a block of statements. Unfortunately, the cuteness doesn’t make up for the ease with which errors sneak in. If you’re stuck with a language like this, I advise you always use braces, possibly excepting the most trivial cases like immediately returning if some argument is NULL. Definitely do not do this nonsense, which I saw in actual code not 24 hours ago.   1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 for (x = ...) for (y = ...) { ... } // more code for (x = ...) for (y = ...) buffer[y][x] = ...  The only real argument for omitting the braces is that the braces take up a lot of vertical space, but that’s mostly a problem if you put each { on its own line, and you could just not do that. Some languages use keywords instead of braces, and in such cases it’s vanishingly rare to make the keywords optional. Blockheads: ACS, awk, C#, D, Erlang (kinda?), Java, JavaScript. New kids on the block: Go, Perl 6, Rust, Swift. Had their braces removed: Ada, ALGOL, BASIC, COBOL, CoffeeScript, Forth, Fortran (but still requires parens), Haskell, Lua, Ruby. Special mention: Inform 7 has several ways to delimit blocks, none of them vulnerable to this problem. Perl 5 requires both the parentheses and the braces… but it lets you leave off the semicolon on the last statement. Python just uses indentation to delimit blocks in the first place, so you can’t have a block look wrong. Lisps exist on a higher plane of existence where the very question makes no sense. ## Bitwise operator precedence For ease of transition from B, in C, the bitwise operators & | ^ have lower precedence than the comparison operators == and friends. That means they happen later. For binary math operators, this is nonsense.  1 2 3 1 + 2 == 3 // (1 + 2) == 3 1 * 2 == 3 // (1 * 2) == 3 1 | 2 == 3 // 1 | (2 == 3)  Many other languages have copied C’s entire set of operators and their precedence, including this. Because a new language is easier to learn if its rules are familiar, you see. Which is why we still, today, have extremely popular languages maintaining compatibility with a language from 1969 — so old that it probably couldn’t get a programming job. Honestly, if your language is any higher-level than C, I’m not sure bit operators deserve to be operators at all. Free those characters up to do something else. Consider having a first-class bitfield type; then 99% of the use of bit operations would go away. Quick test: 1 & 2 == 2 evaluates to 1 with C precedence, false otherwise. Or just look at a precedence table: if equality appears between bitwise ops and other math ops, that’s C style. A bit wrong: C#, D, expr, JavaScript, Perl 5, PHP. Wisened up: Bash, F# (ops are &&& ||| ^^^), Go, Julia, Lua (bitwise ops are new in 5.3), Perl 6 (ops are ?& ?| ?^), Python, Ruby, SQL, Swift. Special mention: Java has C’s precedence, but forbids using bitwise operators on booleans, so the quick test is a compile-time error. Lisp-likes have no operator precedence. ## Negative modulo The modulo operator, %, finds the remainder after division. Thus you might think that this always holds:  1 0 <= a % b < abs(b)  But no — if a is negative, C will produce a negative value. This is so a / b * b + a % b is always equal to a. Truncating integer division rounds towards zero, so the sign of a % b always needs to be away from zero. I’ve never found this behavior (or the above equivalence) useful. An easy example is that checking for odd numbers with x % 2 == 1 will fail for negative numbers, which produce -1. But the opposite behavior can be pretty handy. Consider the problem of having n items that you want to arrange into rows with c columns. A calendar, say; you want to include enough empty cells to fill out the last row. n % c gives you the number of items on the last row, so c - n % c seems like it will give you the number of empty spaces. But if the last row is already full, then n % c is zero, and c - n % c equals c! You’ll have either a double-width row or a spare row of empty cells. Fixing this requires treating n % c == 0 as a special case, which is unsatisfying. Ah, but if we have positive %, the answer is simply… -n % c! Consider this number line for n = 5 and c = 3:  1 2 -6 -3 0 3 6 | - x x | x x x | x x x | x x - |  a % b tells you how far to count down to find a multiple of b. For positive a, that means “backtracking” over a itself and finding a smaller number. For negative a, that means continuing further away from zero. If you look at negative numbers as the mirror image of positive numbers, then % on a positive number tells you how to much to file off to get a multiple, whereas % on a negative number tells you how much further to go to get a multiple. 5 % 3 is 2, but -5 % 3 is 1. And of course, -6 % 3 is still zero, so that’s not a special case. Positive % effectively lets you choose whether to round up or down. It doesn’t come up often, but when it’s handy, it’s really handy. (I have no strong opinion on what 5 % -3 should be; I don’t think I’ve ever tried to use % with a negative divisor. Python makes it negative; Pascal makes it positive. Wikipedia has a whole big chart.) Quick test: -5 % 3 is -2 with C semantics, 1 with “positive” semantics. Leftovers: Bash, C#, D, expr, Go, Java, JavaScript, OCaml, PowerShell, PHP, Rust, Scala, SQL, Swift, VimL, Visual Basic. Notably, some of these languages don’t even have integer division. Paying dividends: Dart, MUMPS (#), Perl, Python, R (%%), Ruby, Smalltalk (\\\\), Standard ML, Tcl. Special mention: Ada, Haskell, Julia, many Lisps, MATLAB, VHDL, and others have separate mod (Python-like) and rem (C-like) operators. CoffeeScript has separate % (C-like) and %% (Python-like) operators. ## Leading zero for octal Octal notation like 0777 has three uses. One: to make a file mask to pass to chmod(). Two: to confuse people when they write 013 and it comes out as 11. Three: to confuse people when they write 018 and get a syntax error. If you absolutely must have octal (?!) in your language, it’s fine to use 0o777. Really. No one will mind. Or you can go the whole distance and allow literals written in any base, as several languages do. Gets a zero: awk (gawk only), Bash, Clojure, Go, Groovy, Java, JavaScript, m4, Perl 5, PHP, Python 2, Scala. G0od: ECMAScript 6, Eiffel (0c — cute!), F#, Haskell, Julia, Nemerle, Nim, OCaml, Perl 6, Python 3, Racket (#o), Ruby, Scheme (#o), Swift, Tcl. Based literals: Ada (8#777#), Bash (8#777), Erlang (8#777), Icon (8r777), J (8b777), Perl 6 (:8<777>), PostScript (8#777), Smalltalk (8r777). Special mention: BASIC uses &O and &H prefixes for octal and hex. bc and Forth allow the base used to interpret literals to be changed on the fly, via ibase and BASE respectively. C#, D, expr, Lua, and Standard ML have no octal literals at all. Some COBOL extensions use O# and H#/X# prefixes for octal and hex. Fortran uses the slightly odd O'777' syntax. ## No power operator Perhaps this makes sense in C, since it doesn’t correspond to an actual instruction on most CPUs, but in JavaScript? If you can make + work for strings, I think you can add a **. If you’re willing to ditch the bitwise operators (or lessen their importance a bit), you can even use ^, as most people would write in regular ASCII text. Powerless: ACS, C#, Eiffel, Erlang, expr, Forth, Go. Two out of two stars: Ada, ALGOL (↑ works too), Bash, COBOL, CoffeeScript, Fortran, F#, Groovy, OCaml, Perl, PHP, Python, Ruby. I tip my hat: awk, BASIC, bc, COBOL, fish, Lua. Otherwise powerful: APL (⋆), D (^^). Special mention: Lisps tend to have a named function rather than a dedicated operator (e.g. Math/pow in Clojure, expt in Common Lisp), but since operators are regular functions, this doesn’t stand out nearly so much. Haskell uses all three of ^, ^^, and ** for typing reasons. ## C-style for loops This construct is bad. It very rarely matches what a human actually wants to do, which 90% of the time is “go through this list of stuff” or “count from 1 to 10”. A C-style for obscures those wishes. The syntax is downright goofy, too: nothing else in the language uses ; as a delimiter and repeatedly executes only part of a line. It’s like a tuple of statements. I said in my previous post about iteration that having an iteration protocol requires either objects or closures, but I realize that’s not true. I even disproved it in the same post. Lua’s own iteration protocol can be implemented without closures — the semantics of for involve keeping a persistent state value and passing it to the iterator function every time. It could even be implemented in C! Awkwardly. And with a bunch of macros. Which aren’t hygenic in C. Hmm, well. Loopy: ACS, bc, Fortran. Cool and collected: C#, Clojure, D, Delphi (recent), Eiffel (recent), Go, Groovy, Icon, Inform 7, Java, Julia, Logo, Lua, Nemerle, Nim, Objective-C, Perl, PHP, PostScript, Prolog, Python, R, Rust, Scala, Smalltalk, Swift, Tcl, Unix shells, Visual Basic. Special mention: Functional languages and Lisps are laughing at the rest of us here. awk has for...in, but it doesn’t iterate arrays in order which makes it rather less useful. JavaScript has both for...in and for...of, but both are differently broken, so you usually end up using C-style for or external iteration. BASIC has an ergonomic numeric loop, but no iteration loop. Ruby mostly uses external iteration, and its for block is actually expressed in those terms. ## Switch with default fallthrough We’ve been through this before. Wanting completely separate code per case is, by far, the most common thing to want to do. It makes no sense to have to explicitly opt out of the more obvious behavior. Breaks my heart: C#, Java, JavaScript. Follows through: Ada, BASIC, CoffeeScript, Go (has a fallthrough statement), Lisps, Swift (has a fallthrough statement), Unix shells. Special mention: D requires break, but requires something one way or the other — implicit fallthrough is disallowed except for empty cases. Perl 5 historically had no switch block built in, but it comes with a Switch module, and the last seven releases have had an experimental given block which I stress is still experimental. Python has no switch block. Erlang, Haskell, and Rust have pattern-matching instead (which doesn’t allow fallthrough at all). ## Type first  1 int foo;  In C, this isn’t too bad. You get into problems when you remember that it’s common for type names to be all lowercase.  1 foo * bar;  Is that a useless expression, or a declaration? It depends entirely on whether foo is a variable or a type. It gets a little weirder when you consider that there are type names with spaces in them. And storage classes. And qualifiers. And sometimes part of the type comes after the name.  1 extern const volatile _Atomic unsigned long long int * restrict foo[];  That’s not even getting into the syntax for types of function pointers, which might have arbitrary amounts of stuff after the variable name. And then C++ came along with generics, which means a type name might also have other type names nested arbitrarily deep.  1 extern const volatile std::unordered_map>::const_iterator>> foo;  And that’s just a declaration! Imagine if there were an assignment in there too. The great thing about static typing is that I know the types of all the variables, but that advantage is somewhat lessened if I can’t tell what the variables are. Between type-first, function pointer syntax, Turing-complete duck-typed templates, and C++’s initialization syntax, there are several ways where parsing C++ is ambiguous or even undecidable! “Undecidable” here means that there exist C++ programs which cannot even be parsed into a syntax tree, because the same syntax means two different things depending on whether some expression is a value or a type, and that question can depend on an endlessly recursive template instantiation. (This is also a great example of ambiguity, where x * y(z) could be either an expression or a declaration.) Contrast with, say, Rust:  1 let x: ... = ...;  This is easy to parse, both for a human and a computer. The thing before the colon must be a variable name, and it stands out immediately; the thing after the colon must be a type name. Even better, Rust has pretty good type inference, so the type is probably unnecessary anyway. Of course, languages with no type declarations whatsoever are immune to this problem. Most vexing: Java, Perl 6 Looks Lovely: Python 3 (annotation syntax and the typing module), Rust, Swift, TypeScript ## Weak typing Please note: this is not the opposite of static typing. Weak typing is more about the runtime behavior of values — if I try to use a value of type T as though it were of type U, will it be implicitly converted? C lets you assign pointers to int variables and then take square roots of them, which seems like a bad idea to me. C++ agreed and nixed this, but also introduced the ability to make your own custom types implicitly convertible to as many other types you want. This one is pretty clearly a spectrum, and I don’t have a clear line. For example, I don’t fault Python for implicitly converting between int and float, because int is infinite-precision and float is 64-bit, so it’s usually fine. But I’m a lot more suspicious of C, which lets you assign an int to a char without complaint. (Well, okay. Literal integers in C are ints, which poses a slight problem.) I do count a combined addition/concatenation operator that accepts different types of arguments as a form of weak typing. Weak: JavaScript (+), Unix shells (everything’s a string, but even arrays/scalars are somewhat interchangeable) Strong: Rust (even numeric upcasts must be explicit). Special mention: Perl 5 is weak, but it avoids most of the ambiguity by having entirely separate sets of operators for string vs numeric operations. Python 2 is mostly strong, but that whole interchangeable bytes/text thing sure caused some ruckus. ## Integer division Hey, new programmers!” you may find yourself saying. “Don’t worry, it’s just like math, see? Here’s how to use$LANGUAGE as a calculator.”

Oh boy!” says your protégé. “Let’s see what 7 ÷ 2 is! Oh, it’s 3. I think the computer is broken.”

They’re right! It is broken. I have genuinely seen a non-trivial number of people come into #python thinking division is “broken” because of this.

To be fair, C is pretty consistent about making math operations always produce a value whose type matches one of the arguments. It’s also unclear whether such division should produce a float or a double. Inferring from context would make sense, but that’s not something C is really big on.

Quick test: 7 / 2 is 3½, not 3.

Integrous: Bash, bc, C#, D, expr, F#, Fortran, Go, OCaml, Python 2, Ruby, Rust (hard to avoid).

Afloat: awk (no integers), Clojure (produces a rational!), Groovy, JavaScript (no integers), Lua (no integers until 5.3), Nim, Perl 5 (no integers), Perl 6, PHP, Python 3.

Special mention: Haskell disallows / on integers. Nim, Perl 6, Python, and probably others have separate integral division operators: div, div, and //, respectively.

## Bytestrings

Strings” in C are arrays of 8-bit characters. They aren’t really strings at all, since they can’t hold the vast majority of characters without some further form of encoding. Exactly what the encoding is and how to handle it is left entirely up to the programmer. This is a pain in the ass.

Some languages caught wind of this Unicode thing in the 90s and decided to solve this problem once and for all by making “wide” strings with 16-bit characters. (Even C95 has this, in the form of wchar_t* and L"..." literals.) Unicode, you see, would never have more than 65,536 characters.

Whoops, so much for that. Now we have strings encoded as UTF-16 rather than UTF-8, so we’re paying extra storage cost and we still need to write extra code to do basic operations right. Or we forget, and then later we have to track down a bunch of wonky bugs because someone typed a 💩.

Note that handling characters/codepoints is very different from handling glyphs, i.e. the distinct shapes you see on screen. Handling glyphs doesn’t even really make sense outside the context of a font, because fonts are free to make up whatever ligatures they want. Remember “diverse” emoji? Those are ligatures of three to seven characters, completely invented by a font vendor. A programming language can’t reliably count the display length of that, especially when new combining behaviors could be introduced at any time.

Also, it doesn’t matter how you solve this problem, as long as it appears to be solved. I believe Ruby uses bytestrings, for example, but they know their own encoding, so they can be correctly handled as sequences of codepoints. Having a separate non-default type or methods does not count, because everyone will still use the wrong thing first — sorry, Python 2.

Quick test: what’s the length of “💩”? If 1, you have real unencoded strings. If 2, you have UTF-16 strings. If 4, you have UTF-8 strings. If something else, I don’t know what the heck is going on.

Totally bytes: Lua, Python 2 (separate unicode type).

Comes up short: Java, JavaScript.

One hundred emoji: Python 3, Ruby, Rust.

Special mention: Perl 5 gets the quick test right if you put use utf8; at the top of the file, but Perl 5’s Unicode support is such a confusing clusterfuck that I can’t really give it a 💯.

## Autoincrement and autodecrement

I don’t think there are too many compelling reasons to have ++. It means the same as += 1, which is still nice and short. The only difference is that people can do stupid unreadable tricks with ++.

One exception: it is possible to overload ++ in ways that don’t make sense as += 1 — for example, C++ uses ++ to advance iterators, which may do any arbitrary work under the hood.

Double plus ungood:

Double plus good: Python

Special mention: Perl 5 and PHP both allow ++ on strings, in which case it increments letters or something, but I don’t know if much real code has ever used this.

## !

A pet peeve. Spot the difference:

 1 2 3 4 5 6 if (looks_like_rain()) { ... } if (!looks_like_rain()) { ... } 

That single ! is ridiculously subtle, which seems wrong to me when it makes an expression mean its polar opposite. Surely it should stick out like a sore thumb. The left parenthesis makes it worse, too; it blends in slightly as just noise.

It helps a bit to space after the ! in cases like this:

 1 2 3 if (! looks_like_rain()) { ... } 

But this seems to be curiously rare. The easy solution is to just spell the operator not. At which point the other two might as well be and and or.

Interestingly enough, C95 specifies and, or, not, and some others as standard alternative spellings, though I’ve never seen them in any C code and I suspect existing projects would prefer I not use them.

Not right: ACS, awk, C#, D, Go, Groovy, Java, JavaScript, Nemerle, PHP, R, Rust, Scala, Swift, Tcl, Vala.

Spelled out: Ada, ALGOL, BASIC, COBOL, Erlang, F#, Fortran, Haskell, Lisps, Lua, Nim, OCaml, Pascal, PostScript, Python, Smalltalk, Standard ML.

Special mention: APL and Julia both use ~, which is at least easier to pick out, which is more than I can say for most of APL. bc and expr, which are really calculators, have no concept of Boolean operations. Forth and Icon, which are not calculators, don’t seem to either. Perl and Ruby have both symbolic and named Boolean operators (Perl 6 has even more), with different precedence (which inside if won’t matter), but I believe the named forms are preferred.

## Single return and out parameters

Because C can only return a single value, and that value is often an indication of failure for the sake of an if, “out” parameters are somewhat common.

 1 2 double x, y; get_point(&x, &y); 

It’s not immediately clear whether x and y are input or output. Sometimes they might function as both. (And of course, in this silly example, you’d be better off returning a single point struct. Or would you use a point out parameter because returning structs is potentially expensive?)

Some languages have doubled down on this by adding syntax to declare “out” parameters, which removes the ambiguity in the function definition, but makes it worse in function calls. In the above example, using & on an argument is at least a decent hint that the function wants to write to those values. If you have implicit out parameters or pass-by-reference or whatever, that would just be get_point(x, y) and you’d have no indication that those arguments are special in any way.

The vast majority of the time, this can be expressed in a more straightforward way by returning multiple values:

 1 x, y = get_point() 

That was intended as Python, but technically, Python doesn’t have multiple returns! It seems to, but it’s really a combination of several factors: a tuple type, the ability to make a tuple literal with just commas, and the ability to unpack a tuple via multiple assignment. In the end it works just as well. Also this is a way better use of the comma operator than in C.

But the exact same code could appear in Lua, which has multiple return/assignment as an explicit feature… and no tuples. The difference becomes obvious if you try to assign the return value to a single variable instead:

 1 point = get_point() 

In Python, point would be a tuple containing both return values. In Lua, point would be the x value, and y would be silently discarded. I don’t tend to be a fan of silently throwing data away, but I have to admit that Lua makes pretty good use of this in several places for “optional” return values that the caller can completely ignore if desired. An existing function can even be extended to return more values than before — that would break callers in Python, but work just fine in Lua.

(Also, to briefly play devil’s advocate: I once saw Python code that returned 14 values all with very complicated values, types, and semantics. Maybe don’t do that. I think I cleaned it up to return an object, which simplified the calling code considerably too.)

It’s also possible to half-ass this. ECMAScript 6::

 1 2 3 4 5 function get_point() { return [1, 2]; } var [x, y] = get_point(); 

It works, but it doesn’t actually look like multiple return. The trouble is that JavaScript has C’s comma operator and C’s variable declaration syntax, so neither of the above constructs could’ve left off the brackets without significantly changing the syntax:

  1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 function get_point() { // Whoops! This uses the comma operator, which evaluates to its last // operand, so it just returns 2 return 1, 2; } // Whoops! This is multiple declaration, where each variable gets its own "=", // so it assigns nothing to x and the return value to y var x, y = get_point(); // Now x is undefined and y is 2 

This is still better than either out parameters or returning an explicit struct that needs manual unpacking, but it’s not as good as comma-delimited tuples. Note that some languages require parentheses around tuples (and also call them tuples), and I’m arbitrarily counting that as better than bracket.

Single return: Ada, ALGOL, BASIC, C#, COBOL, Fortran, Groovy, Java, Smalltalk.

Half-assed multiple return: C++11, D, ECMAScript 6, Erlang, PHP.

Multiple return via tuples: F#, Go, Haskell, Julia, Nemerle, Nim, OCaml, Perl (just lists really), Python, Ruby, Rust, Scala, Standard ML, Swift, Tcl.

Native multiple return: Common Lisp, Lua.

Special mention: Forth is stack-based, and all return values are simply placed on the stack, so multiple return isn’t a special case. Unix shell functions don’t return values. Visual Basic sets a return value by assigning to the function’s name (?!), so good luck fitting multiple return in there.

## Silent errors

Most runtime errors in C are indicated by one of two mechanisms: returning an error code, or segfaulting. Segfaulting is pretty noisy, so that’s okay, except for the exploit potential and all.

Returning an error code kinda sucks. Those tend to be important, but nothing in the language actually reminds you to check them, and of course we silly squishy humans have the habit of assuming everything will succeed at all times. Which is how I segfaulted git two days ago: I found a spot where it didn’t check for a NULL returned as an error.

There are several alternatives here: exceptions, statically forcing the developer to check for an error code, or using something monad-like to statically force the developer to distinguish between an error and a valid return value. Probably some others. In the end I was surprised by how many languages went the exception route.

Quietly wrong: Unix shells. Wow, yeah, I’m having a hard time naming anything else. Good job, us!

Exceptional: Ada, C++, C#, D, Erlang, Forth, Java (exceptions are even part of function signature), JavaScript, Nemerle, Nim, Objective-C, OCaml, Perl 6, Python, Ruby, Smalltalk, Standard ML, Visual Basic.

Monadic: Haskell (Either), Rust (Result).

Special mention: ACS doesn’t really have many operations that can error, and those that do simply halt the script. ALGOL apparently has something called “mending” that I don’t understand. Go tends to use secondary return values, which calling code has to unpack, making them slightly harder to forget about. Lisps have conditions and call/cc, which are different things entirely. Lua and Perl 5 handle errors by taking down the whole program, but offer a construct that can catch that further up the stack, which is clumsy but enough to emulate try..catch. PHP has exceptions, and errors (which are totally different), and a lot of builtin functions that return error codes. Swift has something that looks like exceptions, but it doesn’t involve stack unwinding and does require some light annotation, so I think it’s all sugar for a monadic return value. Visual Basic, and I believe some other BASICs, decided C wasn’t bad enough and introduced the bizarre On Error Resume Next construct which does exactly what it sounds like.

## Nulls

I think it’s considerably worse in a statically typed language like C, because the whole point is that you can rely on the types. But a double* might be NULL, which is not actually a pointer to a double; it’s a pointer to a segfault. Other kinds of bad pointers are possible, of course, but those are more an issue of memory safety; allowing any reference to be null violates type safety. The root of the problem is treating null as a possible value of any type, when really it’s its own type entirely.

The alternatives tend to be either opt-in nullability or an “optional” generic type (a monad!) which eliminates null as its own value entirely. Notably, Swift does it both ways: optional types are indicated by a trailing ?, but that’s just syntactic sugar for Option<T>.

On the other hand, while it’s annoying to get a None where I didn’t expect one in Python, it’s not like I’m surprised. I occasionally get a string where I expected a number, too. The language explicitly leaves type concerns in my hands. My real objection is to having a static type system that lies. So I’m not going to list every single dynamic language here, because not only is it consistent with the rest of the type system, but they don’t really have any machinery to prevent this anyway.

Nothing doing: C#, D, Go, Java, Nim (non-nullable types are opt in), R.

Nullable types: Swift.

Monads: F# (Option — though technically F# also inherits null from .NET), Haskell (Maybe), Rust (Option), Swift (Optional).

Special mention: awk, Tcl, and Unix shells only have strings, so in a surprising twist, they have no concept of null whatsoever. Java recently introduced an Optional<T> type which explicitly may or may not contain a value, but since it’s still a non-primitive, it could also be null. C++17 doesn’t quite have the same problem with std::optional<T>, since non-reference values can’t be null. Inform 7’s nothing value is an object (the root of half of its type system), which means any object variable might be nothing, but any value of a more specific type cannot be nothing. JavaScript has two null values, null and undefined. Perl 6 is really big on static types, but claims its Nil object doesn’t exist, and I don’t know how to even begin to unpack that.

## Assignment as expression

How common a mistake is this:

 1 2 3 if (x = 3) { ... } 

Well, I don’t know, actually. Maybe not that common, save for among beginners. But I sort of wonder whether allowing this buys us anything. I can only think of two cases where it does. One is with something like iteration:

 1 2 3 4 // Typical linked list while (p = p->next) { ... } 

But this is only necessary in C in the first place because it has no first-class notion of iteration. The other is shorthand for checking that a function returned a useful value:

 1 2 3 if (ptr = get_pointer()) { ... } 

But if a function returns NULL, that’s really an error condition, and presumably you have some other way to handle that too.

What does that leave? The only time I remotely miss this in Python (where it’s illegal) is when testing a regex. You tend to see this a lot instead.

 1 2 3 m = re.match('x+y+z+', some_string) if m: ... 

re treats failure as an acceptable possibility and returns None, rather than raising an exception. I’m not sure whether this was the right thing to do or not, but off the top of my head I can’t think of too many other Python interfaces that sometimes return None.

Some languages go entirely the opposite direction and make everything an expression, including block constructs like if. In those languages, it makes sense for assignment to be an expression, for consistency with everything else.

Assignment’s an expression: ACS, C#, D, Java, JavaScript, Perl, PHP, Swift.

Everything’s an expression: Ruby, Rust.

Assignment’s a statement: Inform 7, Lua, Python, Unix shells.

Special mention: BASIC uses = for both assignment and equality testing — the meaning is determined from context. Functional languages generally don’t have an assignment operator. Rust has a special if let block that explicitly combines assignment with pattern matching, which is way nicer than the C approach.

## No hyphens in identifiers

snake_case requires dancing on the shift key (unless you rearrange your keyboard, which is perfectly reasonable). It slows you down slightly and leads to occasional mistakes like snake-Case. The alternative is dromedaryCase, which is objectively wrong and doesn’t actually solve this problem anyway.

Why not just allow hyphens in identifiers, so we can avoid this argument and use kebab-case?

Ah, but then it’s ambiguous whether you mean an identifier or the subtraction operator. No problem: require spaces for subtraction. I don’t think a tiny way you’re allowed to make your code harder to read is really worth this clear advantage.

Low score: ACS, C#, D, Java, JavaScript, OCaml, Pascal, Perl 5, PHP, Python, Ruby, Rust, Swift, Unix shells.

Nicely-named: COBOL, CSS (and thus Sass), Forth, Inform 7, Lisps, Perl 6, XML.

Special mention: Perl has a built-in variable called $-, and Ruby has a few called $-n for various values of “n”, but these are very special cases.

## Braces and semicolons

Okay. Hang on. Bear with me.

C code looks like this.

 1 2 3 4 5 some block header { line 1; line 2; line 3; } 

The block is indicated two different ways here. The braces are for the compiler; the indentation is for humans.

Having two different ways to say the same thing means they can get out of sync. They can disagree. And that can be, as previously mentioned, really bad. This is really just a more general form of the problem of optional block delimiters.

The only solution is to eliminate one of the two. Programming languages exist for the benefit of humans, so we obviously can’t get rid of the indentation. Thus, we should get rid of the braces. QED.

As an added advantage, we reclaim all the vertical space wasted on lines containing only a }, and we can stop squabbling about where to put the {.

If you accept this, you might start to notice that there are also two different ways of indicating where a line ends: with semicolons for the compiler, and with vertical whitespace for humans. So, by the same reasoning, we should lose the semicolons.

Right? Awesome. Glad we’re all on the same page.

Some languages use keywords instead of braces, but the effect is the same. I’m not aware of any languages that use keywords instead of semicolons.

Bracing myself: C#, D, Erlang, Java, Perl, Rust.

Braces, but no semicolons: JavaScript (kinda — see below), Lua, Ruby, Swift.

Free and clear: CoffeeScript, Haskell, Python.

Special mention: Lisp, just, in general. Inform 7 has an indented style, but it still requires semicolons.

Here’s some interesting trivia. JavaScript, Lua, and Python all optionally allow semicolons at the end of a statement, but the way each language determines line continuation is very different.

JavaScript takes an “opt-out” approach: it continues reading lines until it hits a semicolon, or until reading the next line would cause a syntax error. That leaves a few corner cases like starting a new line with a (, which could look like the last thing on the previous line is a function you’re trying to call. Or you could have -foo on its own line, and it would parse as subtraction rather than unary negation. You might wonder why anyone would do that, but using unary + is one way to make function parse as an expression rather than a statement! I’m not so opposed to semicolons that I want to be debugging where the language thinks my lines end, so I just always use semicolons in JavaScript.

Python takes an “opt-in” approach: it assumes, by default, that a statement ends at the end of a line. However, newlines inside parentheses or brackets are ignored, which takes care of 99% of cases — long lines are most frequently caused by function calls (which have parentheses!) with a lot of arguments. If you really need it, you can explicitly escape a newline with \\, but this is widely regarded as incredibly ugly.

Lua avoids the problem almost entirely. I believe Lua’s grammar is designed such that it’s almost always unambiguous where a statement ends, even if you have no newlines at all. This has a few weird side effects: void expressions are syntactically forbidden in Lua, for example, so you just can’t have -foo as its own statement. Also, you can’t have code immediately following a return, because it’ll be interpreted as a return value. The upside is that Lua can treat newlines just like any other whitespace, but still not need semicolons. In fact, semicolons aren’t statement terminators in Lua at all — they’re their own statement, which does nothing. Alas, not for lack of trying, Lua does have the same ( ambiguity as JavaScript (and parses it the same way), but I don’t think any of the others exist.

Oh, and the colons that Python has at the end of its block headers, like if foo:? As far as I can tell, they serve no syntactic purpose whatsoever. Purely aesthetic.

## Blaming the programmer

Perhaps one of the worst misfeatures of C is the ease with which responsibility for problems can be shifted to the person who wrote the code. “Oh, you segfaulted? I guess you forgot to check for NULL.” If only I had a computer to take care of such tedium for me!

Clearly, computers can’t be expected to do everything for us. But they can be expected to do quite a bit. Programming languages are built for humans, and they ought to eliminate the sorts of rote work humans are bad at whenever possible. A programmer is already busy thinking about the actual problem they want to solve; it’s no surprise that they’ll sometimes forget some tedious detail the language forces them to worry about.

So if you’re designing a language, don’t just copy C. Don’t just copy C++ or Java. Hell, don’t even just copy Python or Ruby. Consider your target audience, consider the problems they’re trying to solve, and try to get as much else out of the way as possible. If the same “mistake” tends to crop up over and over, look for a way to modify the language to reduce or eliminate it. And be sure to look at a lot of languages for inspiration — even ones you hate, even weird ones no one uses! A lot of clever people have had a lot of other ideas in the last 44 years.

I hope you enjoyed this accidental cross-reference of several dozen languages! I enjoyed looking through them all, though it was incredibly time-consuming. Some of them look pretty interesting; maybe give them a whirl.

Also, dammit, now I’m thinking about language design again.

# Let’s stop copying C

Post Syndicated from Eevee original https://eev.ee/blog/2016/12/01/lets-stop-copying-c/

Ah, C. The best lingua franca we have… because we have no other lingua francas. Linguae franca. Surgeons general?

C is fairly old — 44 years, now! — and comes from a time when there were possibly more architectures than programming languages. It works well for what it is, and what it is is a relatively simple layer of indirection atop assembly.

Alas, the popularity of C has led to a number of programming languages’ taking significant cues from its design, and parts of its design are… slightly questionable. I’ve gone through some common features that probably should’ve stayed in C and my justification for saying so. The features are listed in rough order from (I hope) least to most controversial. The idea is that C fans will give up when I call it “weakly typed” and not even get to the part where I rag on braces. Wait, crap, I gave it away.

I’ve listed some languages that do or don’t take the same approach as C. Plenty of the listed languages have no relation to C, and some even predate it — this is meant as a cross-reference of the landscape (and perhaps a list of prior art), not a genealogy. The language selections are arbitrary and based on what I could cobble together from documentation, experiments, Wikipedia, and attempts to make sense of Rosetta Code. I don’t know everything about all of them, so I might be missing some interesting quirks. Things are especially complicated for very old languages like COBOL or Fortran, which by now have numerous different versions and variants and de facto standard extensions.

Unix shells” means some handwaved combination that probably includes bash and its descendants; for expressions, it means the (( ... )) syntax. I didn’t look too closely into, say, fish. Unqualified “Python” means both 2 and 3; likewise, unqualified “Perl” means both 5 and 6. Also some of the puns are perhaps a little too obtuse, but the first group listed is always C-like.

## Textual inclusion

#include is not a great basis for a module system. It’s not even a module system. You can’t ever quite tell what symbols came from which files, or indeed whether particular files are necessary at all. And in languages with C-like header files, most headers include other headers include more headers, so who knows how any particular declaration is actually ending up in your code? Oh, and there’s the whole include guards thing.

It’s a little tricky to pick on individual languages here, because ultimately even the greatest module system in the world boils down to “execute this other file, and maybe do some other stuff”. I think the true differentiating feature is whether including/importing/whatevering a file creates a new namespace. If a file gets dumped into the caller’s namespace, that looks an awful lot like textual inclusion; if a file gets its own namespace, that’s a good sign of something more structured happening behind the scenes.

This tends to go hand-in-hand with how much the language relies on a global namespace. One surprising exception is Lua, which can compartmentalize required files quite well, but dumps everything into a single global namespace by default.

Quick test: if you create a new namespace and import another file within that namespace, do its contents end up in that namespace?

Included: ACS, awk, COBOL, Erlang, Forth, Fortran, most older Lisps, Perl 5 (despite that required files must return true), PHP, Unix shells.

Excluded: Ada, Clojure, D, Haskell, Julia, Lua (the file’s return value is returned from require), Nim, Node (similar to Lua), Perl 6, Python, Rust.

Special mention: ALGOL appears to have been designed with the assumption that you could include other code by adding its punch cards to your stack. C#, Java, OCaml, and Swift all have some concept of “all possible code that will be in this program”, sort of like C with inferred headers, so imports are largely unnecessary; Java’s import really just does aliasing. Inform 7 has no namespacing, but does have a first-class concept of external libraries, but doesn’t have a way to split a single project up between multiple files. Ruby doesn’t automatically give required files their own namespace, but doesn’t evaluate them in the caller’s namespace either.

## Optional block delimiters

Old and busted and responsible for gotofail:

 1 2 if (condition) thing; 

New hotness, which reduces the amount of punctuation overall and eliminates this easy kind of error:

 1 2 3 if condition { thing; } 

To be fair, and unlike most of these complaints, the original idea was a sort of clever consistency: the actual syntax was merely if (expr) stmt, and also, a single statement could always be replaced by a block of statements. Unfortunately, the cuteness doesn’t make up for the ease with which errors sneak in. If you’re stuck with a language like this, I advise you always use braces, possibly excepting the most trivial cases like immediately returning if some argument is NULL. Definitely do not do this nonsense, which I saw in actual code not 24 hours ago.

  1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 for (x = ...) for (y = ...) { ... } // more code for (x = ...) for (y = ...) buffer[y][x] = ... 

The only real argument for omitting the braces is that the braces take up a lot of vertical space, but that’s mostly a problem if you put each { on its own line, and you could just not do that.

Some languages use keywords instead of braces, and in such cases it’s vanishingly rare to make the keywords optional.

Blockheads: ACS, awk, C#, D, Erlang (kinda?), Java, JavaScript.

New kids on the block: Go, Perl 6, Rust, Swift.

Had their braces removed: Ada, ALGOL, BASIC, COBOL, CoffeeScript, Forth, Fortran (but still requires parens), Haskell, Lua, Ruby.

Special mention: Inform 7 has several ways to delimit blocks, none of them vulnerable to this problem. Perl 5 requires both the parentheses and the braces… but it lets you leave off the semicolon on the last statement. Python just uses indentation to delimit blocks in the first place, so you can’t have a block look wrong. Lisps exist on a higher plane of existence where the very question makes no sense.

## Bitwise operator precedence

For ease of transition from B, in C, the bitwise operators & | ^ have lower precedence than the comparison operators == and friends. That means they happen later. For binary math operators, this is nonsense.

 1 2 3 1 + 2 == 3 // (1 + 2) == 3 1 * 2 == 3 // (1 * 2) == 3 1 | 2 == 3 // 1 | (2 == 3) 

Many other languages have copied C’s entire set of operators and their precedence, including this. Because a new language is easier to learn if its rules are familiar, you see. Which is why we still, today, have extremely popular languages maintaining compatibility with a language from 1969 — so old that it probably couldn’t get a programming job.

Honestly, if your language is any higher-level than C, I’m not sure bit operators deserve to be operators at all. Free those characters up to do something else. Consider having a first-class bitfield type; then 99% of the use of bit operations would go away.

Quick test: 1 & 2 == 2 evaluates to 1 with C precedence, false otherwise. Or just look at a precedence table: if equality appears between bitwise ops and other math ops, that’s C style.

A bit wrong: D, expr, JavaScript, Perl 5, PHP.

Wisened up: F# (ops are &&& ||| ^^^), Go, Julia, Lua (bitwise ops are new in 5.3), Perl 6 (ops are +& +| +^), Python, Ruby, Rust, SQL, Swift, Unix shells.

Special mention: C# and Java have C’s precedence, but forbid using bitwise operators on booleans, so the quick test is a compile-time error. Lisp-likes have no operator precedence.

## Negative modulo

The modulo operator, %, finds the remainder after division. Thus you might think that this always holds:

 1 0 <= a % b < abs(b) 

But no — if a is negative, C will produce a negative value. (Well, since C99; before that it was unspecified, which is probably worse.) This is so a / b * b + a % b is always equal to a. Truncating integer division rounds towards zero, so the sign of a % b always needs to be away from zero.

I’ve never found this behavior (or the above equivalence) useful. An easy example is that checking for odd numbers with x % 2 == 1 will fail for negative numbers, which produce -1. But the opposite behavior can be pretty handy.

Consider the problem of having n items that you want to arrange into rows with c columns. A calendar, say; you want to include enough empty cells to fill out the last row. n % c gives you the number of items on the last row, so c - n % c seems like it will give you the number of empty spaces. But if the last row is already full, then n % c is zero, and c - n % c equals c! You’ll have either a double-width row or a spare row of empty cells. Fixing this requires treating n % c == 0 as a special case, which is unsatisfying.

Ah, but if we have positive %, the answer is simply… -n % c! Consider this number line for n = 5 and c = 3:

 1 2 -6 -3 0 3 6 | - x x | x x x | x x x | x x - | 

a % b tells you how far to count down to find a multiple of b. For positive a, that means “backtracking” over a itself and finding a smaller number. For negative a, that means continuing further away from zero. If you look at negative numbers as the mirror image of positive numbers, then % on a positive number tells you how to much to file off to get a multiple, whereas % on a negative number tells you how much further to go to get a multiple. 5 % 3 is 2, but -5 % 3 is 1. And of course, -6 % 3 is still zero, so that’s not a special case.

Positive % effectively lets you choose whether to round up or down. It doesn’t come up often, but when it’s handy, it’s really handy.

(I have no strong opinion on what 5 % -3 should be; I don’t think I’ve ever tried to use % with a negative divisor. Python makes it negative; Pascal makes it positive. Wikipedia has a whole big chart.)

Quick test: -5 % 3 is -2 with C semantics, 1 with “positive” semantics.

Leftovers: C#, D, expr, Go, Java, JavaScript, OCaml, PowerShell, PHP, Rust, Scala, SQL, Swift, Unix shells, VimL, Visual Basic. Notably, some of these languages don’t even have integer division.

Paying dividends: Dart, MUMPS (#), Perl, Python, R (%%), Ruby, Smalltalk (\\\\), Standard ML, Tcl.

Special mention: Ada, Haskell, Julia, many Lisps, MATLAB, VHDL, and others have separate mod (Python-like) and rem (C-like) operators. CoffeeScript has separate % (C-like) and %% (Python-like) operators.

Octal notation like 0777 has three uses.

One: to make a file mask to pass to chmod().

Two: to confuse people when they write 013 and it comes out as 11.

Three: to confuse people when they write 018 and get a syntax error.

If you absolutely must have octal (?!) in your language, it’s fine to use 0o777. Really. No one will mind. Or you can go the whole distance and allow literals written in any base, as several languages do.

Gets a zero: awk (gawk only), Clojure, Go, Groovy, Java, JavaScript, m4, Perl 5, PHP, Python 2, Unix shells.

G0od: ECMAScript 6, Eiffel (0c — cute!), F#, Haskell, Julia, Nemerle, Nim, OCaml, Perl 6, Python 3, Ruby, Rust, Scheme (#o), Swift, Tcl.

Based literals: Ada (8#777#), Bash (8#777), Erlang (8#777), Icon (8r777), J (8b777), Perl 6 (:8<777>), PostScript (8#777), Smalltalk (8r777).

Special mention: BASIC uses &O and &H prefixes for octal and hex. bc and Forth allow the base used to interpret literals to be changed on the fly, via ibase and BASE respectively. C#, D, expr, Lua, Scala, and Standard ML have no octal literals at all. Some COBOL extensions use O# and H#/X# prefixes for octal and hex. Fortran uses the slightly odd O'777' syntax.

## No power operator

Perhaps this makes sense in C, since it doesn’t correspond to an actual instruction on most CPUs, but in JavaScript? If you can make + work for strings, I think you can add a **.

If you’re willing to ditch the bitwise operators (or lessen their importance a bit), you can even use ^, as most people would write in regular ASCII text.

Powerless: ACS, C#, Eiffel, Erlang, expr, Forth, Go.

Two out of two stars: Ada, ALGOL (↑ works too), COBOL, CoffeeScript, ECMAScript 7, Fortran, F#, Groovy, OCaml, Perl, PHP, Python, Ruby, Unix shells.

I tip my hat: awk, BASIC, bc, COBOL, fish, Lua.

Otherwise powerful: APL (⋆), D (^^).

Special mention: Lisps tend to have a named function rather than a dedicated operator (e.g. Math/pow in Clojure, expt in Common Lisp), but since operators are regular functions, this doesn’t stand out nearly so much. Haskell uses all three of ^, ^^, and ** for typing reasons.

## C-style for loops

This construct is bad. It very rarely matches what a human actually wants to do, which 90% of the time is “go through this list of stuff” or “count from 1 to 10”. A C-style for obscures those wishes. The syntax is downright goofy, too: nothing else in the language uses ; as a delimiter and repeatedly executes only part of a line. It’s like a tuple of statements.

I said in my previous post about iteration that having an iteration protocol requires either objects or closures, but I realize that’s not true. I even disproved it in the same post. Lua’s own iteration protocol can be implemented without closures — the semantics of for involve keeping a persistent state value and passing it to the iterator function every time. It could even be implemented in C! Awkwardly. And with a bunch of macros. Which aren’t hygenic in C. Hmm, well.

Loopy: ACS, bc, Fortran.

Cool and collected: C#, Clojure, D, Delphi (recent), ECMAScript 6, Eiffel (recent), Go, Groovy, Icon, Inform 7, Java, Julia, Logo, Lua, Nemerle, Nim, Objective-C, Perl, PHP, PostScript, Prolog, Python, R, Rust, Scala, Smalltalk, Swift, Tcl, Unix shells, Visual Basic.

Special mention: Functional languages and Lisps are laughing at the rest of us here. awk has for...in, but it doesn’t iterate arrays in order which makes it rather less useful. JavaScript (pre ES6) has both for...in and for each...in, but both are differently broken, so you usually end up using C-style for or external iteration. BASIC has an ergonomic numeric loop, but no iteration loop. Ruby mostly uses external iteration, and its for block is actually expressed in those terms.

## Switch with default fallthrough

We’ve been through this before. Wanting completely separate code per case is, by far, the most common thing to want to do. It makes no sense to have to explicitly opt out of the more obvious behavior.

Breaks my heart: Java, JavaScript.

Follows through: Ada, BASIC, CoffeeScript, Go (has a fallthrough statement), Lisps, Ruby, Swift (has a fallthrough statement), Unix shells.

Special mention: C# and D require break, but require something one way or the other — implicit fallthrough is disallowed except for empty cases. Perl 5 historically had no switch block built in, but it comes with a Switch module, and the last seven releases have had an experimental given block which I stress is still experimental. Python has no switch block. Erlang, Haskell, and Rust have pattern-matching instead (which doesn’t allow fallthrough at all).

## Type first

 1 int foo; 

In C, this isn’t too bad. You get into problems when you remember that it’s common for type names to be all lowercase.

 1 foo * bar; 

Is that a useless expression, or a declaration? It depends entirely on whether foo is a variable or a type.

It gets a little weirder when you consider that there are type names with spaces in them. And storage classes. And qualifiers. And sometimes part of the type comes after the name.

 1 extern const volatile _Atomic unsigned long long int * restrict foo[]; 

That’s not even getting into the syntax for types of function pointers, which might have arbitrary amounts of stuff after the variable name.

And then C++ came along with generics, which means a type name might also have other type names nested arbitrarily deep.

 1 extern const volatile std::unordered_map>::const_iterator>> foo; 

And that’s just a declaration! Imagine if there were an assignment in there too.

The great thing about static typing is that I know the types of all the variables, but that advantage is somewhat lessened if I can’t tell what the variables are.

Between type-first, function pointer syntax, Turing-complete duck-typed templates, and C++’s initialization syntax, there are several ways where parsing C++ is ambiguous or even undecidable! “Undecidable” here means that there exist C++ programs which cannot even be parsed into a syntax tree, because the same syntax means two different things depending on whether some expression is a value or a type, and that question can depend on an endlessly recursive template instantiation. (This is also a great example of ambiguity, where x * y(z) could be either an expression or a declaration.)

Contrast with, say, Rust:

 1 let x: ... = ...; 

This is easy to parse, both for a human and a computer. The thing before the colon must be a variable name, and it stands out immediately; the thing after the colon must be a type name. Even better, Rust has pretty good type inference, so the type is probably unnecessary anyway.

Of course, languages with no type declarations whatsoever are immune to this problem.

Most vexing: ACS, ALGOL, C#, D (though [] goes on the type), Fortran, Java, Perl 6.

Looks Lovely: Ada, Boo, F#, Go, Python 3 (via annotation syntax and the typing module), Rust, Swift, TypeScript.

Special mention: BASIC uses trailing type sigils to indicate scalar types.

## Weak typing

Please note: this is not the opposite of static typing. Weak typing is more about the runtime behavior of values — if I try to use a value of type T as though it were of type U, will it be implicitly converted?

C lets you assign pointers to int variables and then take square roots of them, which seems like a bad idea to me. C++ agreed and nixed this, but also introduced the ability to make your own custom types implicitly convertible to as many other types you want.

This one is pretty clearly a spectrum, and I don’t have a clear line. For example, I don’t fault Python for implicitly converting between int and float, because int is infinite-precision and float is 64-bit, so it’s usually fine. But I’m a lot more suspicious of C, which lets you assign an int to a char without complaint. (Well, okay. Literal integers in C are ints, which poses a slight problem.)

I do count a combined addition/concatenation operator that accepts different types of arguments as a form of weak typing.

Weak: JavaScript (+), PHP, Unix shells (almost everything’s a string, but even arrays/scalars are somewhat interchangeable).

Strong: F#, Go (explicit numeric casts), Haskell, Python, Rust (explicit numeric casts).

Special mention: ACS only has integers; even fixed-point values are stored in integers, and the compiler has no notion of a fixed-point type, making it the weakest language imaginable. C++ and Scala both allow defining implicit conversions, for better or worse. Perl 5 is weak, but it avoids most of the ambiguity by having entirely separate sets of operators for string vs numeric operations. Python 2 is mostly strong, but that whole interchangeable bytes/text thing sure caused some ruckus. Tcl only has strings.

Hey, new programmers!” you may find yourself saying. “Don’t worry, it’s just like math, see? Here’s how to use $LANGUAGE as a calculator.” Oh boy!” says your protégé. “Let’s see what 7 ÷ 2 is! Oh, it’s 3. I think the computer is broken.” They’re right! It is broken. I have genuinely seen a non-trivial number of people come into #python thinking division is “broken” because of this. To be fair, C is pretty consistent about making math operations always produce a value whose type matches one of the arguments. It’s also unclear whether such division should produce a float or a double. Inferring from context would make sense, but that’s not something C is really big on. Quick test: 7 / 2 is 3½, not 3. Integrous: bc, C#, D, expr, F#, Fortran, Go, OCaml, Python 2, Ruby, Rust (hard to avoid), Unix shells. Afloat: awk (no integers), Clojure (produces a rational!), Groovy, JavaScript (no integers), Lua (no integers until 5.3), Nim, Perl 5 (no integers), Perl 6, PHP, Python 3. Special mention: Haskell disallows / on integers. Nim, Haskell, Perl 6, Python, and probably others have separate integral division operators: div, div, div, and //, respectively. ## Bytestrings Strings” in C are arrays of 8-bit characters. They aren’t really strings at all, since they can’t hold the vast majority of characters without some further form of encoding. Exactly what the encoding is and how to handle it is left entirely up to the programmer. This is a pain in the ass. Some languages caught wind of this Unicode thing in the 90s and decided to solve this problem once and for all by making “wide” strings with 16-bit characters. (Even C95 has this, in the form of wchar_t* and L"..." literals.) Unicode, you see, would never have more than 65,536 characters. Whoops, so much for that. Now we have strings encoded as UTF-16 rather than UTF-8, so we’re paying extra storage cost and we still need to write extra code to do basic operations right. Or we forget, and then later we have to track down a bunch of wonky bugs because someone typed a 💩. Note that handling characters/codepoints is very different from handling glyphs, i.e. the distinct shapes you see on screen. Handling glyphs doesn’t even really make sense outside the context of a font, because fonts are free to make up whatever ligatures they want. Remember “diverse” emoji? Those are ligatures of three to seven characters, completely invented by a font vendor. A programming language can’t reliably count the display length of that, especially when new combining behaviors could be introduced at any time. Also, it doesn’t matter how you solve this problem, as long as it appears to be solved. I believe Ruby uses bytestrings, for example, but they know their own encoding, so they can be correctly handled as sequences of codepoints. Having a separate non-default type or methods does not count, because everyone will still use the wrong thing first — sorry, Python 2. Quick test: what’s the length of “💩”? If 1, you have real unencoded strings. If 2, you have UTF-16 strings. If 4, you have UTF-8 strings. If something else, I don’t know what the heck is going on. Totally bytes: Go, Lua, Python 2 (separate unicode type). Comes up short: Java, JavaScript. One hundred emoji: Python 3, Ruby, Rust, Swift (even gets combining characters right!). Special mention: Go’s strings are explicitly arbitrary byte sequences, but iterating over a string with for..range decodes UTF-8 code points. Perl 5 gets the quick test right if you put use utf8; at the top of the file, but Perl 5’s Unicode support is such a confusing clusterfuck that I can’t really give it a 💯. Hmm. This one is kind of hard to track down for sure without either knowing a lot about internals or installing fifty different interpreters/compilers. ## Increment and decrement I don’t think there are too many compelling reasons to have ++. It means the same as += 1, which is still nice and short. The only difference is that people can do stupid unreadable tricks with ++. One exception: it is possible to overload ++ in ways that don’t make sense as += 1 — for example, C++ uses ++ to advance iterators, which may do any arbitrary work under the hood. Double plus ungood: ACS, awk, C#, D, Go, Java, JavaScript, Perl, Unix shells, Vala. Double plus good: Lua (which doesn’t have += either), Python, Ruby, Rust, Swift (removed in v3). Special mention: Perl 5 and PHP both allow ++ on strings, in which case it increments letters or something, but I don’t know if much real code has ever used this. ## ! A pet peeve. Spot the difference:  1 2 3 4 5 6 if (looks_like_rain()) { ... } if (!looks_like_rain()) { ... }  That single ! is ridiculously subtle, which seems wrong to me when it makes an expression mean its polar opposite. Surely it should stick out like a sore thumb. The left parenthesis makes it worse, too; it blends in slightly as just noise. It helps a bit to space after the ! in cases like this:  1 2 3 if (! looks_like_rain()) { ... }  But this seems to be curiously rare. The easy solution is to just spell the operator not. At which point the other two might as well be and and or. Interestingly enough, C95 specifies and, or, not, and some others as standard alternative spellings, though I’ve never seen them in any C code and I suspect existing projects would prefer I not use them. Not right: ACS, awk, C#, D, Go, Groovy, Java, JavaScript, Nemerle, PHP, R, Rust, Scala, Swift, Tcl, Vala. Spelled out: Ada, ALGOL, BASIC, COBOL, Erlang, F#, Fortran, Haskell, Inform 7, Lisps, Lua, Nim, OCaml, Pascal, PostScript, Python, Smalltalk, Standard ML. Special mention: APL and Julia both use ~, which is at least easier to pick out, which is more than I can say for most of APL. bc and expr, which are really calculators, have no concept of Boolean operations. Forth and Icon, which are not calculators, don’t seem to either. Inform 7 often blends the negation into the verb, e.g. if the player does not have.... Perl and Ruby have both symbolic and named Boolean operators (Perl 6 has even more), with different precedence (which inside if won’t matter); I believe Perl 5 prefers the words and Ruby prefers the symbols. Perl and Ruby also both have a separate unless block, with the opposite meaning to if. Python has is not and not in operators. ## Single return and out parameters Because C can only return a single value, and that value is often an indication of failure for the sake of an if, “out” parameters are somewhat common.  1 2 double x, y; get_point(&x, &y);  It’s not immediately clear whether x and y are input or output. Sometimes they might function as both. (And of course, in this silly example, you’d be better off returning a single point struct. Or would you use a point out parameter because returning structs is potentially expensive?) Some languages have doubled down on this by adding syntax to declare “out” parameters, which removes the ambiguity in the function definition, but makes it worse in function calls. In the above example, using & on an argument is at least a decent hint that the function wants to write to those values. If you have implicit out parameters or pass-by-reference or whatever, that would just be get_point(x, y) and you’d have no indication that those arguments are special in any way. The vast majority of the time, this can be expressed in a more straightforward way by returning multiple values:  1 x, y = get_point()  That was intended as Python, but technically, Python doesn’t have multiple returns! It seems to, but it’s really a combination of several factors: a tuple type, the ability to make a tuple literal with just commas, and the ability to unpack a tuple via multiple assignment. In the end it works just as well. Also this is a way better use of the comma operator than in C. But the exact same code could appear in Lua, which has multiple return/assignment as an explicit feature… and no tuples. The difference becomes obvious if you try to assign the return value to a single variable instead:  1 point = get_point()  In Python, point would be a tuple containing both return values. In Lua, point would be the x value, and y would be silently discarded. I don’t tend to be a fan of silently throwing data away, but I have to admit that Lua makes pretty good use of this in several places for “optional” return values that the caller can completely ignore if desired. An existing function can even be extended to return more values than before — that would break callers in Python, but work just fine in Lua. (Also, to briefly play devil’s advocate: I once saw Python code that returned 14 values all with very complicated values, types, and semantics. Maybe don’t do that. I think I cleaned it up to return an object, which simplified the calling code considerably too.) It’s also possible to half-ass this. ECMAScript 6::  1 2 3 4 5 function get_point() { return [1, 2]; } var [x, y] = get_point();  It works, but it doesn’t actually look like multiple return. The trouble is that JavaScript has C’s comma operator and C’s variable declaration syntax, so neither of the above constructs could’ve left off the brackets without significantly changing the syntax:   1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 function get_point() { // Whoops! This uses the comma operator, which evaluates to its last // operand, so it just returns 2 return 1, 2; } // Whoops! This is multiple declaration, where each variable gets its own "=", // so it assigns nothing to x and the return value to y var x, y = get_point(); // Now x is undefined and y is 2  This is still better than either out parameters or returning an explicit struct that needs manual unpacking, but it’s not as good as comma-delimited tuples. Note that some languages require parentheses around tuples (and also call them tuples), and I’m arbitrarily counting that as better than bracket. Single return: Ada, ALGOL, BASIC, C#, COBOL, Fortran, Groovy, Java, Smalltalk. Half-assed multiple return: C++11, D, ECMAScript 6, Erlang, PHP. Multiple return via tuples: F#, Haskell, Julia, Nemerle, Nim, OCaml, Perl (just lists really), Python, Ruby, Rust, Scala, Standard ML, Swift, Tcl. Native multiple return: Common Lisp, Go, Lua. Special mention: C# has explicit syntax for out parameters, but it’s a compile-time error to not assign to all of them, which is slightly better than C. Forth is stack-based, and all return values are simply placed on the stack, so multiple return isn’t a special case. Unix shell functions don’t return values. Visual Basic sets a return value by assigning to the function’s name (?!), so good luck fitting multiple return in there. ## Silent errors Most runtime errors in C are indicated by one of two mechanisms: returning an error code, or segfaulting. Segfaulting is pretty noisy, so that’s okay, except for the exploit potential and all. Returning an error code kinda sucks. Those tend to be important, but nothing in the language actually reminds you to check them, and of course we silly squishy humans have the habit of assuming everything will succeed at all times. Which is how I segfaulted git two days ago: I found a spot where it didn’t check for a NULL returned as an error. There are several alternatives here: exceptions, statically forcing the developer to check for an error code, or using something monad-like to statically force the developer to distinguish between an error and a valid return value. Probably some others. In the end I was surprised by how many languages went the exception route. Quietly wrong: Unix shells. Wow, yeah, I’m having a hard time naming anything else. Good job, us! And even Unix shells have set -e; it’s just opt-in. Exceptional: Ada, C++, C#, D, Erlang, Forth, Java (exceptions are even part of function signature), JavaScript, Nemerle, Nim, Objective-C, OCaml, Perl 6, Python, Ruby, Smalltalk, Standard ML, Visual Basic. Monadic: Haskell (Either), Rust (Result). Special mention: ACS doesn’t really have many operations that can error, and those that do simply halt the script. ALGOL apparently has something called “mending” that I don’t understand. Go tends to use secondary return values, which calling code has to unpack, making them slightly harder to forget about; it also allows both the assignment and the error check together in the header of an if. Lisps have conditions and call/cc, which are different things entirely. Lua and Perl 5 handle errors by taking down the whole program, but offer a construct that can catch that further up the stack, which is clumsy but enough to emulate try..catch. PHP has exceptions, and errors (which are totally different), and a lot of builtin functions that return error codes. Swift has something that looks like exceptions, but it doesn’t involve stack unwinding and does require some light annotation — apparently sugar for an “out” parameter holding an error. Visual Basic, and I believe some other BASICs, decided C wasn’t bad enough and introduced the bizarre On Error Resume Next construct which does exactly what it sounds like. ## Nulls I think it’s considerably worse in a statically typed language like C, because the whole point is that you can rely on the types. But a double* might be NULL, which is not actually a pointer to a double; it’s a pointer to a segfault. Other kinds of bad pointers are possible, of course, but those are more an issue of memory safety; allowing any reference to be null violates type safety. The root of the problem is treating null as a possible value of any type, when really it’s its own type entirely. The alternatives tend to be either opt-in nullability or an “optional” generic type (a monad!) which eliminates null as its own value entirely. Notably, Swift does it both ways: optional types are indicated by a trailing ?, but that’s just syntactic sugar for Option<T>. On the other hand, while it’s annoying to get a None where I didn’t expect one in Python, it’s not like I’m surprised. I occasionally get a string where I expected a number, too. The language explicitly leaves type concerns in my hands. My real objection is to having a static type system that lies. So I’m not going to list every single dynamic language here, because not only is it consistent with the rest of the type system, but they don’t really have any machinery to prevent this anyway. Nothing doing: C#, D, Go, Java, Nim (non-nullable types are opt in). Nullable types: Swift (sugar for a monad). Monads: F# (Option — though technically F# also inherits null from .NET), Haskell (Maybe), Rust (Option), Swift (Optional). Special mention: awk, Tcl, and Unix shells only have strings, so in a surprising twist, they have no concept of null whatsoever. Java recently introduced an Optional<T> type which explicitly may or may not contain a value, but since it’s still a non-primitive, it could also be null. C++17 doesn’t quite have the same problem with std::optional<T>, since non-reference values can’t be null. Inform 7’s nothing value is an object (the root of half of its type system), which means any object variable might be nothing, but any value of a more specific type cannot be nothing. JavaScript has two null values, null and undefined. Perl 6 is really big on static types, but claims its Nil object doesn’t exist, and I don’t know how to even begin to unpack that. R and SQL have a more mathematical kind of NULL, which tends to e.g. vanish from lists. ## Assignment as expression How common a mistake is this:  1 2 3 if (x = 3) { ... }  Well, I don’t know, actually. Maybe not that common, save for among beginners. But I sort of wonder whether allowing this buys us anything. I can only think of two cases where it does. One is with something like iteration:  1 2 3 4 // Typical linked list while (p = p->next) { ... }  But this is only necessary in C in the first place because it has no first-class notion of iteration. The other is shorthand for checking that a function returned a useful value:  1 2 3 if (ptr = get_pointer()) { ... }  But if a function returns NULL, that’s really an error condition, and presumably you have some other way to handle that too. What does that leave? The only time I remotely miss this in Python (where it’s illegal) is when testing a regex. You tend to see this a lot instead.  1 2 3 m = re.match('x+y+z+', some_string) if m: ...  re treats failure as an acceptable possibility and returns None, rather than raising an exception. I’m not sure whether this was the right thing to do or not, but off the top of my head I can’t think of too many other Python interfaces that sometimes return None. Freedom of expression: ACS, C#, Java, JavaScript, Perl, PHP, Swift. Makes a statement: Inform 7, Lua, Python, Unix shells. Special mention: BASIC uses = for both assignment and equality testing — the meaning is determined from context. D allows variable declaration as an expression, so if (int x = 3) is allowed, but regular assignment is not. Functional languages generally don’t have an assignment operator. Go disallows assignment as an expression, but assignment and a test can appear together in an if condition, and this is an idiomatic way to check success. Ruby makes everything an expression, so assignment might as well be too. Rust makes everything an expression, but assignment evaluates to the useless () value (due to ownership rules), so it’s not actually useful. Rust and Swift both have a special if let block that explicitly combines assignment with pattern matching, which is way nicer than the C approach. ## No hyphens in identifiers snake_case requires dancing on the shift key (unless you rearrange your keyboard, which is perfectly reasonable). It slows you down slightly and leads to occasional mistakes like snake-Case. The alternative is dromedaryCase, which is objectively wrong and doesn’t actually solve this problem anyway. Why not just allow hyphens in identifiers, so we can avoid this argument and use kebab-case? Ah, but then it’s ambiguous whether you mean an identifier or the subtraction operator. No problem: require spaces for subtraction. I don’t think a tiny way you’re allowed to make your code harder to read is really worth this clear advantage. Low scoring: ACS, C#, D, Java, JavaScript, OCaml, Pascal, Perl 5, PHP, Python, Ruby, Rust, Swift, Unix shells. Nicely-designed: COBOL, CSS (and thus Sass), Forth, Inform 7, Lisps, Perl 6, XML. Special mention: Perl has a built-in variable called $-, and Ruby has a few called $-n for various values of “n”, but these are very special cases. ## Braces and semicolons Okay. Hang on. Bear with me. C code looks like this.  1 2 3 4 5 some block header { line 1; line 2; line 3; }  The block is indicated two different ways here. The braces are for the compiler; the indentation is for humans. Having two different ways to say the same thing means they can get out of sync. They can disagree. And that can be, as previously mentioned, really bad. This is really just a more general form of the problem of optional block delimiters. The only solution is to eliminate one of the two. Programming languages exist for the benefit of humans, so we obviously can’t get rid of the indentation. Thus, we should get rid of the braces. QED. As an added advantage, we reclaim all the vertical space wasted on lines containing only a }, and we can stop squabbling about where to put the {. If you accept this, you might start to notice that there are also two different ways of indicating where a line ends: with semicolons for the compiler, and with vertical whitespace for humans. So, by the same reasoning, we should lose the semicolons. Right? Awesome. Glad we’re all on the same page. Some languages use keywords instead of braces, but the effect is the same. I’m not aware of any languages that use keywords instead of semicolons. Bracing myself: C#, D, Erlang, Java, Perl, Rust. Braces, but no semicolons: Go (ASI), JavaScript (ASI — see below), Lua, Ruby, Swift. Free and clear: CoffeeScript, Haskell, Python. Special mention: Lisp, just, in general. Inform 7 has an indented style, but it still requires semicolons. MUMPS doesn’t support nesting at all, but I believe there are extensions that use dots to indicate it. Here’s some interesting trivia. JavaScript, Lua, and Python all optionally allow semicolons at the end of a statement, but the way each language determines line continuation is very different. JavaScript takes an “opt-out” approach: it continues reading lines until it hits a semicolon, or until reading the next line would cause a syntax error. (This approach is called automatic semicolon insertion.) That leaves a few corner cases like starting a new line with a (, which could look like the last thing on the previous line is a function you’re trying to call. Or you could have -foo on its own line, and it would parse as subtraction rather than unary negation. You might wonder why anyone would do that, but using unary + is one way to make function parse as an expression rather than a statement! I’m not so opposed to semicolons that I want to be debugging where the language thinks my lines end, so I just always use semicolons in JavaScript. Python takes an “opt-in” approach: it assumes, by default, that a statement ends at the end of a line. However, newlines inside parentheses or brackets are ignored, which takes care of 99% of cases — long lines are most frequently caused by function calls (which have parentheses!) with a lot of arguments. If you really need it, you can explicitly escape a newline with \\, but this is widely regarded as incredibly ugly. Lua avoids the problem almost entirely. I believe Lua’s grammar is designed such that it’s almost always unambiguous where a statement ends, even if you have no newlines at all. This has a few weird side effects: void expressions are syntactically forbidden in Lua, for example, so you just can’t have -foo as its own statement. Also, you can’t have code immediately following a return, because it’ll be interpreted as a return value. The upside is that Lua can treat newlines just like any other whitespace, but still not need semicolons. In fact, semicolons aren’t statement terminators in Lua at all — they’re their own statement, which does nothing. Alas, not for lack of trying, Lua does have the same ( ambiguity as JavaScript (and parses it the same way), but I don’t think any of the others exist. Oh, and the colons that Python has at the end of its block headers, like if foo:? As far as I can tell, they serve no syntactic purpose whatsoever. Purely aesthetic. ## Blaming the programmer Perhaps one of the worst misfeatures of C is the ease with which responsibility for problems can be shifted to the person who wrote the code. “Oh, you segfaulted? I guess you forgot to check for NULL.” If only I had a computer to take care of such tedium for me! Clearly, computers can’t be expected to do everything for us. But they can be expected to do quite a bit. Programming languages are built for humans, and they ought to eliminate the sorts of rote work humans are bad at whenever possible. A programmer is already busy thinking about the actual problem they want to solve; it’s no surprise that they’ll sometimes forget some tedious detail the language forces them to worry about. So if you’re designing a language, don’t just copy C. Don’t just copy C++ or Java. Hell, don’t even just copy Python or Ruby. Consider your target audience, consider the problems they’re trying to solve, and try to get as much else out of the way as possible. If the same “mistake” tends to crop up over and over, look for a way to modify the language to reduce or eliminate it. And be sure to look at a lot of languages for inspiration — even ones you hate, even weird ones no one uses! A lot of clever people have had a lot of other ideas in the last 44 years. I hope you enjoyed this accidental cross-reference of several dozen languages! I enjoyed looking through them all, though it was incredibly time-consuming. Some of them look pretty interesting; maybe give them a whirl. Also, dammit, now I’m thinking about language design again. # A Rebuttal For Python 3 Post Syndicated from Eevee original https://eev.ee/blog/2016/11/23/a-rebuttal-for-python-3/ Zed Shaw, of Learn Python the Hard Way fame, has now written The Case Against Python 3. I’m not involved with core Python development. The only skin I have in this game is that I like Python 3. It’s a good language. And one of the big factors I’ve seen slowing its adoption is that respected people in the Python community keep grouching about it. I’ve had multiple newcomers tell me they have the impression that Python 3 is some kind of unusable disaster, though they don’t know exactly why; it’s just something they hear from people who sound like they know what they’re talking about. Then they actually use the language, and it’s fine. I’m sad to see the Python community needlessly sabotage itself, but Zed’s contribution is beyond the pale. It’s not just making a big deal about changed details that won’t affect most beginners; it’s complete and utter nonsense, on a platform aimed at people who can’t yet recognize it as nonsense. I am so mad. ## The Case Against Python 3 I give two sets of reasons as I see them now. One for total beginners, and another for people who are more knowledgeable about programming. Just to note: the two sets of reasons are largely the same ideas presented differently, so I’ll just weave them together below. The first section attempts to explain the case against starting with Python 3 in non-technical terms so a beginner can make up their own mind without being influenced by propaganda or social pressure. Having already read through this once, this sentence really stands out to me. The author of a book many beginners read to learn Python in the first place is providing a number of reasons (some outright fabricated) not to use Python 3, often in terms beginners are ill-equipped to evaluate, but believes this is a defense against propaganda or social pressure. ## The Most Important Reason Before getting into the main technical reasons I would like to discuss the one most important social reason for why you should not use Python 3 as a beginner: THERE IS A HIGH PROBABILITY THAT PYTHON 3 IS SUCH A FAILURE IT WILL KILL PYTHON. Python 3’s adoption is really only at about 30% whenever there is an attempt to measure it. Wait, really? Wow, that’s fantastic. I mean, it would probably be higher if the most popular beginner resources were actually teaching Python 3, but you know. Nobody is all that interested in finding out what the real complete adoption is, despite there being fairly simple ways to gather metrics on the adoption. This accusatory sentence conspicuously neglects to mention what these fairly simple ways are, a pattern that repeats throughout. The trouble is that it’s hard to even define what “adoption” means — I write all my code in Python 3 now, but veekun is still Python 2 because it’s in maintenance mode, so what does that say about adoption? You could look at PyPI download stats, but those are thrown way off by caches and system package managers. You could look at downloads from the Python website, but a great deal of Python is written and used on Unix-likes, where Python itself is either bundled or installed from the package manager. It’s as simple as that. If you learn Python 2, then you can still work with all the legacy Python 2 code in existence until Python dies or you (hopefully) move on. But if you learn Python 3 then your future is very uncertain. You could really be learning a dead language and end up having to learn Python 2 anyway. You could use Python 2, until it dies… or you could use Python 3, which might die. What a choice. By some definitions, Python 2 is already dead — it will not see another major release, only security fixes. Python 3 is still actively developed, and its seventh major release is next month. It even contains a new feature that Zed later mentions he prefers to Python 2’s offerings. It may shock you to learn that I know both Python 2 and Python 3. Amazingly, two versions of the same language are much more similar than they are different. If you learned Python 3 and then a wizard cast a spell that made it vanish from the face of the earth, you’d just have to spend half an hour reading up on what had changed from Python 2. Also, it’s been over a decade, maybe even multiple decades, and Python 3 still isn’t above about 30% in adoption. Even among the sciences where Python 3 is touted as a “success” it’s still only around 25-30% adoption. After that long it’s time to admit defeat and come up with a new plan. Python 3.0 came out in 2008. The first couple releases ironed out some compatibility and API problems, so it didn’t start to gain much traction until Python 3.2 came out in 2011. Hell, Python 2.0 came out in 2000, so even Python 2 isn’t multiple decades old. It would be great if this trusted beginner reference could take two seconds to check details like this before using them to scaremonger. The big early problem was library compatibility: it’s hard to justify switching to a new version of the language if none of the libraries work. Libraries could only port once their own dependencies had ported, of course, and it took a couple years to figure out the best way to maintain compatibility with both Python 2 and Python 3. I’d say we only really hit critical mass a few years ago — for instance, Django didn’t support Python 3 until 2013 — in which case that 30% is nothing to sneeze at. There are more reasons beyond just the uncertain future of Python 3 even decades later. In one paragraph, we’ve gone from “maybe even multiple decades” to just “decades”, which is a funny way to spell “eight years”. ## Not In Your Best Interests The Python project’s efforts to convince you to start with Python 3 are not in your best interest, but, rather, are only in the best interests of the Python project. It’s bad, you see, for the Python project to want people to use the work it produced. Anyway, please buy Zed Shaw’s book. Anyway, please pledge to my Patreon. Ultimately though, if Python 3 were good they wouldn’t need to do any convincing to get you to use it. It would just naturally work for you and you wouldn’t have any problems. Instead, there are serious issues with Python 3 for beginners, and rather than fix those issues the Python project uses propaganda, social pressure, and marketing to convince you to use it. In the world of technology using marketing and propaganda is immediately a sign that the technology is defective in some obvious way. This use of social pressure and propaganda to convince you to use Python 3 despite its problems, in an attempt to benefit the Python project, is morally unconscionable to me. Ten paragraphs in, Zed is telling me that I should be suspicious of anything that relies on marketing and propaganda. Meanwhile, there has yet to be a single concrete reason why Python 3 is bad for beginners — just several flat-out incorrect assertions and a lot of handwaving about how inexplicably nefarious the Python core developers are. You know, the same people who made Python 2. But they weren’t evil then, I guess. ## You Should Be Able to Run 2 and 3 In the programming language theory there is this basic requirement that, given a “complete” programming language, I can run any other programming language. In the world of Java I’m able to run Ruby, Java, C++, C, and Lua all at the same time. In the world of Microsoft I can run F#, C#, C++, and Python all at the same time. This isn’t just a theoretical thing. There is solid math behind it. Math that is truly the foundation of computer science. The fact that you can’t run Python 2 and Python 3 at the same time is purely a social and technical decision that the Python project made with no basis in mathematical reality. This means you are working with a purposefully broken platform when you use Python 3, and I personally can’t condone teaching people to use something that is fundamentally broken. The programmer-oriented section makes clear that the solid math being referred to is Turing-completeness — the section is even titled “Python 3 Is Not Turing Complete”. First, notice a rhetorical trick here. You can run Ruby, Java, C++, etc. at the same time, so why not Python 2 and Python 3? But can you run Java and C# at the same time? (I’m sure someone has done this, but it’s certainly much less popular than something like Jython or IronPython.) Can you run Ruby 1.8 and Ruby 2.3 at the same time? Ah, no, so I guess Ruby 2.3 is fundamentally and purposefully broken. Can you run Lua 5.1 and 5.3 at the same time? Lua is a spectacular example, because Lua 5.2 made a breaking change to how the details of scope work, and it’s led to a situation where a lot of programs that embed Lua haven’t bothered upgrading from Lua 5.1. Was Lua 5.2 some kind of dark plot to deliberately break the language? No, it’s just slightly more inconvenient than expected for people to upgrade. Anyway, as for Turing machines: In computer science a fundamental law is that if I have one Turing Machine I can build any other Turing Machine. If I have COBOL then I can bootstrap a compiler for FORTRAN (as disgusting as that might be). If I have FORTH, then I can build an interpreter for Ruby. This also applies to bytecodes for CPUs. If I have a Turing Complete bytecode then I can create a compiler for any language. The rule then can be extended even further to say that if I cannot create another Turing Machine in your language, then your language cannot be Turing Complete. If I can’t use your language to write a compiler or interpreter for any other language then your language is not Turing Complete. Yes, this is true. Currently you cannot run Python 2 inside the Python 3 virtual machine. Since I cannot, that means Python 3 is not Turing Complete and should not be used by anyone. And this is completely asinine. Worse, it’s flat-out dishonest, and relies on another rhetorical trick. You only “cannot” run Python 2 inside the Python 3 VM because no one has written a Python 2 interpreter in Python 3. The “cannot” is not a mathematical impossibility; it’s a simple matter of the code not having been written. Or perhaps it has, but no one cares anyway, because it would be comically and unusably slow. I assume this was meant to be sarcastic on some level, since it’s followed by a big blue box that seems unsure about whether to double down or reverse course. But I can’t tell why it was even brought up, because it has absolutely nothing to do with Zed’s true complaint, which is that Python 2 and Python 3 do not coexist within a single environment. Implementing language X using language Y does not mean that X and Y can now be used together seamlessly. The canonical Python release is written in C (just like with Ruby or Lua), but you can’t just dump a bunch of C code into a Python (or Ruby or Lua) file and expect it to work. You can talk to C from Python and vice versa, but defining how they communicate is a bit of a pain in the ass and requires some level of setup. I’ll get into this some more shortly. ## No Working Translator Python 3 comes with a tool called 2to3 which is supposed to take Python 2 code and translate it to Python 3 code. I should point out right off the bat that this is not actually what you want to use most of the time, because you probably want to translate your Python 2 code to Python 2/3 code. 2to3 produces code that most likely will not work on Python 2. Other tools exist to help you port more conservatively. Translating one programming language into another is a solidly researched topic with solid math behind it. There are translators that convert any number of languages into JavaScript, C, C++, Java, and many times you have no idea the translation is being done. In addition to this, one of the first steps when implementing a new language is to convert the new language into an existing language (like C) so you don’t have to write a full compiler. Translation is a fully solved problem. This is completely fucking ludicrous. Translating one programming language to another is a common task, though “fully solved” sounds mighty questionable. But do you know what the results look like? I found a project called “Transcrypt”, which puts Python in the browser by “translating” it to JavaScript. I’ve never used or heard of this before; I just googled for something to convert Python to JavaScript. Here’s their first sample, a demo using jQuery:   1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 def start (): def changeColors (): for div in S__divs: S (div) .css ({ 'color': 'rgb({},{},{})'.format (* [int (256 * Math.random ()) for i in range (3)]), }) S__divs = S ('div') changeColors () window.setInterval (changeColors, 500)  And here’s the JavaScript code it compiles to:   1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 (function () { var start = function () { var changeColors = function () { var __iterable0__ =$divs; for (var __index0__ = 0; __index0__ < __iterable0__.length; __index0__++) { var div = __iterable0__ [__index0__]; $(div).css (dict ({'color': 'rgb({},{},{})'.format.apply (null, function () { var __accu0__ = []; for (var i = 0; i < 3; i++) { __accu0__.append (int (256 * Math.random ())); } return __accu0__; } ())})); } }; var$divs = \$ ('div'); changeColors (); window.setInterval (changeColors, 500); }; __pragma__ ('') __all__.start = start; __pragma__ ('') }) (); 

Well, not quite. That’s actually just a small piece at the end of the full 1861-line file.

You may notice that the emitted JavaScript effectively has to emulate the Python for loop, because JavaScript doesn’t have anything that works exactly the same way. And this is a basic, common language feature translated between two languages in the same general family! Imagine how your code would look if you relied on gritty details of how classes are implemented.

Is this what you want 2to3 to do to your code?

Even if something has been proven to be mathematically possible, that doesn’t mean it’s easy, and it doesn’t mean the results will be pretty (or fast).

The 2to3 translator fails on about 15% of the code it attempts, and does a poor job of translating the code it can handle. The motivations for this are unclear, but keep in mind that a group of people who claim to be programming language experts can’t write a reliable translator from one version of their own language to another. This is also a cause of their porting problems, which adds up to more evidence Python 3’s future is uncertain.

Writing a translator from one language to another is a fully proven and fundamental piece of computer science. Yet, the 2to3 translator cannot translate code 100%. In my own tests it is only about 85% effective, leaving a large amount of code to translate manually. Given that translation is a solved problem this seems to be a decision bordering on malice rather than incredible incompetence.

The programmer-oriented section doubles down on this idea with a title of “Purposefully Crippled 2to3 Translator” — again, accusing the Python project of sabotaging everyone. That doesn’t even make sense; if their goal is to make everyone use Python 3 at any cost, why would they deliberately break their tool that reduces the amount of Python 2 code and increases the amount of Python 3 code?

2to3 sucks because its job is hard. Python is dynamically typed. If it sees d.iteritems(), it might want to change that to d.items(), as it’s called in Python 3 — but it can’t always be sure that d is actually a dict. If d is some user-defined type, renaming the method is wrong.

But hey, Turing-completeness, right? It must be mathematically possible. And it is! As long as you’re willing to see this:

 1 2 for key, value in d.iteritems(): ... 

Get translated to this:

 1 2 3 __d = d for key, value in (__d.items() if isinstance(__d, dict) else __d.iteritems()): ... 

Would Zed be happier with that, I wonder?

## The JVM and CLR Prove It’s Pointless

Yet, for some reason, the Python 3 virtual machine can’t run Python 2? Despite the solidly established mathematics disproving this, the countless examples of running one crazy language inside a Russian doll cascade of other crazy languages, and huge number of languages that can coexist in nearly every other virtual machine? That makes no sense.

This, finally, is the real complaint. It’s not a bad one, and it comes up sometimes, but… it’s not this easy.

The Python 3 VM is fairly similar to the Python 2 VM. The problem isn’t the VM, but the core language constructs and standard library.

Consider: what happens when a Python 2 old-style class instance gets passed into Python 3, which has no such concept? It seems like a value would have to always have the semantics of the language version it came from — that’s how languages usually coexist on the same VM, anyway.

Now, I’m using Python 3, and I load some library written for Python 2. I call a Python 2 function that deals with bytestrings, and I pass it a Python 3 bytestring. Oh no! It breaks because Python 3 bytestrings iterate as integers, whereas the Python 2 library expects them to iterate as characters.

Okay, well, no big deal, you say. Maybe Python 2 libraries just need to be updated to work either way, before they can be used with Python 3.

But that’s exactly the situation we’re in right now. Syntax changes are trivially fixed by 2to3 and similar tools. It’s libraries that cause the subtler issues.

The same applies the other way, too. I write Python 3 code, and it gets an int from some Python 2 library. I try to use the .to_bytes method on it, but that doesn’t exist on Python 2 integers. So my Python 3 code, written and intended purely for Python 3, now has to deal with Python 2 integers as well.

Perhaps “primitive” types should convert automatically, on the boundary? Okay, sure. What about the Python 2 buffer type, which is C-backed and replaced by memoryview in Python 3?

Or how about this very fundamental problem: names of methods and other attributes are str in both versions, but that means they’re bytestrings in Python 2 and text in Python 3. If you’re in Python 3 land, and you call obj.foo() on a Python 2 object, what happens? Python 3 wants a method with the text name foo, but Python 2 wants a method with the bytes name foo. Text and bytes are not implicitly convertible in Python 3. So does it error? Somehow work anyway? What about the other way around?

What about the standard library, which has had a number of improvements in Python 3 that don’t or can’t exist in Python 2? Should Python ship two entire separate copies of its standard library? What about modules like logging, which rely on global state? Does Python 2 and Python 3 code need to set up logging separately within the same process?

There are no good solutions here. The language would double in size and complexity, and you’d still end up with a mess at least as bad as the one we have now when values leak from one version into the other.

We either have two situations here:

1. Python 3 has been purposefully crippled to prevent Python 2’s execution alongside Python 3 for someone’s professional or ideological gain.
2. Python 3 cannot run Python 2 due to simple incompetence on the part of the Python project.

I can think of a third.

## Difficult To Use Strings

The strings in Python 3 are very difficult to use for beginners. In an attempt to make their strings more “international” they turned them into difficult to use types with poor error messages.

Why is “international” in scare quotes?

Every time you attempt to deal with characters in your programs you’ll have to understand the difference between byte sequences and Unicode strings.

Given that I’m reading part of a book teaching Python, this would be a perfect opportunity to drive this point home by saying “Look! Running exercise N in Python 3 doesn’t work.” Exercise 1, at least, works fine for me with a little extra sprinkle of parentheses:

 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 print("Hello World!") print("Hello Again") print("I like typing this.") print("This is fun.") print('Yay! Printing.') print("I'd much rather you 'not'.") print('I "said" do not touch this.') 

Contrast with the actual content of that exercise — at the bottom is a big red warning box telling people from “another country” (relative to where?) that if they get errors about ASCII encodings, they should put an unexplained magical incantation at the top of their scripts to fix “Unicode UTF-8”, whatever that is. I wonder if Zed has read his own book.

Don’t know what that is? Exactly.

If only there were a book that could explain it to beginners in more depth than “you have to fix this if you’re foreign”.

The Python project took a language that is very forgiving to beginners and mostly “just works” and implemented strings that require you to constantly know what type of string they are. Worst of all, when you get an error with strings (which is very often) you get an error message that doesn’t tell you what variable names you need to fix.

The complaint is that this happens in Python 3, whereas it’s accepted in Python 2:

 1 2 3 4 >>> b"hello" + "hello" Traceback (most recent call last): File "", line 1, in TypeError: can't concat bytes to str 

The programmer section is called “Statically Typed Strings”. But this is not static typing. That’s strong typing, a property that sets Python’s type system apart from languages like JavaScript. It’s usually considered a good thing, because the alternative is to silently produce nonsense in some cases, and then that nonsense propagates through your program and is hard to track down when it finally causes problems.

If they’re going to require beginners to struggle with the difference between bytes and Unicode the least they could do is tell people what variables are bytes and what variables are strings.

That would be nice, but it’s not like this is a new problem. Try this in Python 2.

 1 2 3 4 >>> 3 + "hello" Traceback (most recent call last): File "", line 1, in TypeError: unsupported operand type(s) for +: 'int' and 'str' 

How would Python even report this error when I used literals instead of variables? How could custom types hook into such a thing? Error messages are hard.

By the way, did you know that several error messages are much improved in Python 3? Python 2 is somewhat notorious for the confusing errors it produces when an argument is missing from a method call, but Python 3 is specific about the problem, which is much friendlier to beginners.

However, when you point out that this is hard to use they try to claim it’s good for you. It is not. It’s simple blustering covering for a poor implementation.

I don’t know what about this is hard. Why do you have a text string and a bytestring in the first place? Why is it okay to refuse adding a number to a string, but not to refuse adding bytes to a string?

Imagine if one of the Python core developers were just getting into Python 2 and messing around.

 1 2 3 # -*- coding: utf8 -*- print "Hi, my name is Łukasz Langa." print "Hi, my name is Łukasz Langa."[::-1] 
 1 2 Hi, my name is Łukasz Langa. .agnaL zsaku�� si eman ym ,iH 

Good luck figuring out how to fix that.

This isn’t blustering. Bytes are not text; they are binary data that could encode anything. They happen to look like text sometimes, and you can get away with thinking they’re text if you’re not from “another country”, but that mindset will lead you to write code that is wrong. The resulting bugs will be insidious and confusing, and you’ll have a hard time even reasoning about them because it’ll seem like “Unicode text” is somehow a different beast altogether from “ASCII text”.

Exercise 11 mentions at the end that you can use int() to convert a number to an integer. It’s no more complicated to say that you convert bytes to a string using .decode(). It shouldn’t even come up unless you’re explicitly working with binary data, and I don’t see any reading from sockets in LPTHW.

It’s also not statically compiled as strongly as it could be, so you can’t find these kinds of type errors until you run the code.

This comes a scant few paragraphs after “Dynamic typing is what makes Python easy to use and one of the reasons I advocate it for beginners.”

You can’t find any kinds of type errors until you run the code. Welcome to dynamic typing.

Strings are also most frequently received from an external source, such as a network socket, file, or similar input. This means that Python 3’s statically typed strings and lack of static type safety will cause Python 3 applications to crash more often and have more security problems when compared with Python 2.

On the contrary — Python 3 applications should crash less often. The problem with silently converting between bytestrings and text in Python 2 is that it might fail, depending on the contents. "cafe" + u"hello" works fine, but "café" + u"hello" raises a UnicodeDecodeError. Python 2 makes it very easy to write code that appears to work when tested with ASCII data, but later breaks with anything else, even though the values are still the same types. In Python 3, you get an error the first time you try to run such code, regardless of what’s in the actual values. That’s the biggest reason for the change: it improves things from being intermittent value errors to consistent type errors.

More security problems? This is never substantiated, and seems to have been entirely fabricated.

## Too Many Formatting Options

In addition to that you will have 3 different formatting options in Python 3.6. That means you’ll have to learn to read and use multiple ways to format strings that are all very different. Not even I, an experienced professional programmer, can easily figure out these new formatting systems or keep up with their changing features.

I don’t know what on earth “keep up with their changing features” is supposed to mean, and Zed doesn’t bother to go into details.

Python 3 has three ways to format strings: % interpolation, str.format(), and the new f"" strings in Python 3.6. The f"" strings use the same syntax as str.format(); the difference is that where str.format() uses numbers or names of keyword arguments, f"" strings just use expressions. Compare:

 1 2 3 number = 133 print("{n:02x}".format(n=number)) print(f"{number:02x}") 

This isn’t “very different”. A frequently-used method is being promoted to syntax.

I really like this new style, and I have no idea why this wasn’t the formatting for Python 3 instead of that stupid .format function. String interpolation is natural for most people and easy to explain.

The problem is that beginner will now how to know all three of these formatting styles, and that’s too many.

I could swear Zed, an experienced professional programmer, just said he couldn’t easily figure out these new formatting systems. Note also that str.format() has existed in Python 2 since Python 2.6 was released in 2008, so I don’t know why Zed said “new formatting systems“, plural.

This is a truly bizarre complaint overall, because the mechanism Zed likes best is the newest one. If Python core had agreed that three mechanisms was too many, we wouldn’t be getting f"" at all.

## Even More Versions of Strings

Finally, I’m told there is a new proposal for a string type that is both bytes and Unicode at the same time? That’d be fantastic if this new type brings back the dynamic typing that makes Python easy, but I’m betting it will end up being yet another static type to learn. For that reason I also think beginners should avoid Python 3 until this new “chimera string” is implemented and works reliably in a dynamic way. Until then, you will just be dealing with difficult strings that are statically typed in a dynamically typed language.

I have absolutely no idea what this is referring to, and I can’t find anyone who does. I don’t see any recent PEPs mentioning such a thing, nor anything in the last several months on the python-dev mailing list. I don’t see it in the Python 3.6 release notes.

The closest thing I can think of is the backwards-compatibility shenanigans for PEP 528 and PEP 529 — they switch to the Windows wide-string APIs for console and filesystem encoding, but pretend under the hood that the APIs take UTF-8-encoded bytes to avoid breaking libraries like Twisted. That’s a microscopic detail that should never matter to anyone but authors of Twisted, and is nothing like a new hybrid string type, but otherwise I’m at a loss.

This paragraph really is a perfect summary of the whole article. It speaks vaguely yet authoritatively about something that doesn’t seem to exist, it doesn’t bother actually investigating the thing the entire section talks about, it conjectures that this mysterious feature will be hard just because it’s in Python 3, and it misuses terminology to complain about a fundamental property of Python that’s always existed.

## Core Libraries Not Updated

Many of the core libraries included with Python 3 have been rewritten to use Python 3, but have not been updated to use its features. How could they given Python 3’s constant changing status and new features?

What “constant changing status”? The language makes new releases; is that bad? The only mention of “changing” so far was with string formatting, which makes no sense to me, because the only major change has been the addition of syntax that Zed prefers.

There are several libraries that, despite knowing the encoding of data, fail to return proper strings. The worst offender seems to be any libraries dealing with the HTTP protocol, which does indicate the encoding of the underlying byte stream in many cases.

In many cases, yes. Not in all. Some web servers don’t send back an encoding. Some files don’t have an encoding, because they’re images or other binary data. HTML allows the encoding to be given inside the document, instead. urllib has always returned bytes, so it’s not all that unreasonable to keep doing that, rather than… well, I’m not quite sure what this is proposing. Return strings sometimes?

The documentation for urllib.request and http.client both advise using the higher-level Requests library instead, in a prominent yellow box right at the top. Requests has distinct mechanisms for retrieving bytes versus text and is vastly easier to use overall, though I don’t think even it understands reading encodings from HTML. Alas, computers.

Good luck to any beginner figuring out how to install Requests on Python 2 — but thankfully, Python 3 now comes bundled with pip, which makes installing libraries much easier. Contrast with the beginning of exercise 46, which apologizes for how difficult this is to explain, lists four things to install, warns that it will be frustrating, and advises watching a video to help figure it out.

What’s even more idiotic about this is Python has a really good Chardet library for detecting the encoding of byte streams. If Python 3 is supposed to be “batteries included” then fast Chardet should be baked into the core of Python 3’s strings making it cake to translate strings to bytes even if you don’t know the underlying encoding. … Call the function whatever you want, but it’s not magic to guess at the encoding of a byte stream, it’s science. The only reason this isn’t done for you is that the Python project decided that you should be punished for not knowing about bytes vs. Unicode, and their arrogance means you have difficult to use strings.

Guessing at the encoding of a byte stream isn’t so much science as, well, guessing. Guessing means that sometimes you’re wrong. Sometimes that’s what you want, and I’m honestly ambivalent about having chardet in the standard library, but it’s hardly arrogant to not want to include a highly-fallible heuristic in your programming language.

## Conclusions and Warnings

I have resisted writing about these problems with Python 3 for 5 versions because I hoped it would become usable for beginners. Each year I would attempt to convert some of my code and write a couple small tests with Python 3 and simply fail. If I couldn’t use Python 3 reliably then there’s no way a total beginner could manage it. So each year I’d attempt it, and fail, and wait until they fix it. I really liked Python and hoped the Python project would drop their stupid stances on usability.

Let us recap the usability problems seen thusfar.

• You can’t add b"hello" to "hello".
• TypeErrors are phrased exactly the same as they were in Python 2.
• The type system is exactly as dynamic as it was in Python 2.
• There is a new formatting mechanism, using the same syntax as one in Python 2, that Zed prefers over the ones in Python 2.
• urllib.request doesn’t decode for you, just like in Python 2.
• 档牡敤㽴 isn’t built in. Oh, sorry, I meant chardet.

Currently, the state of strings is viewed as a Good Thing in the Python community. The fact that you can’t run Python 2 inside Python 3 is seen as a weird kind of tough love. The brainwashing goes so far as to outright deny the mathematics behind language translation and compilation in an attempt to motivate the Python community to brute force convert all Python 2 code.

Which is probably why the Python project focuses on convincing unsuspecting beginners to use Python 3. They don’t have a switching cost, so if you get them to fumble their way through the Python 3 usability problems then you have new converts who don’t know any better. To me this is morally wrong and is simply preying on people to prop up a project that needs a full reset to survive. It means beginners will fail at learning to code not because of their own abilities, but because of Python 3’s difficulty.

Now that we’re towards the end, it’s a good time to say this: Zed Shaw, your behavior here is fucking reprehensible.

Half of what’s written here is irrelevant nonsense backed by a vague appeal to “mathematics”. Instead of having even the shred of humility required to step back and wonder if there are complicating factors beyond whether something is theoretically possible, you have invented a variety of conflicting and malicious motivations to ascribe to the Python project.

It’s fine to criticize Python 3. The string changes force you to think about what you’re doing a little more in some cases, and occasionally that’s a pain in the ass. I absolutely get it.

But you’ve gone out of your way to invent a conspiracy out of whole cloth and promote it on your popular platform aimed at beginners, who won’t know how obviously full of it you are. And why? Because you can’t add b"hello" to "hello"? Are you kidding me? No one can even offer to help you, because instead of examples of real problems you’ve had, you gave two trivial toys and then yelled a lot about how the whole Python project is releasing mind-altering chemicals into the air.

The Python 3 migration has been hard enough. It’s taken a lot of work from a lot of people who’ve given enough of a crap to help Python evolve — to make it better to the best of their judgment and abilities. Now we’re finally, finally at the point where virtually all libraries support Python 3, a few new ones only support Python 3, and Python 3 adoption is starting to take hold among application developers.

And you show up to piss all over it, to propagate this myth that Python 3 is hamstrung to the point of unusability, because if the Great And Wise Zed Shaw can’t figure it out in ten seconds then it must just be impossible.

Fuck you.

Sadly, I doubt this will happen, and instead they’ll just rant about how I don’t know what I’m talking about and I should shut up.

This is because you don’t know what you’re talking about, and you should shut up.