IMO all those examples are less readable than writing it in an imperative way using good function and variable names.

Also, len() is a Python convention and a built-in function that calls __len__() on that object. It's even more established than .length in JS, so I really don't see why someone would expect anything else. And even then, one could call my_list.__len__() if they really wanted to be sure and have that "left to right" bonus.

I also tend to prefer left to right and use threading macros a lot.

clojure.org/guides/threading_m…

I'm always suspicious of people who say that a language is suboptimal and use as evidence some filthy one-liner. Maybe if you bothered to write some whitespace and didn't write the language ignorant of its features (like generator expressions) you would end up with better code?

sum(
    all(
        abs(x) >= 1 and abs(x) <= 3 for x in line
    ) and (
        all(x > 0 for x in line) or
        all(x < 0 for x in line)
    )
    for line in diffs
)

People don't, in fact, read code from top to bottom, left to right; they read it by first looking at its "skeleton" - functions, control flow, etc - until finding the bit they think is most important to read in detail. That implies that "jumping back and forth" is a natural and necessary part of reading (and hence writing) code, and so is nothing to fear.

There is still a slight advantage to not having to jump around, but consider the costs: in Javascript, map and filter are methods on Array and some other types. So how are you going to implement them for your custom iterable type? Do you have to do it yourself, or write lots of boilerplate? It's easy in Python. It's not bad in Rust either because of traits, but what this all means is that to get this, you need other, heavy, language features.

In practice, you often know what a comprehension is iterating over due to context. In those situations, having what the comprehension produces be the most prominent is actually a boon. In these scenarios in Rust/JS you are left skipping over the unimportant stuff to get to what you actually want to read.

Is string length len, length, size, count, num, or # ? Is there even a global function for length? You won’t know until you try all of them.

This is Python basics, so the argument would be to optimize readability specifically for people who have zero familiarity with the language.

(The other examples have the same general direction of readability tradeoff to the benefit of beginners, this one was just simplest to pick here)

That's a valid tradeoff to discuss, if discussed as a tradeoff. Here it is not. The cost to readability for anyone with language familiarity appear to be not even understood.

interessante, qualche anno fa avevo fatto un articolo simile (forse è da aggiornare ora): lealternative.net/2020/07/17/a… tutte queste realtà hanno pochissimo seguito e adesioni, io ho provato ogni tanto a usarle ma non erano praticamente mai presenti nelle città in cui mi servivano e quando trovavo qualcosa era a dei prezzi spesso inaccessibili.

Attualmente forse la cosa più efficace è cercare su Booking e poi, una volta trovato il posto giusto, cercarlo su internet per vedere se affitta le camere anche senza Booking ma con un proprio sistema di prenotazioni. Spesso facendo cosi si spende però di più perché, da quanto so, gli alberghi che si associano a Booking non possono mettere sul proprio sito stanze a prezzi più convenienti.

From an organizational standpoint, it doesn't sound unreasonable to me.

The group will be split into four smaller groups, according to a New York Times report. One group will focus on AI research, another one on infrastructure and hardware projects, one on AI products, and another one on building out AI superintelligence, a hypothetical AI system that could outperform human intelligence on any and all scales.

I mean, they have different skillsets, a fair bit of that is going to be on decoupled timelines, they have different levels of risk, and the technical expertise is going to differ. One succeeding or failing isn't tightly coupled to another doing so. Sure, they all relate to one thing or another to something that has been called "AI", but that's a pretty broad group.

West Bank-style occupation

How's that working out?

OP hit the nail on the head. This is once again shifting the blame (and guilt) onto individuals who even collectively have fuck-all impact on the problem in question.

The worst of it is, some people will believe this shit.