Re: [Python-Dev] arguments policy: **kwargs.pop()

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 04/10/2014 10:12 PM, Christian Tismer wrote: > I always used the policy that arguments are never changed by a > function, unless explicitly stated. But since I see this pattern quite > frequently, I wanted to ask if I am right by thinking this way,

Re: [Python-Dev] arguments policy: **kwargs.pop()

I'm not sure what you're worried about here. Modifying kwds doesn't actually modify the dict that was passed in. So are you just talking about the style issue? Or would you also object to this: def foo(x=1): x += 1 ? On Thu, Apr 10, 2014 at 10:12 PM, Christian Tismer wrote: > Hi guys, > >

[Python-Dev] arguments policy: **kwargs.pop()

Hi guys, I tried to find advice for hours, but failed so fer, so here is my question: Whenever I think to adopt a new module that does a good job, I always can't stand the temptation to look at the coding style and certain principles. Then I rather often see things like this: class someclass(ob

Re: [Python-Dev] Windows installers and OpenSSL

On 11.04.2014 03:15, Nick Coghlan wrote: > On 10 Apr 2014 18:55, "Benjamin Peterson" wrote: >> >> On Thu, Apr 10, 2014, at 14:50, Gregory P. Smith wrote: >>> Yep. All binary Python distributions that bundle SSL support need >>> updating. >>> But... what MRAB said. >>> >>> We also *likely* have SSL

Re: [Python-Dev] Windows installers and OpenSSL

On 10 Apr 2014 18:55, "Benjamin Peterson" wrote: > > On Thu, Apr 10, 2014, at 14:50, Gregory P. Smith wrote: > > Yep. All binary Python distributions that bundle SSL support need > > updating. > > But... what MRAB said. > > > > We also *likely* have SSL certificates and SSH host keys on > > python

Re: [Python-Dev] Language Summit notes

On 10 Apr 2014 10:23, "Antoine Pitrou" wrote: > > Le 10/04/2014 13:24, Kushal Das a écrit : > >> >> At this time of discussion Nick pointed us to >> `http://speed.python.org/ `_, he asked if >> any of the implementations >> wants to maintain it. We need more volunteers fo

Re: [Python-Dev] Windows installers and OpenSSL

On Thu, Apr 10, 2014, at 14:50, Gregory P. Smith wrote: > Yep. All binary Python distributions that bundle SSL support need > updating. > But... what MRAB said. > > We also *likely* have SSL certificates and SSH host keys on > python.orginfrastructure that need to be revoked and new certs > reissu

Re: [Python-Dev] Windows installers and OpenSSL

Yep. All binary Python distributions that bundle SSL support need updating. But... what MRAB said. We also *likely* have SSL certificates and SSH host keys on python.orginfrastructure that need to be revoked and new certs reissued *after* all of those machines have been patched and their services

Re: [Python-Dev] Language Summit notes

On Apr 10, 2014, at 12:34 PM, Eli Bendersky wrote: >There's absolutely no reason to exempt CFFI, IMHO. On the contrary -- the >dependence on other 3rd party modules (PLY and pycparesr), and the related >dilemma of whether to expose each/both as stdlib modules or hide as >internal implementation de

Re: [Python-Dev] Language Summit notes

On Thu, Apr 10, 2014 at 3:12 PM, Paul Moore wrote: > On 10 April 2014 20:30, Antoine Pitrou wrote: > > FWIW, I do hope there would be a PEP before including CFFI... Actually I > > don't understand what would justify an exemption. > > I agree. I'd like to see a clear explanation of what advantage

Re: [Python-Dev] Language Summit notes

On 10 April 2014 20:30, Antoine Pitrou wrote: > FWIW, I do hope there would be a PEP before including CFFI... Actually I > don't understand what would justify an exemption. I agree. I'd like to see a clear explanation of what advantages (and disadvantages!) CFFI gives over ctypes, as well as the

Re: [Python-Dev] Language Summit notes

Well, I was going to put off requesting a PEP until I'd judged the plan, but clearly (a) there isn't actually a plan (just some vague description of an end result that some feel desirable) and (b) it's controversial. So, yes, it definitely needs a PEP. Also, even though this came up a year ago, nob

Re: [Python-Dev] Language Summit notes

Le 10/04/2014 20:58, Guido van Rossum a écrit : Huh, I totally missed this (and I just gave Kushal a confused answer when he asked me about it in person). Can someone please post here what the plan is exactly? I don't want to press for a PEP, but I would at least like to understand the plan for

Re: [Python-Dev] Language Summit notes

On Thu, Apr 10, 2014 at 12:30 PM, Antoine Pitrou wrote: > Le 10/04/2014 20:58, Guido van Rossum a écrit : > > >> Huh, I totally missed this (and I just gave Kushal a confused answer >> when he asked me about it in person). Can someone please post here what >> the plan is exactly? I don't want to p

Re: [Python-Dev] Language Summit notes

On Thu, Apr 10, 2014 at 12:58 PM, Guido van Rossum wrote: > On Thu, Apr 10, 2014 at 11:41 AM, Thomas Wouters wrote: > >> >> On Thu, Apr 10, 2014 at 4:24 AM, Kushal Das wrote: > > >>> >>> There was a small discussion about state of CFFI for standard library >>> inclusion. Alex and David Beazley a

Re: [Python-Dev] Language Summit notes

On Thu, Apr 10, 2014 at 11:41 AM, Thomas Wouters wrote: > On Thu, Apr 10, 2014 at 4:24 AM, Kushal Das wrote: > > There was a small discussion about state of CFFI for standard library >> inclusion. Alex and David Beazley are supposed to >> work on cleaning PLY for the same. General opinion wa

Re: [Python-Dev] Language Summit notes

On Thu, Apr 10, 2014 at 4:24 AM, Kushal Das wrote: > On Thu, Apr 10, 2014 at 6:38 AM, Guido van Rossum > wrote: > > To anyone who took notes at the language summit at PyCon today, even if > you > > took them just for yourself, would you mind posting them here? It would > be > > good to have some

Re: [Python-Dev] Language Summit notes

On Thu, Apr 10, 2014 at 7:50 PM, Antoine Pitrou wrote: > > > I feel a bit tired to point out that there *is* a common set of > cross-implementation benchmarks at http://hg.python.org/benchmarks > > It is maintained and there is also a mailing-list to discuss it at > https://mail.python.org/mailman

Re: [Python-Dev] Windows installers and OpenSSL

On 2014-04-10 14:41, Paul Moore wrote: Given the OpenSSL vulnerability and the fact that we bundle OpenSSL with the Windows installers (1.0.1e in Python 3.4.0) should we be releasing updated installers? I'd say yes, but, then, I wouldn't be doing any of the work... _

Re: [Python-Dev] Language Summit notes

Maybe we don't need a volunteer to maintain it, but we sure need a volunteer to coordinate and spread the knowledge! :-) On Thu, Apr 10, 2014 at 10:20 AM, Antoine Pitrou wrote: > Le 10/04/2014 13:24, Kushal Das a écrit : > > >> At this time of discussion Nick pointed us to >> `http://speed.pytho

Re: [Python-Dev] Language Summit notes

Le 10/04/2014 13:24, Kushal Das a écrit : At this time of discussion Nick pointed us to `http://speed.python.org/ `_, he asked if any of the implementations wants to maintain it. We need more volunteers for that, target is to have a common set of tests to benchmark diff

[Python-Dev] Windows installers and OpenSSL

Given the OpenSSL vulnerability and the fact that we bundle OpenSSL with the Windows installers (1.0.1e in Python 3.4.0) should we be releasing updated installers? Paul ___ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/lis

Re: [Python-Dev] Language Summit notes

On Wed, Apr 09, 2014 at 09:08:04PM -0400, Guido van Rossum wrote: > To anyone who took notes at the language summit at PyCon today, even if you > took them just for yourself, would you mind posting them here? It would be > good to have some kind of (informal!) as soon as possible, before we > colle

Re: [Python-Dev] PEP 465: A dedicated infix operator for matrix multiplication

2014-04-09 17:37 GMT+02:00 Nathaniel Smith : > On Wed, Apr 9, 2014 at 4:25 PM, Björn Lindqvist wrote: >> 2014-04-08 14:52 GMT+02:00 Nathaniel Smith : >>> On Tue, Apr 8, 2014 at 9:58 AM, Björn Lindqvist wrote: 2014-04-07 3:41 GMT+02:00 Nathaniel Smith : > So, I guess as far as I'm concern

Re: [Python-Dev] Language Summit notes

On Thu, Apr 10, 2014 at 6:38 AM, Guido van Rossum wrote: > To anyone who took notes at the language summit at PyCon today, even if you > took them just for yourself, would you mind posting them here? It would be > good to have some kind of (informal!) as soon as possible, before we > collectively

Re: [Python-Dev] death to 2.7; long live 2.7

On 10 April 2014 02:58, Benjamin Peterson wrote: >> What will a lack of provided installers do to Windows support? It's >> easy enough on Linux to say "either build it from source, or let your >> upstream package provider build it for you", but AIUI, most Windows >> users want to get a ready-made

Re: [Python-Dev] A Friendly IDLE

On Thu, Apr 10, 2014 at 12:42 AM, Terry Reedy wrote: > On 4/9/2014 12:25 AM, adnanume...@gmail.com wrote: > Python-list, python-ideas, or idle-dev lists might have been better places to > put this, but here are my responses. I'm adding idle-dev, where this belongs. Further discussion should tak

Re: [Python-Dev] death to 2.7; long live 2.7

On 10.04.2014 04:16, Guido van Rossum wrote: > Yeah, this was mentioned a few times. I quipped to Nick that Red Hat's > biggest contribution might be to take over the Windows Installer, but > didn't bite. :-) > > But there's always the PSF. We may try to find some folks we trust with > relevant ex

Re: [Python-Dev] death to 2.7; long live 2.7

Le 10/04/2014 04:09, Senthil Kumaran a écrit : On Wed, Apr 9, 2014 at 10:02 PM, Benjamin Peterson mailto:benja...@python.org>> wrote: I consider the security enhancement/feature question to be in the domain of PEP 466. If security stuff lands in the 2.7 branch, it will get released