[Python-Dev] Re: Should the definition of an "(async) iterator" include __iter__?

On Wed, Sep 15, 2021 at 4:06 PM Guido van Rossum wrote: > [SNIP] > Reminder about how for-loops work: > > This: > > for x in seq: > > > translates (roughly) to this: > > _it = iter(seq) > while True: > try: > x = next(_it) > except StopIteration: > break > >

[Python-Dev] Should the definition of an "(async) iterator" include __iter__?

Over in https://github.com/python/typeshed/issues/6030 I have managed to kick up a discussion over what exactly an "iterator" is. If you look at https://docs.python.org/3/library/functions.html#iter you will see the docs say it "Return[s] an iterator

[Python-Dev] Re: A better way to freeze modules

On Sat, Sep 11, 2021 at 7:08 PM Gregory Szorc wrote: > Thanks for all the replies, everyone! I'll reply to a few comments > individually. But I first wanted to address the common theme around > zipimport. > > First, one idea that nobody mentioned (and came to me after reading the > replies) was

[Python-Dev] Re: Discrepancy between what aiter() and `async for` requires on purpose?

On Wed, Sep 8, 2021 at 12:49 PM Yury Selivanov wrote: > We have already merged it, the fix is part of the rc2. > Thanks! (If we were on Discourse I would have left a ♥ instead ) > > yury > > > On Wed, Sep 8 2021 at 12:48 PM, Brett Cannon wrote: > >> On Th

[Python-Dev] Re: Discrepancy between what aiter() and `async for` requires on purpose?

On Thu, Sep 2, 2021 at 7:43 PM Yury Selivanov wrote: > Comments inlined: > > On Thu, Sep 2, 2021 at 6:23 PM Guido van Rossum wrote: > >> First of all, we should ping Yury, who implemented `async for` about 6 >> years ago (see PEP 492), and Joshua Bronson, who implemented aiter() and >> anext()

[Python-Dev] Re: PEP-535 (Rich comparison chaining) Discussion?

Link to the PEP: https://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0535/ On Tue, Aug 31, 2021 at 8:52 AM Angus Hollands wrote: > Hi all, > > PEP 535 was deferred until Python 3.8. I would like to discuss the PEP > given that some time has passed, and I _personally_ would benefit from its > acceptance. > > >

[Python-Dev] Re: Discrepancy between what aiter() and `async for` requires on purpose?

On Sun, Aug 29, 2021 at 2:01 PM Serhiy Storchaka wrote: > 29.08.21 23:16, Brett Cannon пише: > > If you look at > > > https://github.com/python/cpython/blob/b11a951f16f0603d98de24fee5c023df83ea552c/Python/ceval.c#L2409-L2451 > > < > https://

[Python-Dev] Discrepancy between what aiter() and `async for` requires on purpose?

If you look at https://github.com/python/cpython/blob/b11a951f16f0603d98de24fee5c023df83ea552c/Python/ceval.c#L2409-L2451 you will see that `async for` requires that the iterator returned from `__aiter__` define `__anext__`. But if you look at aiter() which uses PyObject_GetAiter() from

[Python-Dev] Re: Notes on PEP 8

On Wed, Aug 25, 2021 at 10:38 PM Christopher Barker wrote: > As I was working on removing Python 2 references from PEP 8 (PR: > https://github.com/python/peps/pull/2059), I tried to avoid any other > copy-editing. > > However, I noted a few things that maybe could use some attention: > > stdlib

[Python-Dev] Re: [Steering-council] Re: A ban from Core Developer spaces.

On Thu, Aug 26, 2021 at 12:10 AM Simon Cross wrote: > Hi Thomas, > > Could I ask a bit about the thinking behind extending the ban to a > year? It wouldn't view it as an extension as much as Ethan took immediate action while the SC was simultaneously working on what to do about the situation.

[Python-Dev] My apologies to the list

I just wanted to apologize for any angst or noise my replies to Marco caused folks. I should have known that correcting Marco on how to address me would have triggered an outsized reply (the real intent of that overall email was to communicate the process of banning someone to the rest of the list

[Python-Dev] Re: Should PEP 8 be updated for Python 3 only?

On Wed, Aug 25, 2021 at 10:32 AM Mike Miller wrote: > > How about moving Python 2 notes into a section at the bottom? > I don't think that's useful. PEP 8 is still meant for the stdlib which is obviously not using Python 2, so it just becomes baggage. Plus if people want to refer to the old

[Python-Dev] Re: Problems with dict subclassing performance

> SO, and since the question had about 20 votes without dirty tricks, as > Steven subtly insinuates, all of this makes me laugh. Do your worst, > you all little men. As a Mister No One, I will be **PROUD** to be > banned as Stephan Krah. > > > On Mon, 16 Aug 2021 at 18:52, Brett

[Python-Dev] Re: python-dev thread w/ Marco Sulla

On Mon, Aug 16, 2021 at 1:37 PM Jonathan Goble wrote: > On Mon, Aug 16, 2021 at 4:04 PM Nathan C. Fox > wrote: > >> Yes, it was intended to go to python-dev, even though it's not about >> Python development. It's part of a discussion about a pretty hostile and >> off-topic thread that has

[Python-Dev] Re: Problems with dict subclassing performance

On Sun, Aug 15, 2021 at 2:55 PM Marco Sulla wrote: > On Sun, 15 Aug 2021 at 23:33, Tim Peters > wrote:ople have said now, including me, they had no idea what > > you meant.by "I pretend your immediate excuses". It's not a complaint > > that it's expressed inelegantly, but that they can't make

[Python-Dev] python-dev thread w/ Marco Sulla

https://mail.python.org/archives/list/python-dev@python.org/thread/JRFJ4QH7TR35HFRQWOYPPCGOYRFAXK24/ I can't be objective with Marco as I believe we have recorded issues with him previously (as with Steven if you take Marco's initial side with this). The thing that pushed me over the edge to

[Python-Dev] Re: PEP 558, the simplest thing I could come up with

On Sat, Aug 14, 2021 at 8:01 PM Nick Coghlan wrote: > Bringing the public record up to date with a brief off-list discussion > between Mark, Nathaniel and I: > > * Mark hasn't convinced me that getting rid of the frame value cache > entirely for optimised frames is a good idea, so he's going to

[Python-Dev] Re: PEP 467 feedback from the Steering Council

Barry Warsaw wrote: > On Aug 4, 2021, at 07:31, Victor Stinner vstin...@python.org wrote: > > On Tue, Aug 3, 2021 at 7:54 PM Ethan Furman et...@stoneleaf.us wrote: > > I would rather keep `bchr` and lose the `.fromint()` methods. > > I would prefer to only have a bytes.byte(65) method, no bchr() >

[Python-Dev] Re: Should we try to get a complete draft of What's New by b1?

ou will see that we already have the docs for 3.10 and 3.11 available. I don't know if they are updated per release right now or per commit. -Brett > > On Thu, Aug 12, 2021, 3:02 AM Serhiy Storchaka > wrote: > >> 11.08.21 21:35, Brett Cannon пише: >> > So my questio

[Python-Dev] Should we try to get a complete draft of What's New by b1?

Not to specifically pick on Eric V. Smith, but yesterday a co-worker came to me asking about `KW_ONLY` for dataclasses and wanting to provide feedback ( https://docs.python.org/3.10/library/dataclasses.html#dataclasses.KW_ONLY). I said we had reached RC and so it was pretty much too late; the

[Python-Dev] Re: PEP 649: Deferred Evaluation Of Annotations

On Mon, Aug 9, 2021 at 8:31 AM Eric V. Smith wrote: > I'd like to revive the discussion of PEP 649 > [https://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0649/] that started shortly before > development of 3.10 features was closed. This is Larry's PEP to defer > evaluation of __annotations__ until it's actually

[Python-Dev] Re: Repealing PEP 509 (Add a private version to dict)

On Thu, Jul 29, 2021 at 3:47 AM Mark Shannon wrote: > Hi everyone, > > I would like to repeal PEP 509. We don't really have a process for > repealing a PEP. Presumably I would just write another PEP. > Yeah, it's probably a new PEP explaining why the first PEP turned out to not work out since

[Python-Dev] Re: importing does not dispatch to __builtins__.__getitem__ to lookup __import__

On Wed, Jul 14, 2021 at 10:17 AM Patrick Reader wrote: > Hi there, > > I've noticed that, when a frame's __builtins__ is a subclass of dict with > an overridden __getitem__ method, this overriden method is not used by the > IMPORT_NAME instruction to lookup __import__ in the dictionary; it uses

[Python-Dev] Re: Python3 OSF/1 support?

On Wed, Jul 14, 2021 at 9:36 AM Chris Johns wrote: > As someone who has ported Python 3 to another "less commonly used" > system (RISC OS) I just do semi-regular updates rather than trying to > keep it it totally up to date with "main". > > I have some vague recollection of there being talk

[Python-Dev] Re: Is the Python review process flawed?

On Thu, Jul 1, 2021 at 4:54 PM wrote: > Okay so I just code a little bit and I used the multiprocessing module but > my code didn't work and I found the solution on Stack Overflow and it > turned out to be not my mistake (which has never happened before I think). > Instead I found out it's a bug

[Python-Dev] Re: Roundup to GitHub Issues migration

On Tue., Jun. 22, 2021, 14:50 Glenn Linderman, wrote: > On 6/22/2021 12:52 PM, Brett Cannon wrote: > > > > On Mon, Jun 21, 2021 at 4:09 PM Glenn Linderman > wrote: > >> On 6/21/2021 2:31 PM, Christopher Barker wrote: >> >> >> By contrast, requiring a

[Python-Dev] Re: Roundup to GitHub Issues migration

On Mon, Jun 21, 2021 at 4:09 PM Glenn Linderman wrote: > On 6/21/2021 2:31 PM, Christopher Barker wrote: > > > By contrast, requiring a github account for reporting bugs also makes >> python an unwelcoming place for non-developers in general. Github is a >> developers' social network, "mere"

[Python-Dev] Re: change of behaviour for '.' in sys.path between 3.10.0a7 and 3.10.0b1

On Sat., Jun. 5, 2021, 07:38 Robin Becker, wrote: > On 04/06/2021 19:29, Steve Dower wrote: > ... > > > > While we were investigating the reliably broken behaviour, we figured > that related behaviour was > > *unreliably* broken on all platforms. > > > > Specifically, if you imported a

[Python-Dev] Re: PEP 659: Specializing Adaptive Interpreter

more normal. On Wed, May 26, 2021 at 1:00 PM Brett Cannon wrote: > > > On Wed, May 26, 2021 at 4:23 AM Mark Shannon wrote: > >> Hi Brett, >> >> On 26/05/2021 3:56 am, Brett Cannon wrote: >> > >> > >> > On Tue., May 25, 2021, 12:

[Python-Dev] Re: PEP 659: Specializing Adaptive Interpreter

On Wed, May 26, 2021 at 4:23 AM Mark Shannon wrote: > Hi Brett, > > On 26/05/2021 3:56 am, Brett Cannon wrote: > > > > > > On Tue., May 25, 2021, 12:58 Guido van Rossum, > <mailto:gu...@python.org>> wrote: > > > > On Tue, May 25, 2021 at 12

[Python-Dev] Re: PEP 659: Specializing Adaptive Interpreter

On Tue., May 25, 2021, 12:58 Guido van Rossum, wrote: > On Tue, May 25, 2021 at 12:34 PM Brett Cannon wrote: > >> >> I personally think it should be a Standards Track PEP. This PEP isn't >> documenting some detail like PEP 13 or some release schedule, but is >> in

[Python-Dev] Re: PEP 659: Specializing Adaptive Interpreter

On Thu, May 13, 2021 at 1:38 AM Mark Shannon wrote: > Hi Terry, > > On 13/05/2021 8:20 am, Terry Reedy wrote: > > On 5/12/2021 1:40 PM, Mark Shannon wrote: > > > >> This is an informational PEP about a key part of our plan to improve > >> CPython performance for 3.11 and beyond. > > > > What is

[Python-Dev] Re: python-iterators mailing list on SourceForge

On Fri, May 21, 2021 at 9:25 AM Julien Palard via Python-Dev < python-dev@python.org> wrote: > Le 5/11/21 à 8:39 PM, Guido van Rossum a écrit : > > I doubt that anyone has the keys to the python project on sourceforge > > any more... :-( We've abandoned that platform nearly two decades ago. > >

[Python-Dev] Re: Future PEP: Include Fine Grained Error Locations in Tracebacks

On Sat, May 8, 2021 at 2:59 PM Gregory P. Smith wrote: > > > On Sat, May 8, 2021 at 2:09 PM Pablo Galindo Salgado > wrote: > >> > Why not put in it -O instead? Then -O means lose asserts and lose >> fine-grained tracebacks, while -OO continues to also >> strip out doc strings. >> >> What if

[Python-Dev] Re: Future PEP: Include Fine Grained Error Locations in Tracebacks

On Fri, May 7, 2021 at 7:31 PM Pablo Galindo Salgado wrote: > Although we were originally not sympathetic with it, we may need to offer > an opt-out mechanism for those users that care about the impact of the > overhead of the new data in pyc files > and in in-memory code objectsas was suggested

[Python-Dev] Re: Can't sync cpython main to my fork

Just today, GitHub launched a new feature to sync a branch with upstream via the web UI. https://github.blog/changelog/2021-05-06-sync-an-out-of-date-branch-of-a-fork-from-the-web On Thu., May 6, 2021, 15:16 Ethan Furman, wrote: > On 5/6/21 7:14 AM, Jelle Zijlstra wrote: > > > Maybe others

[Python-Dev] Re: Revive PEP 396 -- Module Version Numbers ?

On Mon, Apr 26, 2021 at 3:25 PM Stestagg wrote: > > > On Mon, Apr 26, 2021 at 10:31 PM Brett Cannon wrote: > >> >> >> On Mon, Apr 26, 2021 at 9:37 AM Baptiste Carvello < >> devel2...@baptiste-carvello.net> wrote: >> >>> Hi, >>>

[Python-Dev] Re: Revive PEP 396 -- Module Version Numbers ?

On Mon, Apr 26, 2021 at 9:37 AM Baptiste Carvello < devel2...@baptiste-carvello.net> wrote: > Hi, > > sorry for being late to the party, but I may not be the only one wondering… > > Le 14/04/2021 à 20:56, Barry Warsaw a écrit : > > > > I’d forgotten that this PEP was in Deferred state. I think

[Python-Dev] Re: PEP 563 and 649: The Great Compromise

On Sat., Apr. 24, 2021, 20:55 Carl Meyer, wrote: > Hi Larry, > > This is a creative option, but I am optimistic (now that the SC > decision has removed the 3.10 deadline urgency) that we can find a > path forward that is workable for everyone and doesn't require a > permanent compiler feature

[Python-Dev] Asking for clarifications in PEP 646 and postponing to Python 3.11

First, the SC is postponing considering accepting https://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0646/ any further until Python 3.11. There's unfortunately not enough time before b1 to get requested updates into the PEP, discuss the PEP again, approve it, and then review an implementation thoroughly.

[Python-Dev] Re: Keeping Python a Duck Typed Language.

On Thu, Apr 22, 2021 at 4:11 AM Paul Moore wrote: > On Thu, 22 Apr 2021 at 11:21, Paul Moore wrote: > > > > On Thu, 22 Apr 2021 at 11:06, Chris Angelico wrote: > > > > > > Someone will likely correct me if this is inaccurate, but my > > > understanding is that that's exactly what you get if

[Python-Dev] Re: In support of PEP 649

On Thu, Apr 15, 2021 at 12:01 PM Samuel Colvin wrote: > I've read the recent discussions > > regarding PEP 649 and PEP 563 with interest, Larry Hastings

[Python-Dev] Re: Revive PEP 396 -- Module Version Numbers ?

On Thu, Apr 15, 2021 at 10:53 AM Antoine Pitrou wrote: > On Thu, 15 Apr 2021 10:28:53 -0700 > Brett Cannon wrote: > > On Thu, Apr 15, 2021 at 8:50 AM Christopher Barker > > wrote: > > > > > On Thu, Apr 15, 2021 at 2:40 AM Victor Stinner > > > wrot

[Python-Dev] Re: Revive PEP 396 -- Module Version Numbers ?

On Thu, Apr 15, 2021 at 8:50 AM Christopher Barker wrote: > On Thu, Apr 15, 2021 at 2:40 AM Victor Stinner > wrote: > >> Paul Bryan: >> > Seems like this is something that should make its way into stdlib? >> >> In the last 10 years, the trend is more to remove anything related to >> packaging

[Python-Dev] Re: Revive PEP 396 -- Module Version Numbers ?

On Thu, Apr 15, 2021 at 9:36 AM David Mertz wrote: > On Thu, Apr 15, 2021 at 4:55 PM Christopher Barker > wrote: > >> Presumably that's why importlib.metadata exists in the stdlib. >> > > I was so hopeful about this, but in the end... not really. I have not > used this capability before. Here

[Python-Dev] Re: PEP 649: Deferred Evaluation Of Annotations Using Descriptors, round 2

On Wed, Apr 14, 2021 at 12:08 PM Guido van Rossum wrote: > Let's just wait for the SC to join the discussion. I'm sure they will, > eventually. > FYI the PEP has not been sent to us via https://github.com/python/steering-council/issues as ready for pronouncement, so we have not started

[Python-Dev] Re: PEP 649: Deferred Evaluation Of Annotations Using Descriptors, round 2

On Tue, Apr 13, 2021 at 6:58 PM Inada Naoki wrote: > On Wed, Apr 14, 2021 at 10:44 AM Larry Hastings > wrote: > > > > > > On 4/13/21 1:52 PM, Guido van Rossum wrote: > > > > > > Because typing is, to many folks, a Really Important Concept, and it's > confusing to use the same syntax ("x: blah

[Python-Dev] Re: Typing syntax and ecosystem

On Tue, Apr 13, 2021 at 5:12 PM Hugh Fisher wrote: > On Wed, 14 Apr 2021 at 08:21, Barry Warsaw wrote: > > I wouldn’t necessarily be opposed to bundling a type checker with the > interpreter/stdlib, but I think there are some issues with it. Just off > the top of my head (there are undoubtedly

[Python-Dev] Re: gzip.py: allow deterministic compression (without time stamp)

On Wed, Apr 14, 2021 at 5:00 AM Joachim Wuttke wrote: > gzip compression, using class GzipFile from gzip.py, by default > inserts a timestamp to the compressed stream. If the optional > argument `mtime` is absent or None, then the current time is used [1]. > > This makes outputs

[Python-Dev] Re: Typing syntax and ecosystem

On Mon, Apr 12, 2021 at 2:19 PM wrote: > April 12, 2021 4:59 PM, "Brett Cannon" wrote: > > > On Mon, Apr 12, 2021 at 3:01 AM Hugh Fisher > wrote: > > > >>> Message: 1 > >>> Date: Sun, 11 Apr 2021 13:31:12 -0700 > >>> F

[Python-Dev] Re: Typing syntax and ecosystem

On Mon, Apr 12, 2021 at 3:01 AM Hugh Fisher wrote: > > Message: 1 > > Date: Sun, 11 Apr 2021 13:31:12 -0700 > > From: Barry Warsaw > > Subject: [Python-Dev] Re: PEP 647 Accepted > > > > > This is something the SC has been musing about, but as it’s not a fully > formed idea, I’m a little

[Python-Dev] Re: When we remove 'U' mode of open()?

On Wed, Apr 7, 2021 at 10:01 AM Serhiy Storchaka wrote: > 07.04.21 19:13, Victor Stinner пише: > > Hi Inada-san, > > > > I'm +0 on removing again the flag, but I would prefer to not endorse > > the responsibility. I am already responsible for enough incompatible > > changes in Python 3.10 :-D >

[Python-Dev] Re: How to attract developer attention to issue tracker items?

On Tue, Apr 6, 2021 at 11:22 PM wrote: > Hi developers, > > What should / shouldn't I do to attract any python developer response to > issue tracker items? I am unsure of the proper procedure to follow so I am > asking here first. > What you're doing here is probably your best bet.

[Python-Dev] Re: Weird io.OpenWrapper hack to use a function as method

On Wed., Mar. 31, 2021, 18:56 Inada Naoki, wrote: > Do we need _pyio at all? > Does PyPy or any other Python implementation use it? > https://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0399/ would suggest rolling back Python support is something to avoid. > On Wed, Mar 31, 2021 at 9:36 PM Victor Stinner >

[Python-Dev] Re: Where and how can I contribute?

devguide.python.org has some guidelines on how to find easy issues to work on. You can also ask for help on core-mentors...@python.org. On Fri, Mar 26, 2021 at 3:32 AM Marco Sulla wrote: > I would contribute to the project in my spare time. Can someone point > me to some easy task? I know C and

[Python-Dev] Re: Alternative syntax for Python's lambda

That discussion has not even made it here yet; it seems to still only be on python-ideas and thus that's probably the best place to leave a comment on the subject (for now). On Thu, Mar 25, 2021 at 9:55 PM Dan Stromberg wrote: > > Please see https://lwn.net/Articles/847960/ > > :) > > On Thu,

[Python-Dev] Re: Merge Request Review Reminder

On Fri, Mar 19, 2021 at 9:29 AM Faisal Mahmood wrote: > Hello, > > Following my previous e-mail last month, thank you for responding. I > almost immediately got two reviewers who posted helpful comments on my PR > which I believe have all been resolved now. > > Today, I got a notification to

[Python-Dev] Re: aiter/anext review request

t;> On Fri, Mar 19, 2021 at 11:29 AM Luciano Ramalho >>> wrote: >>> >>>> Thanks for working on this, Joshua. I agree 100% with Jelle Zijlstra >>>> in the issue tracker: >>>> >>>> Do these really need to be builtins? >>>>

[Python-Dev] Re: pth file encoding

On Mon, Mar 15, 2021 at 7:53 PM Inada Naoki wrote: > Hi, all. > > I found .pth file is decoded by the default (i.e. locale-specific) > encoding. > > https://github.com/python/cpython/blob/0269ce87c9347542c54a653dd78b9f60bb9fa822/Lib/site.py#L173 > > pth files contain: > > * import statements > *

[Python-Dev] Re: Reviving PEP 473

Since tweaking the built-in exceptions is so far-reaching, probably at least discussing each proposed change (one at a time, not 5 at once) would be the minimum. Otherwise you could do a PEP, but once again you're looking at a PEP per exception. I think it's really going to come down to how big of

[Python-Dev] Re: [Steering-council] Re: PEP 651, Robust Stack Overflow Handling, Rejection notice

Speaking for myself ... On Fri, Mar 5, 2021 at 7:04 AM Mark Shannon wrote: > Hi, > > Thanks for taking the time to consider the PEP. > > Although the PEP was rejected, I still believe that the safety > guarantees in PEP 651 are worth adding to Python in the future. > > To do that (maybe for

[Python-Dev] Re: PEP 637 - Support for indexing with keyword arguments: request for feedback for SC submission

On Thu, Feb 25, 2021 at 8:46 AM Thor Whalen wrote: > Finally! One of my top python wishes! > > Where can I vote? > There is no explicit voting, but thanks for sharing your opinion! > > How can I get my hands on a back port? > Probably can't since it will be new to 3.10 if the PEP gets

[Python-Dev] Re: Move support of legacy platforms/architectures outside Python

On Sun, Feb 21, 2021 at 12:28 PM Gregory P. Smith wrote: > > On Sun, Feb 21, 2021 at 10:15 AM Christian Heimes > wrote: > >> On 21/02/2021 13.47, glaub...@debian.org wrote: >> > Rust doesn't keep any user from building Rust for Tier 2 or Tier 3 >> platforms. There is no separate configure

[Python-Dev] Anyone interested in leading a sprint at PyCascades tomorrow?

It's short notice, but PyCascades is hosting sprints on Sunday, Feb. 21 from 09:00 - 12:30 PST tomorrow and the organizers wanted to see if anyone happened to be up for leading or helping out anyone who wants to sprint on CPython. https://2021.pycascades.com/program/sprints/

[Python-Dev] Re: Security releases of CPython

On Fri, Feb 19, 2021 at 3:10 PM Stestagg wrote: > > > On Fri, 19 Feb 2021 at 22:50, Christian Heimes > wrote: > >> On 19/02/2021 23.22, Stestagg wrote: >> > The thing that stood out from this conversation, for me, is: Releases >> > are too hard, and there’s a risk of not having enough

[Python-Dev] Re: Clarification on the removal of generator-based coroutines in 3.10

On Thu, Feb 18, 2021 at 9:04 PM Guido van Rossum wrote: > On Thu, Feb 18, 2021 at 8:23 PM Luciano Ramalho > wrote: > >> Thanks for your reply, Guido. >> >> On Fri, Feb 19, 2021 at 12:07 AM Guido van Rossum >> wrote: >> > Reading the doc section you link to, it's pretty clear that >>

[Python-Dev] Re: Security releases of CPython

On Fri, Feb 19, 2021 at 2:16 AM Michał Górny wrote: > On Thu, 2021-02-11 at 23:24 -0500, Terry Reedy wrote: > > On 2/11/2021 3:23 PM, Michał Górny wrote: > > > Hello, > > > > > > I'm the primary maintainer of CPython packages in Gentoo. I would like > > > to discuss possible improvement to the

[Python-Dev] Re: Python 0.9.1

If we can get a clean copy of the original sources I think we should put them up under the Python org on GitHub for posterity. On Wed, Feb 17, 2021 at 6:10 AM Skip Montanaro wrote: > This is getting a bit more off-topic for python-dev than I'd like. I > will make a couple comments though, then

[Python-Dev] Re: Signature discrepancies between documentation and implementation

On Tue., Feb. 9, 2021, 12:20 Serhiy Storchaka, wrote: > 09.02.21 12:22, Erlend Aasland пише: > > What's the recommended approach with issues like > https://bugs.python.org/issue43094? Change the docs or the > implementation? I did a quick search on bpo, but could not find similar > past issues.

[Python-Dev] Re: Why aren't we allowing the use of C11?

On Thu, Jan 28, 2021 at 8:31 AM Mark Shannon wrote: > Hi everyone, > > PEP 7 says that C code should conform to C89 with a subset of C99 allowed. > It's 2021 and all the major compilers support C11 (ignoring the optional > parts). > > C11 has support for thread locals, static asserts, and

[Python-Dev] Re: New sys.module_names attribute in Python 3.10: list of all stdlib modules

On Tue, Jan 26, 2021 at 1:26 AM Antoine Pitrou wrote: > On Tue, 26 Jan 2021 10:36:10 +1100 > Steven D'Aprano wrote: > > On Mon, Jan 25, 2021 at 06:17:09PM +0100, Victor Stinner wrote: > > > Hi Bernat, > > > > > > "stdlib_module_names" was my first idea but it looks too long, so I > > > chose

[Python-Dev] Re: pathlib.Path: inconsistent symlink_to() and link_to()

> in mailing list etiquette. > Not a problem! Sometimes it's just called for, and you kept the old emails quoted in your reply which helps. -Brett > > Best, > > Barney > > [0] https://github.com/python/cpython/pull/18909#discussion_r392416154 > [1] https://bugs.python.org/

[Python-Dev] The SC is accepting PEP 632: deprecating distutils

On behalf of the SC, I'm happy to announce that we have chosen to accept PEP 632. Congrats, Steve, and thanks for the work on the PEP! I'll let Steve outline what the next steps are for implementing the PEP. ___ Python-Dev mailing list --

[Python-Dev] Re: Bumping minimum Sphinx version to 3.2 for cpython 3.10?

On Wed, Jan 13, 2021 at 7:25 AM Serhiy Storchaka wrote: > 12.01.21 22:38, Julien Palard via Python-Dev пише: > > During the development of cpython 3.10, Sphinx was bumped to 3.2.1. > > > > Problem is Sphinx 3 have some incompatibilities with Sphinx 2, some that > > we could work around, some are

[Python-Dev] Re: Let's Fix Class Annotations -- And Maybe Annotations Generally

On Tue, Jan 12, 2021 at 6:31 PM Larry Hastings wrote: > > On 1/12/21 5:28 PM, Brett Cannon wrote: > > The other thing to keep in mind is we are talking about every module, > class, and function getting 64 bytes ... which I bet isn't that much. > > Actually it's only e

[Python-Dev] Re: 3.10 change (?) for __bool__

On Tue, Jan 12, 2021 at 9:51 AM Chris Angelico wrote: > On Wed, Jan 13, 2021 at 4:24 AM Richard Damon > wrote: > > > > On 1/12/21 10:53 AM, Mark Shannon wrote: > > > Hi everyone, > > > > > > Should the optimizer eliminate tests that it can prove have no effect > > > on the control flow of the

[Python-Dev] Re: Let's Fix Class Annotations -- And Maybe Annotations Generally

On Mon, Jan 11, 2021 at 5:57 PM Larry Hastings wrote: > > On 1/11/21 5:05 PM, Greg Ewing wrote: > > On 12/01/21 6:22 am, Larry Hastings wrote: > > * The language will set __annotations__ to a dict if the object has > >annotations, or None if it has no annotations. > > > That sounds

[Python-Dev] Re: Let's Fix Class Annotations -- And Maybe Annotations Generally

On Mon, Jan 11, 2021 at 9:23 AM Larry Hastings wrote: > [SNIP - background info] > > > If I could wave my magic wand and do whatever I wanted, I'd change the > semantics for __annotations__ to the following: > > * Functions, classes, and modules always have an __annotations__ member > set. > *

[Python-Dev] Re: unittest of sequence equality

On Tue, Dec 22, 2020 at 10:54 AM Alan G. Isaac wrote: > The following test fails because because `seq1 == seq2` returns a > (boolean) NumPy array > whenever either seq is a NumPy array. > > import unittest > import numpy as np > unittest.TestCase().assertSequenceEqual([1.,2.,3.],

[Python-Dev] Re: Python package funding through command-line

This mailing list is for the development of Python. Pip development is primarily discussed at https://discuss.python.org/c/packaging/14. But I would also check their issue tracker as I believe they already have an issue open about this (I think it's called `pip thanks`). On Thu, Dec 17, 2020 at

[Python-Dev] Re: NEWS, changelog, and blurb -- a teaching moment

On Wed, Dec 9, 2020 at 7:38 PM Larry Hastings wrote: > On 12/9/20 5:21 PM, Ethan Furman wrote: > > On 12/9/20 5:01 PM, Larry Hastings wrote: > > > "Misc/NEWS" is no longer checked in, it's generated on demand using > "blurb merge". > > So if I understand correctly, blurb makes NEWS, but

[Python-Dev] Re: macOS issues with 3.8.7rc1

On Wed, Dec 9, 2020 at 10:16 AM Gregory P. Smith wrote: > > > As a meta question: Is there a good reason to support binaries running on > macOS earlier than ~ $latest_version-1? > > Aren't systems running those old releases rather than upgrading > unsupported by Apple, never to be patched, and

[Python-Dev] SC 2020 recommendation for PEP 634

After much deliberation, the 2020 SC will be making a recommendation to the 2021 SC to accept PEP 634 (although this was not a unanimous decision). This is in no way a binding recommendation to the 2021 SC (even if a majority of current council members get re-elected), but we felt we should pass

[Python-Dev] Re: Distro packagers: PEP 615 and the tzdata dependency

On Sun, Nov 29, 2020 at 8:54 AM Miro Hrončok wrote: > On 11/28/20 9:30 PM, Paul Ganssle wrote: > > Considering the people involved and the nature of the list, I suspect > that > > adding a new @python.org mailing list would be better than discourse. > In my > > experience, it's very difficult to

[Python-Dev] Re: Distro packagers: PEP 615 and the tzdata dependency

/24/20 7:50 PM, Brett Cannon wrote: > > If enough people were interested we could create a "Distributors" > > category on discuss.python.org <http://discuss.python.org>. > > I'd join :) > > > > > On Tue, Nov 24, 2020 at 9:08 AM Tianon Gravi > <m

[Python-Dev] Re: Thanks for the Dev Guide

: > > The dev guide is a community project, like all of Python. But IIRC the > person who drove it and did I think most of the heavy lifting on it was > Brett Cannon. > > And yes, it *is* excellent, isn't it :D > > > */arry* > > On 11/26/20 11:28 AM, Richard Levass

[Python-Dev] Re: Distro packagers: PEP 615 and the tzdata dependency

If enough people were interested we could create a "Distributors" category on discuss.python.org. On Tue, Nov 24, 2020 at 9:08 AM Tianon Gravi wrote: > > I'd love to have an easy way to keep them in the loop. > > I'm one of the maintainers on https://github.com/docker-library/python > (which is

[Python-Dev] Re: The semantics of pattern matching for Python

On Thu, Nov 19, 2020 at 5:16 AM Steve Holden wrote: > On Wed, Nov 18, 2020 at 7:04 PM Daniel Moisset > wrote: > >> [sorry for the duplicate, meant to reply-all] >> >> Thank you for this approach, I find it really helpful to put the >> conversation in these terms (semantics and guiding

[Python-Dev] Re: How Cpython repository has a pre-commit hook ? (as in PEP8)

On Thu, Nov 19, 2020 at 10:47 AM Nilo César Teixeira < nilo.teixe...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hello, > > I'm not a Python contributor but I have a question which (I believe) can > be answered here, so I've subscribed. > > The question is at stackoverflow: >

[Python-Dev] Re: PEP 642: Constraint Pattern Syntax for Structural Pattern Matching

On Wed, Nov 18, 2020 at 1:25 AM Robin Becker wrote: > Is there a bestiary of examples for the current pattern matching > proposal(s)? > > It seems I don't have a good handle on how one matches simple tests like > callability, Doable using protocols. > function signatures, I don't think

[Python-Dev] Re: Why does "except Ex as x" not restore the previous value of x?

On Tue, Nov 17, 2020 at 10:16 PM Greg Ewing wrote: > On 18/11/20 4:36 pm, Larry Hastings wrote: > > > > But, > > the thinking went, you'd never want to examine the last value from a > > list generator, so it was more convenient if it behaved as if it had its > > own scope. > > List

[Python-Dev] Re: Questions about about the DLS 2020

for a wildcard pattern did it from early on, not later on; it had nothing to do with the proposal proposing pattern matching late in Python's history. > > Kind regards, > Tobias > > P.S. Sorry, I guess this turned out to be not so much a reply to your > comment alone, as much more a rep

[Python-Dev] Re: Questions about about the DLS 2020

On Mon, Nov 16, 2020 at 9:03 AM Tobias Kohn wrote: > Hi Mark, > > Thank you for your interest and the questions. > > > 1. This really comes down to how you look at it, or how you define > pattern matching. The issue here is that the concept of pattern matching > has grown into a large and

[Python-Dev] Re: [python-committers] Re: Steering Council Election Timeline for 2021 term

Ernest closed the nominations and we ended up with 10 nominees! Thanks to everyone who stepped forward to serve on the SC. I would like to encourage people to take the time to read everyone's nomination posts as stances on a wide variety of topics ranging from pattern matching to the Code of

[Python-Dev] Re: PEP 642 v2: Explicit constraint patterns *without* question marks in the syntax

On Thu, Nov 12, 2020 at 11:41 PM Paul Sokolovsky wrote: > Hello, > > On Thu, 12 Nov 2020 12:51:19 -0800 > Guido van Rossum wrote: > > > I have a meta-observation. Clearly there are too many cooks here. The > > same suggestions keep getting brought up. We will never converge on a > > design this

[Python-Dev] Re: My thoughts on Pattern Matching.

On Mon, Nov 9, 2020 at 10:40 PM Tobias Kohn wrote: > Hi Thomas, > > Thank you very much for your carefully worded and thoughtful email. I > feel, however, that many of your concerns are based on an idealised > picture of a future Python language that will never actually > materialise. > > As I

[Python-Dev] Re: Who is target reader of tutorial?

A documentation WG is going to be formed which will be in a better position to answer this, so until that WG is started I think we should keep the tutorial aimed towards beginners. On Thu, Nov 5, 2020 at 1:13 AM Inada Naoki wrote: > Hi, all. > > Since "How To" guide is not organized well, it is

[Python-Dev] Re: Pattern matching reborn: PEP 622 is dead, long live PEP 634, 635, 636

On Fri, Oct 30, 2020 at 6:39 PM Tin Tvrtković wrote: > A small update on this, since I've been playing with it. > > I'm trying to implement a websocket proxy, since it's an example of a toy > project that needs to juggle two long-lived asyncio connections at once. > I'm using Starlette/Uvicorn

[Python-Dev] Re: Drop Solaris, OpenSolaris, Illumos and OpenIndiana support in Python

On Fri, Oct 30, 2020 at 6:37 AM Pablo Galindo Salgado wrote: > >Two volunteer core developers and at least one buildbot would help a > > lot to ensure that Python is working on Solaris for real, and reduce > > the number of open Solaris issues. If it happens, I'm perfectly fine > > with keeping

[Python-Dev] Re: PEP 11: Drop support for AIX releases without dlopen

On Tue, Oct 20, 2020 at 11:10 AM Kevin Adler wrote: > Brett Cannon wrote: > > On Mon, Oct 19, 2020 at 4:43 PM Kevin Adler kad...@linux.vnet.ibm.com > > wrote: > > > Should this list be updated to mention that AIX 5.3 and below are no > > > longer supported? >

<    1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   9   10   >