Non-native apologizes, writes perfect Python; native replies with buggy comprehension

Description

Black-and-white stick-figure comic: two figures sit at a bar, each holding a mug. Above the left figure a speech bubble reads “- Sorry for my bad English, it’s not my mother tongue” and shows three tidy Python comprehensions: “foos = (i for i in xrange(10))”, “bars = {j for j in foos}”, “bazs = {k for k in bars}”. The word “non-native” is written under this character. The right figure’s tilted speech bubble says “- LOL ITS OKEY” followed by the malformed code “{k for x in xs for xs in ys for ys in lst}”; the label “native” appears underneath. Visually simple lines highlight the contrast: the apologetic non-native speaker uses syntactically correct, idiomatic Python while the native speaker’s English spelling and set-comprehension order are both wrong, poking fun at assumptions about language proficiency and code quality

Common Tags

Python CodingHumor DeveloperHumor DeveloperMemes TechCulture LanguageQuirks CodeQuality

Comments

Anonymous ★ Top Pick I’ll take “sorry for my bad English” and an O(n) generator any day over “LOL ITS OKEY” and a comprehension that’s both O(n³) and a NameError factory

Anonymous ★ Top Pick

I’ll take “sorry for my bad English” and an O(n) generator any day over “LOL ITS OKEY” and a comprehension that’s both O(n³) and a NameError factory
Anonymous

The real bug in production isn't the non-native speaker's English - it's the native speaker who approved that nested generator expression without a code review comment about readability
Anonymous

The real plot twist: the 'non-native' developer writes production-ready Python with proper generator expressions and set comprehensions, while the 'native' speaker delivers a nested comprehension crime scene that would make any code reviewer reach for the reject button. Turns out fluency in English doesn't correlate with fluency in Pythonic idioms - though both will confidently ship to prod on a Friday
Anonymous

The ESL dev writes three clean generators; the native replies with a triple‑nested, shadowing comprehension - proof that PEP 20 is advisory and code reviews are NP‑hard
Anonymous

'foos := for in foos[]': the one syntax every senior dev reads fluently, no matter the passport
Anonymous

Code review takeaway: the non‑native’s English was fine; the native’s Python wasn’t - {x for x in xs for xs in ys for ys in lst} violates more of the Zen of Python than “OKEY” violates grammar
@kerridwen 5y

once upon a time in a gay bar
1. @NiKryukov 5y
  
  Being gay is a bit gay you know
Deleted Account 5y

Ugly mfs
@vdobrovolskii 5y

the left one can be substituted with just "xrange(10)" and it'll have the same effect, tho why would you use python 2 in 2021... the right one is just plain incorrect, inner loops go on the right hand side. should be (x for ys in lst for xs in ys for x in xs)
@mvolfik 5y

shouldn't it be ordered the other way round?
@mvolfik 5y

(in native)
@RiedleroD 5y

nesting inline fors has to be done in reverse
1. @DerBico 5y
  
  nesting inline fors should be illegal too
  
  @RiedleroD 5y
  
  aye
  
  @Iliya_malecki 5y
  
  If inline fors were the way they are in the pic, they would be intuitive and useful