this post was submitted on 13 Dec 2025
154 points (96.4% liked)

Greentext

7454 readers
636 users here now

This is a place to share greentexts and witness the confounding life of Anon. If you're new to the Greentext community, think of it as a sort of zoo with Anon as the main attraction.

Be warned:

If you find yourself getting angry (or god forbid, agreeing) with something Anon has said, you might be doing it wrong.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 
all 24 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] renzhexiangjiao@piefed.blahaj.zone 30 points 10 hours ago (1 children)

to me method names are imperatives, like when we order the dog to walk.

dog.walk() = "Dog, walk!"

[–] rtxn@lemmy.world 17 points 10 hours ago (2 children)

[lady for lady in ladies if lady.is_single] just doesn't have the same bop.

[–] alias_qr_rainmaker@lemmy.world 7 points 10 hours ago

list comprehensions aren't changed much. but a statement like dog = Dog(name="fido") is transpiled to the dog is now a Dog with name 'fido'

the language uses backticks for strings. it handles nested stringly nicely because of it

[–] lemmyman@lemmy.world 1 points 5 hours ago* (last edited 5 hours ago) (1 children)

Can I just say that as someone who only codes tangentially to my work, code and documentation that uses the same word 2 or 3 times in an expression, when they mean different things, is such an immense pet peeve of mine when learning something new.

I'm already struggling with everything else about it, and now I have to parse out which lady is which and what the hell each one is supposed to be

object Object(object = object);

Statements dreamed up by the utterly deranged.

[–] rtxn@lemmy.world 2 points 5 hours ago* (last edited 5 hours ago) (1 children)

That's just Python's generator syntax. Not all that difficult to parse once you get a feel for it. Plus syntax highlighting helps.

(OUTPUT_EXPRESSION for ITEM in INPUT_ITERABLE if CONDITION)
[–] ryannathans@aussie.zone 1 points 5 hours ago

it's list comprehension syntax, not generator syntax

[–] BleakBluets@lemmy.world 15 points 5 hours ago* (last edited 5 hours ago) (1 children)
Buffalo_buffalo::buffaloBuffalo.buffalo(Buffalo.buffalo);

p.s. I'm on mobile and this is a shitpost. I did not put a lot of thought into this code. Feel free to suggest a more accurate representation.

[–] Bosht@lemmy.world 4 points 5 hours ago

NoIDontThinkIWill.gif

[–] iAmTheTot@sh.itjust.works 14 points 8 hours ago (1 children)
[–] alias_qr_rainmaker@lemmy.world -1 points 8 hours ago

meh, close enough

[–] fibojoly@sh.itjust.works 12 points 4 hours ago* (last edited 4 hours ago)

It's not theDog.walks(), it's 狗.走()

Conjugate this you anglocentrist fuck!

[–] lauha@lemmy.world 8 points 7 hours ago (1 children)

I would imagine the class would be aDog and when you instantiate it the variable would be theDog.

[–] alias_qr_rainmaker@lemmy.world 0 points 7 hours ago

"the dog" maps to dog, the = maps to "is now", and Dog() maps to "a dog", and (name="Dog name") maps to "with name dog name"

So no, you're wrong, lmao

I've already written the transpiler

[–] Feyd@programming.dev 8 points 11 hours ago (1 children)
[–] einlander@lemmy.world 3 points 6 hours ago

And that brings us back to BASIC.

[–] m0darn@lemmy.ca 3 points 3 hours ago

I feel like I'm walking into a trap here but:

This pedant is using an adjective as an adverb.

(...)you don't conjugate your verbs right.

[–] EldenLord@lemmy.world 2 points 8 hours ago

That Pepe is cursed

[–] DickFiasco@sh.itjust.works 1 points 4 hours ago

Cunning linguist, he he. I wonder if they're friends with Colonel Angus.