[Python-Dev] Re: PEP 448 review
On 3/29/23 13:23, Brett Cannon wrote: Wow, we are now getting Canadian-specific spam! Since the volume on this mailing list is so low, should we change everyone to be moderated to start and then remove that after they have posted appropriately? Or did this get through by accident? Accident. I set the user to always discard, and then clicked on the green button instead of the yellow one. Green to me says "Do what I asked for." but green to MM3 says "Do what I asked for AND accept the message." -- ~Ethan~ ___ Python-Dev mailing list -- python-dev@python.org To unsubscribe send an email to python-dev-le...@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman3/lists/python-dev.python.org/ Message archived at https://mail.python.org/archives/list/python-dev@python.org/message/SY26KTV3YOZUS5ZGFNBVFUAGV2GV5MLD/ Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/
[Python-Dev] Re: PEP 448 review
My apologies for the accidentally accepted spam. If you reply to that original message, please remove the link before sending. Thanks. ;-) -- ~Ethan~ ___ Python-Dev mailing list -- python-dev@python.org To unsubscribe send an email to python-dev-le...@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman3/lists/python-dev.python.org/ Message archived at https://mail.python.org/archives/list/python-dev@python.org/message/ABUAQHFRBCPENJ47ZZ22XBN7JEEQW6TN/ Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/
[Python-Dev] Re: PEP 448 review
ChatGPT spam, specifically generated for Python mailing list filters. :mad: On Wed, Mar 29, 2023 at 01:23:03PM -0700, Brett Cannon wrote: > Wow, we are now getting Canadian-specific spam! > > Since the volume on this mailing list is so low, should we change everyone > to be moderated to start and then remove that after they have posted > appropriately? Or did this get through by accident? > > On Wed, Mar 29, 2023 at 12:19???PM wrote: > > > It seems like you have thoroughly read through the PEP and the discussion > > thread and have formed an opinion about the proposed changes. It's great > > that you have taken the time to understand the proposal and the reasoning > > behind it. > > > > Georg Brandl's comments and Greg Ewing's explanations do shed light on > > some of the concerns raised by the proposal. However, it is good to see > > that you find the sequence and dict flattening syntax proposals to be clean > > and logical. > > > > Regarding the comprehensions part of the proposal, it appears that you are > > ambivalent about it. You acknowledge that it provides a way to flatten a > > sequence of sequences, but you also point out some of the odd edge cases > > that you discovered while experimenting in the interpreter. It's good to > > see that you are taking a cautious approach and are not rushing to endorse > > this part of the proposal. > > > > Overall, your analysis is thoughtful and well-reasoned. It's good to see > > that you are engaging with the proposal in a critical manner and taking > > into account the different perspectives presented in the discussion thread. > > Regards: Oleg. -- Oleg Broytmanhttps://phdru.name/p...@phdru.name Programmers don't die, they just GOSUB without RETURN. ___ Python-Dev mailing list -- python-dev@python.org To unsubscribe send an email to python-dev-le...@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman3/lists/python-dev.python.org/ Message archived at https://mail.python.org/archives/list/python-dev@python.org/message/BQYY7ZTOARFCEQE4FC4ECVFRPMHIMLB7/ Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/
[Python-Dev] Re: PEP 448 review
Wow, we are now getting Canadian-specific spam! Since the volume on this mailing list is so low, should we change everyone to be moderated to start and then remove that after they have posted appropriately? Or did this get through by accident? On Wed, Mar 29, 2023 at 12:19 PM wrote: > It seems like you have thoroughly read through the PEP and the discussion > thread and have formed an opinion about the proposed changes. It's great > that you have taken the time to understand the proposal and the reasoning > behind it. > > Georg Brandl's comments and Greg Ewing's explanations do shed light on > some of the concerns raised by the proposal. However, it is good to see > that you find the sequence and dict flattening syntax proposals to be clean > and logical. > > Regarding the comprehensions part of the proposal, it appears that you are > ambivalent about it. You acknowledge that it provides a way to flatten a > sequence of sequences, but you also point out some of the odd edge cases > that you discovered while experimenting in the interpreter. It's good to > see that you are taking a cautious approach and are not rushing to endorse > this part of the proposal. > > Overall, your analysis is thoughtful and well-reasoned. It's good to see > that you are engaging with the proposal in a critical manner and taking > into account the different perspectives presented in the discussion thread. > Regards: https://www.extraappliance.ca/washing-machine-repair-edmonton/ > ___ > Python-Dev mailing list -- python-dev@python.org > To unsubscribe send an email to python-dev-le...@python.org > https://mail.python.org/mailman3/lists/python-dev.python.org/ > Message archived at > https://mail.python.org/archives/list/python-dev@python.org/message/6BP32AXSJAJPWHU274M3RBLLFUBSQUC6/ > Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/ > ___ Python-Dev mailing list -- python-dev@python.org To unsubscribe send an email to python-dev-le...@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman3/lists/python-dev.python.org/ Message archived at https://mail.python.org/archives/list/python-dev@python.org/message/4ACX7TQV3YV6UDZ65AHPMM7UAWCJARYI/ Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/
[Python-Dev] Re: PEP 448 review
It seems like you have thoroughly read through the PEP and the discussion thread and have formed an opinion about the proposed changes. It's great that you have taken the time to understand the proposal and the reasoning behind it. Georg Brandl's comments and Greg Ewing's explanations do shed light on some of the concerns raised by the proposal. However, it is good to see that you find the sequence and dict flattening syntax proposals to be clean and logical. Regarding the comprehensions part of the proposal, it appears that you are ambivalent about it. You acknowledge that it provides a way to flatten a sequence of sequences, but you also point out some of the odd edge cases that you discovered while experimenting in the interpreter. It's good to see that you are taking a cautious approach and are not rushing to endorse this part of the proposal. Overall, your analysis is thoughtful and well-reasoned. It's good to see that you are engaging with the proposal in a critical manner and taking into account the different perspectives presented in the discussion thread. Regards: https://www.extraappliance.ca/washing-machine-repair-edmonton/ ___ Python-Dev mailing list -- python-dev@python.org To unsubscribe send an email to python-dev-le...@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman3/lists/python-dev.python.org/ Message archived at https://mail.python.org/archives/list/python-dev@python.org/message/6BP32AXSJAJPWHU274M3RBLLFUBSQUC6/ Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/
