7 ms·

It's not 100% more — 100% would be twice as much. In this case, we've gone from none at all to having some, which is infinitely more.

DemocracyFTW 6y ago
Came here to say that, am satisfied. It was twice as cold on Monday than it was on Sunday. /duck
- teekert 6y ago
  If you'd use Kelvin I'd be ok with your remark, although I'd be wondering on what planet you live.
  - kubanczyk 6y ago
    My guess it was just at Moon's terminator. (Parent didn't say "planet".) Can quickly go from 300 K to 150 K, source https://ars.els-cdn.com/content/image/1-s2.0-S0019103516304869-gr5.jpg https://ars.els-cdn.com/content/image/1-s2.0-S00191035163048...
ghego1 6y ago
Thanks for the clarification! I am relatively new to python and I thought that I had not noticed this feature :-D
tpoacher 6y ago
and don't get me started on "biweekly"
- OJFord 6y ago
  That really is a weird one, because here in the UK we say 'fortnightly' (for 'every other week'); so 'biweekly' would definitely be taken to mean 'twice per week'. That also matches 'biannual' (an event that occurs every other year is 'biennial'), so 'biweekly' as 'fortnightly' is certainly to be proscribed, in my book.
  - smitty1e 6y ago
    Let's standardize on "26 times per quarter" just to chafe everyone.
  - jp57 6y ago
    > so 'biweekly' as 'fortnightly' is certainly to be proscribed, in my book. Except that's literally the dictionary definition of the word. And "biennial" and "biannual" are synonyms.
    - OJFord 6y ago
      ...in the US. I only have Collins' concise to hand, which gives the definitions I have and doesn't even mention (not even proscribed or US etc.) other uses. And Collins is pretty permissive. And no they're not. 'Biennial' events occur once per two year period; 'biannual' events occur four times per two year (twice per year) period. For example, in horticulture 'a biennial [plant]' is one that has a single flowering/reproduction cycle over two years. (Cf. 'annuals', 'perennials'.)
  - jsilence 6y ago
    biweekly versus fortnitely is really a battle royale!
SuchAnonMuchWow 6y ago
It doesn't start from 0: there was some pattern matching before: (a, b, c, d) = range(4)
- ksm1717 6y ago
  Now we can do (a, b, c, d, e, f, g, h) = range(8)
- bmn__ 6y ago
  This is destructuring.
  - seertaak 6y ago
    ...which is a simple form of pattern matching.
collyw 6y ago
Depends no? If your "100%" is based on the after value rather than the before value, you have added 100%. Though I guess there is an implicit expectation that it is the before value that is used.
- budafish 6y ago
  I think the word "more" implied it was 100% on top of the existing.
  - mckirk 6y ago
    Yes, that's what we have now though, isn't it? It went from having 0 pattern matching to having 1 pattern matching -- that seems like '100% more of this thing we are talking about' to me. This of course only makes sense if you see '1 pattern matching' as a precisely defined abstract construct, but I guess the 100%-more joke usually requires that perspective (and is a joke precisely because it's so non-sensical to think this way).
- yakubin 6y ago
  > Though I guess there is an implicit expectation that it is the before value that is used. This is what people normally learn in primary school about the meaning of this phrase.
Already__Taken 6y ago
If I have no apples and get 1 apple I don't have infinite more apples...
- sethammons 6y ago
  Except you do. If you go from 10 to 15, would have 50% more. The math: (15 - 10)/10. If you go from 0 to 1: (1-0)/0. Well, that is not gonna work, but it tends towards infinity as your starting number gets closer and closer to zero.
xyzal 6y ago
My first thought when I read the headline. Our nerdiness is beyond redemption.

DemocracyFTW 6y ago

Came here to say that, am satisfied. It was twice as cold on Monday than it was on Sunday. /duck

teekert 6y ago
If you'd use Kelvin I'd be ok with your remark, although I'd be wondering on what planet you live.
- kubanczyk 6y ago
  My guess it was just at Moon's terminator. (Parent didn't say "planet".) Can quickly go from 300 K to 150 K, source https://ars.els-cdn.com/content/image/1-s2.0-S0019103516304869-gr5.jpg https://ars.els-cdn.com/content/image/1-s2.0-S00191035163048...

ghego1 6y ago

Thanks for the clarification! I am relatively new to python and I thought that I had not noticed this feature :-D

tpoacher 6y ago

and don't get me started on "biweekly"

OJFord 6y ago
That really is a weird one, because here in the UK we say 'fortnightly' (for 'every other week'); so 'biweekly' would definitely be taken to mean 'twice per week'. That also matches 'biannual' (an event that occurs every other year is 'biennial'), so 'biweekly' as 'fortnightly' is certainly to be proscribed, in my book.
- smitty1e 6y ago
  Let's standardize on "26 times per quarter" just to chafe everyone.
- jp57 6y ago
  > so 'biweekly' as 'fortnightly' is certainly to be proscribed, in my book. Except that's literally the dictionary definition of the word. And "biennial" and "biannual" are synonyms.
  - OJFord 6y ago
    ...in the US. I only have Collins' concise to hand, which gives the definitions I have and doesn't even mention (not even proscribed or US etc.) other uses. And Collins is pretty permissive. And no they're not. 'Biennial' events occur once per two year period; 'biannual' events occur four times per two year (twice per year) period. For example, in horticulture 'a biennial [plant]' is one that has a single flowering/reproduction cycle over two years. (Cf. 'annuals', 'perennials'.)
- jsilence 6y ago
  biweekly versus fortnitely is really a battle royale!

SuchAnonMuchWow 6y ago

It doesn't start from 0: there was some pattern matching before: (a, b, c, d) = range(4)

ksm1717 6y ago
Now we can do (a, b, c, d, e, f, g, h) = range(8)
bmn__ 6y ago
This is destructuring.
- seertaak 6y ago
  ...which is a simple form of pattern matching.

collyw 6y ago

Depends no? If your "100%" is based on the after value rather than the before value, you have added 100%. Though I guess there is an implicit expectation that it is the before value that is used.

budafish 6y ago
I think the word "more" implied it was 100% on top of the existing.
- mckirk 6y ago
  Yes, that's what we have now though, isn't it? It went from having 0 pattern matching to having 1 pattern matching -- that seems like '100% more of this thing we are talking about' to me. This of course only makes sense if you see '1 pattern matching' as a precisely defined abstract construct, but I guess the 100%-more joke usually requires that perspective (and is a joke precisely because it's so non-sensical to think this way).
yakubin 6y ago
> Though I guess there is an implicit expectation that it is the before value that is used. This is what people normally learn in primary school about the meaning of this phrase.

Already__Taken 6y ago

If I have no apples and get 1 apple I don't have infinite more apples...

sethammons 6y ago
Except you do. If you go from 10 to 15, would have 50% more. The math: (15 - 10)/10. If you go from 0 to 1: (1-0)/0. Well, that is not gonna work, but it tends towards infinity as your starting number gets closer and closer to zero.

xyzal 6y ago

My first thought when I read the headline. Our nerdiness is beyond redemption.