On 2020-03-10 19:21, Stefan Behnel wrote:
Hi Petr!
Petr Viktorin schrieb am 14.01.20 um 14:37:
It also includes a more drastic change: it removes the MRO walker from the
proposal.
Reflecting on the feedback, it became clear to me that a MRO walker, as it
was described, won't give correct
Hi Petr!
Petr Viktorin schrieb am 14.01.20 um 14:37:
> It also includes a more drastic change: it removes the MRO walker from the
> proposal.
> Reflecting on the feedback, it became clear to me that a MRO walker, as it
> was described, won't give correct results in all cases: specifically, is a
>
On 2019-11-25 13:15, Stefan Behnel wrote:
Hi all,
I think that PEP 573 is ready to be accepted, to greatly improve the state
of extension modules in CPython 3.9.
https://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0573/
It has come a long way since the original proposal and went through several
iterations
On 2020-01-03 14:36, Petr Viktorin wrote:
On 2019-11-25 13:15, Stefan Behnel wrote:
Hi all,
I think that PEP 573 is ready to be accepted, to greatly improve the
state
of extension modules in CPython 3.9.
https://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0573/
It has come a long way since the original
On 2019-11-25 13:15, Stefan Behnel wrote:
Hi all,
I think that PEP 573 is ready to be accepted, to greatly improve the state
of extension modules in CPython 3.9.
https://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0573/
It has come a long way since the original proposal and went through several
iterations
On Wed, 4 Dec 2019 at 09:44, Nick Coghlan wrote:
>
> I have a few minor copy-editing comments, but I'll submit those as a PR to
> the PEPs repo (it's nothing substantial, just a few wording clarifications,
> and making sure the list of added methods is complete).
Belatedly working on those
I have a few minor copy-editing comments, but I'll submit those as a PR to the
PEPs repo (it's nothing substantial, just a few wording clarifications, and
making sure the list of added methods is complete).
Thanks to you and everyone else for the work on this!
