News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Think Bayes: Bayesian Statistics Made Simple (2012) by innocentoldguy on Sunday November 19, 2017 @09:30AM (#15734011)
“I broke this rule because I developed some of the code while I was a Visiting Scientist at Google, so I followed the Google style guide, which deviates from PEP 8 in a few places. Once I got used to Google style, I found that I liked it. And at this point, it would be too much trouble to change.”

Why would you write a book that targets the Python community and ignore PEP8 styling, inconveniencing an entire community, simply because it would be too much trouble for you to change?

“Also on the topic of style, I write “Bayes’s theorem” with an s after the apostrophe, which is preferred in some style guides and deprecated in others.”

It is deprecated in all modern style guides and should not be used. You’ll get dinged in college English and writing classes for using this outdated and redundant style.

I’m sure this book is great, but, as a point of constructive criticism, I would suggest the author do a better job at adhering to the styles of code and English expected by his target audience, rather than what is comfortable for him.

Re:Think Bayes: Bayesian Statistics Made Simple (2012) by leephillips on Sunday November 19, 2017 @05:21PM (#15736281)
From the PEP8 style guide:

"Many projects have their own coding style guidelines. In the event of any conflicts, such project-specific guides take precedence for that project."

and

"A Foolish Consistency is the Hobgoblin of Little Minds".

And, throughout, PEP8 makes it clear that it is a set of recommendations, and that if a project or community already has an established style, it need not be changed.

Re:Think Bayes: Bayesian Statistics Made Simple (2012) by innocentoldguy on Sunday November 19, 2017 @11:30PM (#15737808)
You misunderstand. I’m not criticizing Google not following PEP8. They’re welcome to make whatever modifications they want. I do the same. For example, I don’t like having two blank lines between methods and I don’t limit my line widths to 80 characters. This personal or project level alteration is fine. However, when your target audience is the Python community at large, you are better off following the PEP8 standard, which everyone knows and is comfortable with, rather that a project specific format, just because you personally find it more convenient. Standards are pretty important in the publishing industry, so I’m not sure why this is so controversial here today.
Re:Think Bayes: Bayesian Statistics Made Simple (2012) by franklin_cobb on Monday November 20, 2017 @12:43AM (#15738056)
Why are you arguing against PEP8? As you mentioned in your final sentence, the Python community DOES have an established standard. It is called PEP8. The parent has made a valid point. Why would you criticize or trash his "karma" for stating it?
Re:Think Bayes: Bayesian Statistics Made Simple (2012) by leephillips on Monday November 20, 2017 @04:44PM (#15743574)
You say I'm arguing against PEP8 by quoting PEP8? That's hard to understand. Whose karma am I "trashing", and how? I certainly didn't downvote him, if that's what you mean.
Re:Think Bayes: Bayesian Statistics Made Simple (2012) by TFortunato on Monday November 20, 2017 @02:37AM (#15738412)
Others have already made the point about PEP8 being a guideline, so I just wanted to also point out that not all style guides would agress with you on Bayes'/'s theorem. Case in point, the APA style guide: http://blog.apastyle.org/apastyle/2013/06/forming-possessive...
Re:Think Bayes: Bayesian Statistics Made Simple (2012) by bubblesocks on Sunday November 19, 2017 @09:44AM (#15734067)
I'm not sure why you were down-voted. This is a valid point and as a college professor and author, I'm sure Downey would appreciate any feedback that would make his book better.
[dead]
Re:Think Bayes: Bayesian Statistics Made Simple (2012) by sctb on Monday November 20, 2017 @03:48PM (#15743130)
Would you mind sticking to civil and substantive comments, and also resist complaining about voting? The guidelines are pretty clear.

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

Re:Think Bayes: Bayesian Statistics Made Simple (2012) by appleiigs on Sunday November 19, 2017 @12:47PM (#15734933)
I can't downvote. The author points out his differences and provides his reasons why. The criticism doesn't add any value to the conversation because it has been addressed already by the author himself.
Re:Think Bayes: Bayesian Statistics Made Simple (2012) by bubblesocks on Sunday November 19, 2017 @01:21PM (#15735087)
I disagree. In Python, the PEP8 standard is to use snake case for variables and function names. Classes should appear in this format: ClassName. Downey uses the class style for functions because, according to him, he feels it would be too inconvenient to do it the right way. This is a lazy cop-out. If you're writing a book targeting the Python community you should adhere to the Python PEP8 standards out of respect for your readers, if nothing else. The parent poster poses a valid question and it most definitely adds to the conversation because it calls into question the author's respect for his audience.

How is what Downey did any different from me writing a book and stating that correct spelling, grammar, and editing would be too inconvenient for me, so I'm just going to type whatever I feel like and that should be OK, because I addressed my lack of quality and attention to detail during my introduction?

By the way. Thanks for commenting.

Re:Think Bayes: Bayesian Statistics Made Simple (2012) by srean on Tuesday November 21, 2017 @12:04AM (#15745691)
This comment is in such perfect harmony with https://www.cia.gov/news-information/featured-story-archive/...

Small mercies that Python community does not speak this.