Python is a good programming language, but "Python" is not a good
name.
First, python also means snake, Monty Python. If we search "python" in
google, emule, many results are not programming resource. If we search
PHP, all results are programming resource.
Second, python also means snake, snake is not a good thing in western
culture. Many people dislike any things relevant to snake. We must
have high regard for the custom.
Now, python3000 is coming. It's the best time to rename!
Athon is a good candidate, you could provide better names.
In Athon, the first letter "A" could pronounce as [ e ] .
Nov 30 '07
92  3664 
The only reason to change the name would be because of some serious
bad PR that came onto Python, thus causing its branding name to be
catagorized as something bad.
However this is not the case, presently, and the brand name is well
established and accepted. There is no reason to change its name and
while this conversation has now turned completely off this, I do not
know why you dislike it so much.
It is a rather catchy, easy to spell and say name, that "rolls off the
tongue". Frankly all the other suggested names just do not fit to me.
Why change what isn't broken?
On Dec 3, 8:22 am, cokofree...@gmail.com wrote:
The only reason to change the name would be because of some serious
bad PR that came onto Python, thus causing its branding name to be
catagorized as something bad.
However this is not the case, presently, and the brand name is well
established and accepted. There is no reason to change its name and
while this conversation has now turned completely off this, I do not
know why you dislike it so much.
It is a rather catchy, easy to spell and say name, that "rolls off the
tongue". Frankly all the other suggested names just do not fit to me.
Why change what isn't broken?
You are probably right, but let me just explain one more time why I
think a name change is worth considering, then I'll drop it.
I'm thinking about the first impression people get when they hear the
name. Python is a "funny" name -- in both senses of the word. No? Then
why did a comedy team adopt it?
You and the others here don't think it's funny because you are used to
it, but when someone hears it for the first time as the name of a
programming language, they thinks it's just a bit funny. Many other
programming languages have funny names too, so it is considered normal
-- by software people, but not necessarily by the general public.
When someone proposes that Python be considered for use by an
organization that has little or no knowledge of it, first impressions
can make a difference. When managers hear "Python" for the first time,
I'm afraid they are not inclined to consider it a serious language.
And they usually need a serious language for a serious problem. The
barrier to initial consideration is therefore just a bit higher than
it needs to be. And that barrier can be subconscious, so that no one
even realizes it exists.
I know this because I've been through it myself. When I tell people
that I use Python, I often qualify it by pointing out that it is used
extensively at Google. In other words, I'm banking on the reputation
of Google to offset the goofiness of the "Python" name.
Come to think of it, maybe it should be called "Googlang" or "Googon"?
Russ P. wrote:
On Dec 3, 8:22 am, cokofree...@gmail.com wrote:
>The only reason to change the name would be because of some serious
bad PR that came onto Python, thus causing its branding name to be
catagorized as something bad.
However this is not the case, presently, and the brand name is well
established and accepted. There is no reason to change its name and
while this conversation has now turned completely off this, I do not
know why you dislike it so much.
It is a rather catchy, easy to spell and say name, that "rolls off the
tongue". Frankly all the other suggested names just do not fit to me.
Why change what isn't broken?
You are probably right, but let me just explain one more time why I
think a name change is worth considering, then I'll drop it.
Good! (On the "drop it" part. Not so good on the "one more time"
part.) If we ignore it, maybe this thread will dry up and blow away.
I'm thinking about the first impression people get when they hear the
name. Python is a "funny" name -- in both senses of the word. No? Then
why did a comedy team adopt it?
You and the others here don't think it's funny because you are used to
it, but when someone hears it for the first time as the name of a
programming language, they thinks it's just a bit funny. Many other
programming languages have funny names too, so it is considered normal
-- by software people, but not necessarily by the general public.
When someone proposes that Python be considered for use by an
organization that has little or no knowledge of it, first impressions
can make a difference. When managers hear "Python" for the first time,
I'm afraid they are not inclined to consider it a serious language.
And they usually need a serious language for a serious problem. The
barrier to initial consideration is therefore just a bit higher than
it needs to be. And that barrier can be subconscious, so that no one
even realizes it exists.
I know this because I've been through it myself. When I tell people
that I use Python, I often qualify it by pointing out that it is used
extensively at Google. In other words, I'm banking on the reputation
of Google to offset the goofiness of the "Python" name.
Come to think of it, maybe it should be called "Googlang" or "Googon"?
Python name is not funny for me. Even the Monty Python, because its hard
to translate their jokes, and in my country they are not so popular.
Just a few ppl knows them.
I've heard it helps to be stoned out of your mind (i.e., under the
influence of illegal drugs), but I don't necessarily recommend it.
Russ P. Ã*rta:
>Python name is not funny for me. Even the Monty Python, because its hard
to translate their jokes, and in my country they are not so popular.
Just a few ppl knows them.
I've heard it helps to be stoned out of your mind (i.e., under the
influence of illegal drugs), but I don't necessarily recommend it.
back from jokes, im _really_ interested what is core developers, mainly
Guido's opinion about the name change.
tsabi
Tóth Csaba wrote:
back from jokes, im _really_ interested what is core developers, mainly
Guido's opinion about the name change.
I'm pretty sure it's, "Not a chance."
--
Robert Kern
"I have come to believe that the whole world is an enigma, a harmless enigma
that is made terrible by our own mad attempt to interpret it as though it had
an underlying truth."
-- Umberto Eco
On Dec 3, 2007, at 2:04 PM, Tóth Csaba wrote:
Russ P. írta:
>>Python name is not funny for me. Even the Monty Python, because
its hard
to translate their jokes, and in my country they are not so popular.
Just a few ppl knows them.
I've heard it helps to be stoned out of your mind (i.e., under the
influence of illegal drugs), but I don't necessarily recommend it.
back from jokes, im _really_ interested what is core developers,
mainly
Guido's opinion about the name change.
I can;t speak for Guido, but believe me when I say that a name change
will not happen!!!! Python is a successful and entrenched name brand.
It makes not sense in the world to change it.
As mentioned before, searching for "Python" in google returns 7 of the
top 10 links to be Python programming links.
This is just "a dead horse", stop beating it!
Cheers
TG
ur***********@gmail.com a écrit :
Python is a good programming language, but "Python" is not a good
name.
First, python also means snake, Monty Python. If we search "python" in
google, emule, many results are not programming resource. If we search
PHP, all results are programming resource.
Second, python also means snake, snake is not a good thing in western
culture. Many people dislike any things relevant to snake. We must
have high regard for the custom.
Now, python3000 is coming. It's the best time to rename!
Athon is a good candidate, you could provide better names.
In Athon, the first letter "A" could pronounce as [ e ] .
I'm amazed that anyone here answered this obvious troll...
On Mon, 03 Dec 2007 16:11:19 +0000, Neil Cerutti wrote:
To paraphrase Bertrand Russell, Newton was too successful.
Over-veneration of Newton was eventually an impediment to progress--this
was not, of course, his fault.
Given that the veneration of Newton was very much a product of Newton's
efforts at self-promotion, there's a good case to make that it was his
fault. He was a man of contradictions (as we all are, but he more so than
normal): on the one hand he was secretive and uncommunicative, on the
other he insisted on being given priority whenever possible, even in
doubtful cases, and absolutely refused to share the stage with anyone.
--
Steven
On Dec 3, 1:04 pm, Steven D'Aprano <st...@REMOVE-THIS-
cybersource.com.auwrote:
On Mon, 03 Dec 2007 16:11:19 +0000, Neil Cerutti wrote:
To paraphrase Bertrand Russell, Newton was too successful.
Over-veneration of Newton was eventually an impediment to progress--this
was not, of course, his fault.
Given that the veneration of Newton was very much a product of Newton's
efforts at self-promotion, there's a good case to make that it was his
fault. He was a man of contradictions (as we all are, but he more so than
normal): on the one hand he was secretive and uncommunicative, on the
other he insisted on being given priority whenever possible, even in
doubtful cases, and absolutely refused to share the stage with anyone.
My understanding is that Newton was a quiet, reflective guy who
computed mathematical power series by hand to kill time. He was the
college guy studying by himself in the library on Saturday night while
everyone else was out partying. If he was perceived as arrogant, he
was probably just sure he was right. And more often than not, he was.
Newton may or may not be overrated, but I don't know who do you think
you're fooling by claiming that he was "not a scientist." That's just
silly.
On Dec 3, 1:47 pm, Bruno Desthuilliers
<bdesth.quelquech...@free.quelquepart.frwrote:
Bullshit. Nowadays, anyone serious (since you seem to worry quite a lot
about "being serious") about IT knows what Python is and who uses it.
Heck, even MSVS now has support for Python and there's an official CLR
port of it. Can't get much more "serious" (lol), isn't it ?
Not so. I know professional programmers and computer scientists with
PhDs who have barely heard of Python and who assumed it was something
roughly like Basic -- until I explained that it is a "serious"
language that can be used for serious work. Then there are the
managers ... who tend to prefer serious names. Sometimes they can see
past a joke of a name ... and sometimes they can't.
On Dec 3, 1:58 pm, "Dan Upton" <up...@virginia.eduwrote:
...and thus, maybe the joke is on you? Just to play devil's advocate...
Yes, the joke *is* on me -- every time I have to explain to someone
why I am using this funny-sounding language. That's the point.
On 2007-12-03, Bruno Desthuilliers <bd*****************@free.quelquepart.frwrote:
ur***********@gmail.com a écrit :
>Second, python also means snake, snake is not a good thing in
western culture. Many people dislike any things relevant to
snake. We must have high regard for the custom.
Now, python3000 is coming. It's the best time to rename!
Athon is a good candidate, you could provide better names.
In Athon, the first letter "A" could pronounce as [ e ] .
I'm amazed that anyone here answered this obvious troll...
I didn't think of it as a troll, but as a humor piece. So I tried
to think of a funny response, but failed. Others jumped in to
fill the gap, and well... things progressed from there.
But your opinion is noted. ;)
--
Neil Cerutti
On 2007-12-03, Michael Terry <fo*****@gmail.comwrote:
!!!
Folks admire Newton for some of his breathtaking insights, not
because of his methods. The scientific method is a tool. The
results are far more important than the tool.
Right. The biggest weakness in the scientific method is that it
doesn't explain how to come up with theories. You need luck,
genius, or both. The same applies to language naming. There's no
theory of good language names (except for a short list of
don'ts); you have to attempt it and see what happens.
--
Neil Cerutti
"Tóth Csaba" <ts***@tsabi.huwrote in message
news:47**************@tsabi.hu...
|
| >Python name is not funny for me. Even the Monty Python, because its
hard
| >to translate their jokes, and in my country they are not so popular.
| >Just a few ppl knows them.
|| back from jokes, im _really_ interested what is core developers, mainly
| Guido's opinion about the name change.
Until the OP posted his lastest 'why', I assumed this proposal was an April
Fools' post that he just could not wait to post. In fact, given that the
effective cost would be in the $millions, I an still not sure he is sanely
serious.
Fun discussion of 'what if' is a different matter.
tjr
Michael Terry wrote:
>
Folks admire Newton for some of his breathtaking insights, not because
of his methods. The scientific method is a tool.
As was Newton, according to many of his contemporaries.
The results are far more important than the tool.
Yep.
Jim
--
"I loathe people who say, 'I always read the ending of the book first.'
That really irritates me. It's like someone coming to dinner, just
opening the fridge and eating pudding, while you're standing there still
working on the starter. It's not on." -- JK Rowling
On Dec 3, 3:09 pm, "Chris Mellon" <arka...@gmail.comwrote:
People who claim that everyone would agree with them if they'd only
open their minds or think out of the box are worth more than a few
Never said anything like it. It's a red herring that you either
imagined or made up.
points on the trollmeter. Consequentially, this will be (my) last post
on the subject, although apparently I have already been trolled.
Good riddance.
On Dec 3, 2:40 pm, "Terry Reedy" <tjre...@udel.eduwrote:
Until the OP posted his lastest 'why', I assumed this proposal was an April
Fools' post that he just could not wait to post. In fact, given that the
effective cost would be in the $millions, I an still not sure he is sanely
serious.
I doubt you really thought that. I think you just want to make the OP
feel like a fool. Do you feel better now? Where are the sensitivity
police when they are needed?
I find it interesting that someone can claim that Newton was not a
scientist and be taken seriously on this site, but someone who
suggests changing the name of a programming language is ridiculed.
That's ridiculous.
On Dec 3, 5:39 pm, "Russ P." <Russ.Paie...@gmail.comwrote:
On Dec 3, 2:40 pm, "Terry Reedy" <tjre...@udel.eduwrote:
Until the OP posted his lastest 'why', I assumed this proposal was an April
Fools' post that he just could not wait to post. In fact, given that the
effective cost would be in the $millions, I an still not sure he is sanely
serious.
I doubt you really thought that. I think you just want to make the OP
feel like a fool. Do you feel better now? Where are the sensitivity
police when they are needed?
I find it interesting that someone can claim that Newton was not a
scientist and be taken seriously on this site, but someone who
suggests changing the name of a programming language is ridiculed.
That's ridiculous.
Whether Newton was a scientist is a matter of opinion (mainly
regarding one's philosophy of science, and more specifically, the
demarcation problem); whether to change the name of python is a matter
of pragmatics. It's much easier to show that something is
pragmatically wrong (e.g., costs extra money with no overall gain),
than to show that someone's opinion about a complex matter is wrong.
On my view of "science," Newton was a scientist (as is anyone using
the tools of discursive reasoning and empirical observation; even if
they don't strictly follow the "scientific method"). That's all great.
But my opinions have nothing to do with the fact that it makes no
pragmatic sense to change the name of python. It is a foolish (or
"unwise" if you want a more "sensitive" euphemism) suggestion.
The suggestion, in syllogism (w/ conjunctions of the first premise
broken into separate premises 1-N):
1 Python is not taken seriously because of its "joke" name
2 great people of the past deserve honor
3 it would get better publicity with a different name
N ...
N' we want to be taken seriously, &c
Ergo, the name python should be changed to name X
It is easy to prove that premises 1-N are either true or false (or
pragmatically irrelevant, which can be considered as false to preserve
bivalence). So far, no compelling reasons have been given to think
them true, while several counter-examples and contradicting facts have
been given for thinking them false. Thus, a name change is
pragmatically stupid. QED.
Regards,
Jordan
On Sat, 1 Dec 2007 16:51:35 +0200, "Dotan Cohen"
<do********@gmail.comwrote:
>On 30/11/2007, Gerardo Herzig <gh*****@fmed.uba.arwrote:
>You will be eaten by the Snake-Ra god tonight!
Wasn't Ra the Sun god?
He meant quetzatcoatl. We could rename the language. Now try qith
Quetzatcoatl and its derivatives:
- QuetzatcoatlGTK
- QuetzatcoatlTest
- Quetzatcoatl_argfs_ughs_IlostMybreath
And some equally funny and easy to pronounce others...
Regards,
Zara
On Sat, 1 Dec 2007 13:40:10 -0800 (PST), "Russ P."
<Ru**********@gmail.comwrote:
>On Dec 1, 12:47 pm, "J. Clifford Dyer" <j...@sdf.lonestar.orgwrote:
>On Sat, 2007-12-01 at 12:10 -0800, Russ P. wrote:
On Dec 1, 2:10 am, Bjoern Schliessmann <usenet-
mail-0306.20.chr0n...@spamgourmet.comwrote:
Russ P. wrote:
I agree that Python is not a good name for a programming language,
Why not?
Think about proposing its use to someone who has never heard of it
(which I did not too long ago). As the OP pointed out, a Python is a
snake. Why should a programming language be named after a snake?
That's not a persuasive argument.
First of all, Python is named for a comedy troupe from England. For
comparison, Perl is named for a knitting technique, Lisp is named for a
speech impediment, Ruby is named for a rock, Smalltalk is named for a
not-so-useful form of communication, and Java is named after a beverage
or an island.
Which of those is a good name for a programming language by your
criterion?
None. None of them are good names by my criteria. But then, a name is
only a name. One of the few names I like is Pascal, because he was a
great mathematician and scientist.
After thinking about it a bit, here are examples of what I would
consider a good name for a programming language:
Newton#
Newton*
Newton+
Newton was a great scientist, and his name is easy to spell and
pronounce. The trailing character serves to disambiguate it from
Newton in online searches. For shorthand in online discussions, N#,
N*, or N+ could be used as aliases.
Names of other great scientists, mathematicians, or computer
scientists could also be used, of course. Take your pick.
How about renaming Python3000?
I would never use the name of a mathematician for a procedural
language. Mathemathician names should be for funtional languages (such
as Haskell).
Procedural languages are flexible, they keep on tangling and getting
out of it, they like publicity:
Houdini
or, as suggested in other messages:
Houdini3
Best regards,
Zara
On Dec 4, 11:36 am, MarkE <mark.engl...@rbccm.comwrote:
Ithon
Pie - Fun
Dennis Lee Bieber Ã*rta:
Changing the name of the language, at this stage, means giving up
over ten years of history and rebuilding name recognition from
scratch... Along with having to rename Jython, IronPython, CherryPy,
probably Boa Constructor, the pysqlite DB adapter, numpy, scipy,
pythonwin, PythonCard, etc.
Why should they rename their project too?
Their is very big chance they wont be compatible with Python3000, just
if they rewrite their program too!
They should rename their project when they feel the name is not so good
for the project. Not because _one_ (even if it is the main) of the
depencency project renames itself. in my humble opinion its nonsense
thinking.
tsabi
On Tue, 04 Dec 2007 08:31:55 +0100, Zara wrote:
On Sat, 1 Dec 2007 16:51:35 +0200, "Dotan Cohen"
<do********@gmail.comwrote:
>>On 30/11/2007, Gerardo Herzig <gh*****@fmed.uba.arwrote:
>>You will be eaten by the Snake-Ra god tonight!
Wasn't Ra the Sun god?
He meant quetzatcoatl. We could rename the language.
That name is already taken in the programming language domain. There's a
Tiny C compiler for 6510 based targets: http://www.kdef.com/geek/vic/quetz.html
Ciao,
Marc 'BlackJack' Rintsch
Marc 'BlackJack' Rintsch wrote:
On Tue, 04 Dec 2007 08:31:55 +0100, Zara wrote:
>He meant quetzatcoatl. We could rename the language.
That name is already taken in the programming language domain.
There's a Tiny C compiler for 6510 based targets:
Uh, why don't take one of his aliases? Let's call Python from now on
Tlahuizcalpantecuhtli. The scripts' extension could be ".tlapanli".
Regards,
Björn
--
BOFH excuse #362:
Plasma conduit breach
En Tue, 04 Dec 2007 14:49:36 -0300, Dennis Lee Bieber
<wl*****@ix.netcom.comescribió:
How about the cognate: Kulkukan?
You meant Kukulkan. If you got it wrong from "Apocalypto" (Mel Gibson),
well, it's just one of many errors in the film...
--
Gabriel Genellina
"Dennis Lee Bieber" <wl*****@ix.netcom.comwrote:
Euler? (most non-tech types would probably think that's a reference
to someone who squirts lubricants into the workings of a steam engine)
You have just destroyed a long held image in my mind with this
horrible homophone - I used to conjure up images of a wise owl.
- Hendrik
--
For the linguistically challenged: "Eule" is German for "Owl"
"Gabriel Genellina" <ga*******@yahoo.com.arwrote:
>En Tue, 04 Dec 2007 14:49:36 -0300, Dennis Lee Bieber
<wl*****@ix.netcom.comescribió:
>How about the cognate: Kulkukan?
>You meant Kukulkan. If you got it wrong from "Apocalypto" (Mel Gibson),
well, it's just one of many errors in the film...
Either way its no good - sounds too much like Kalkul
- Hendrik
Russ P. wrote:
Speaking of stupid names, what does "C++" mean?
According to Special Relativity, C++ is a contradiction in terms :)
"Russ P." <Ru**********@gmail.comwrote in
news:78**********************************@a39g2000 pre.googlegro
ups.com:
Speaking of stupid names, what does "C++" mean? I think it's
the grade you get when you just barely missed a "B--". But I
can't deny that it *is* good for searching.
For that matter C# is no better, I thought that # was pronounced
hash, I still refer to C# as C-hash.
Adrian
>>>>"Adrian Cherry" <ac*****@btinternet.com(AC) wrote:
>ACFor that matter C# is no better, I thought that # was pronounced
AChash, I still refer to C# as C-hash.
Are you musically illiterate?
--
Piet van Oostrum <pi**@cs.uu.nl>
URL: http://www.cs.uu.nl/~piet [PGP 8DAE142BE17999C4]
Private email: pi**@vanoostrum.org
Piet van Oostrum wrote:
"Adrian Cherry" <ac*****@btinternet.com(AC) wrote:
>For that matter C# is no better, I thought that # was
pronounced hash, I still refer to C# as C-hash.
Are you musically illiterate?
I wonder what Cb (C-flat) would be. Ada? :)
Regards,
Björn
--
BOFH excuse #351:
PEBKAC (Problem Exists Between Keyboard And Chair)
Dennis Lee Bieber wrote:
I wouldn't be that harsh... Though I've never heard # as "hash"...
Python programmer and never heard of the hashbang? :)
Also see: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Number_sign
Regards,
Björn
--
BOFH excuse #170:
popper unable to process jumbo kernel
Piet van Oostrum <pi**@cs.uu.nlwrote in
news:m2************@cochabamba.cs.uu.nl:
>>>>>"Adrian Cherry" <ac*****@btinternet.com(AC) wrote:
>>ACFor that matter C# is no better, I thought that # was
pronounced AChash, I still refer to C# as C-hash.
Are you musically illiterate?
Yup! The limits of my musically ability is
Spam, spam, spam, spam.
Lovely spam! Wonderful spaaam!
Lovely spam! Wonderful spam.
Spa-a-a-a-a-a-a-am! Spa-a-a-a-a-a-a-am!
Is that a problem? It's still a hash sign to me.
Adrian
Piet van Oostrum wrote:
>>>>>"Adrian Cherry" <ac*****@btinternet.com(AC) wrote:
>ACFor that matter C# is no better, I thought that # was pronounced
AChash, I still refer to C# as C-hash.
Are you musically illiterate?
Note that the notation for the note (!) isn't universal. French speakers for
instance write that one do# and call it "do dièze". C# reads as unpronounceable
linenoise to them.
>>>>"Adrian Cherry" <ac*****@btinternet.com(AC) wrote:
>ACPiet van Oostrum <pi**@cs.uu.nlwrote in
ACnews:m2************@cochabamba.cs.uu.nl:
>>>>>>>"Adrian Cherry" <ac*****@btinternet.com(AC) wrote:
ACFor that matter C# is no better, I thought that # was
>>>pronounced AChash, I still refer to C# as C-hash.
Are you musically illiterate?
>ACYup! The limits of my musically ability is
>ACSpam, spam, spam, spam.
ACLovely spam! Wonderful spaaam!
ACLovely spam! Wonderful spam.
ACSpa-a-a-a-a-a-a-am! Spa-a-a-a-a-a-a-am!
>ACIs that a problem? It's still a hash sign to me.
No problem, but if you know music notation, C# will ring a bell.
--
Piet van Oostrum <pi**@cs.uu.nl>
URL: http://www.cs.uu.nl/~piet [PGP 8DAE142BE17999C4]
Private email: pi**@vanoostrum.org
Boris Borcic wrote:
Piet van Oostrum wrote:
>>>>>>"Adrian Cherry" <ac*****@btinternet.com(AC) wrote:
>>ACFor that matter C# is no better, I thought that # was pronounced
AChash, I still refer to C# as C-hash.
Are you musically illiterate?
Note that the notation for the note (!) isn't universal. French speakers
for instance write that one do# and call it "do dièze". C# reads as
unpronounceable linenoise to them.
In a german text it would be "Cis". And in real musical notation
the "sharpener" doesn't look like '#', only similar.
Boris Borcic a écrit :
Piet van Oostrum wrote:
>>>>>>"Adrian Cherry" <ac*****@btinternet.com(AC) wrote:
>>ACFor that matter C# is no better, I thought that # was pronounced
AChash, I still refer to C# as C-hash.
Are you musically illiterate?
Note that the notation for the note (!) isn't universal. French speakers
for instance write that one do# and call it "do dièze". C# reads as
unpronounceable linenoise to them.
Strange as it might be, some french speakers also know the english
notation...
Op Mon, 03 Dec 2007 14:20:52 +1300, schreef greg:
If you want a really appropriate name for a programming language, I'd
suggest Babbage. (not for Python, though!)
Konrad Zuse wrote the first high-level programming language, so I think
his name would be a better candidate...
--
JanC This discussion thread is closed Replies have been disabled for this discussion. Similar topics
7 posts
views
Thread by Tim Smith |
last post: by
|
5 posts
views
Thread by puzzlecracker |
last post: by
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
