> 1-based indexing is superior to 0-based indexing. Yes! But programmers are weird like that,I understand the rationale in case of C(Nothing that couldnt be so

> 1-based indexing is superior to 0-based indexing. Yes! But programmers are weird like that,I understand the rationale in case of C(Nothing that couldnt be solved then and there) but for high level or scientific computing? How many off by one bugs caused by this? > If you use spaces to indent code, or in any way rely on a fixed width font to "line things up", you have a fundamental misunderstanding. Agree, that's one of the things I hate about python, the indentation are probably the worst solution to the problem of scoping code. > Relatedly, the 80 column "rule" is as stupid in code as it would be in prose. Use your aesthetic sense. Agree > Vim and Emacs both have terrible user interfaces, and are an inferior experience to even a normal text editor let alone a decent IDE. Users have Stockholm Syndrome. Agree, both are very good pieces of software but I feel 99% of the new people swearing by them just do it to try to appear l33t > For beginners, BASIC is great and Python is terrible. In 1995? Perhaps. Now? Hell, no. > Source code should liberally use Unicode symbols. Hell no. > There are many languages with a 'mystique', like Lisp and APL. The correlation between 'mystique' and practical utility is inverse. More or less, great, but difficult, programming languages would never become mainstream, and like good old Joe Stalin used to say "quantity is a quality on its own" > Let the flames begin! As always with these type of comment OP is not as alone as they think they are.