News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:In Memoriam: Tim Peters 1952–2026 by shiandow on Wednesday November 11, 2026 @02:11PM (#50457214)
The PEP explicitly says there are 20 of which only 19 are written down and I can't figure out if that is a joke, a deliberate statement, or both.
Re:In Memoriam: Tim Peters 1952–2026 by leoc on Wednesday November 11, 2026 @02:18PM (#50457301)
And at that moment, shiandow was enlightened. ;)

(https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zen_of_Python has more about the discrepancy.)

Re:In Memoriam: Tim Peters 1952–2026 by rbanffy on Wednesday November 11, 2026 @06:53PM (#50460770)
Two of the most common bugs in programming is the off-by-one error.
Re:In Memoriam: Tim Peters 1952–2026 by spockz on Thursday November 12, 2026 @11:08AM (#50469687)
[delayed]
Re:In Memoriam: Tim Peters 1952–2026 by willtemperley on Thursday November 12, 2026 @08:34AM (#50466854)
I'm guessing you're not Dutch?
Re:In Memoriam: Tim Peters 1952–2026 by jacobolus on Thursday November 12, 2026 @10:20AM (#50468834)
From the original mailing list message:

> There you go: 20 Pythonic Fec^H^H^HTheses on the nose, counting the one I'm

> leaving for Guido to fill in. If the answer to *any* Python design issue

> isn't obvious after reading those -- well, I just give up <wink>.

https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-list/1999-June/0019...