Wonder why it's written in Python 2.7 and not 3?

In my experience with scientists, they just use the tools that know how to use and have available. So maybe they just got the set-up for 2.7 on their personal/work computers or maybe some tool/library is using 2.7?

One function? Could've written the whole thing in one `wget` call.

teach me how.

Here's a start:

  for x in $(curl -s https://alpha.wallhaven.cc/random | pcregrep -o1 "https://alpha.wallhaven.cc/wallpaper/(\d+)" | sort | uniq) ; do wget "https://wallpapers.wallhaven.cc/wallpapers/full/wallhaven-$x.jpg" ; done

bash, curl, pcregrep, sort, uniq and wget is not what I'd call "one wget call".

To the hardcore bash users, I think they call that 'easy'. I have someone like that on my team - holy crap some of the bash stuff they can come up with

Hardcore bash sure sounds like fun, but when things start getting too big or messy I usually find a Python script with some `subprocess` [0] tricks to be way easier on the eye.

[0]: https://docs.python.org/3/library/subprocess.html

I hope none of that stuff makes it into your main codebase? If there is even a remote chance of requiring maintenance by someone other than the person that wrote it, that is. Which is probably 99.99% the chance, unless it's temporary/throwaway code.

I guess wget has a useful spidering function that could probably page through the websites search results page, downloading all the preview and real images. You'd have to do the login bit as a different call and fetch the first search pages url yourself?

Every code has side effects. Splitting code into appropriate functions makes those side effects much more managable.

I hope at your day job, if you are a programmer at all, you don't write commit messages like the ones in the repo.

Yes, i do. And we’re hiring!

Nothing wrong with them.