On 4/18/2014 10:31 PM, Nick Coghlan wrote:
After spending some time talking to the folks at the PyCon Twisted
sprints, they persuaded me that adding back the iterkeys/values/items
methods for mapping objects would be a nice way to eliminate a key
porting hassle for them (and likely others), witho
On Fri, Apr 18, 2014 at 10:31:29PM -0400, Nick Coghlan wrote:
> After spending some time talking to the folks at the PyCon Twisted
> sprints, they persuaded me that adding back the iterkeys/values/items
> methods for mapping objects would be a nice way to eliminate a key
> porting hassle for them (
On Fri, Apr 18, 2014, at 20:05, Victor Stinner wrote:
> Does it mean that depending of the number of items, keys can be mutable?
> It
> sounds like a terrible idea.
I believe Jim is talking about internal implementation.
___
Python-Dev mailing list
Pytho
On Fri, Apr 18, 2014, at 19:31, Nick Coghlan wrote:
> After spending some time talking to the folks at the PyCon Twisted
> sprints, they persuaded me that adding back the iterkeys/values/items
> methods for mapping objects would be a nice way to eliminate a key
> porting hassle for them (and likely
Does it mean that depending of the number of items, keys can be mutable? It
sounds like a terrible idea.
Victor
Le vendredi 18 avril 2014, Jim J. Jewett a écrit :
> (1) I believe the recent consensus was that the number of comparisons
> made in a dict lookup is an implementation detail. (Plea
After spending some time talking to the folks at the PyCon Twisted
sprints, they persuaded me that adding back the iterkeys/values/items
methods for mapping objects would be a nice way to eliminate a key
porting hassle for them (and likely others), without significantly
increasing the complexity of
On 18 April 2014 19:34, Guido van Rossum wrote:
> Thanks, Nick. I hereby approve this PEP. You can update the status yourself.
> Congrats!
Thanks! PEP status updated: http://hg.python.org/peps/rev/d905b6f9c6a9
I also tweaked the type, since it's just an ordinary Standards Track
PEP now, rather t
On Friday, April 18, 2014 3:10:54 PM, Zachary Ware <
zachary.ware+py...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Fri, Apr 18, 2014 at 1:54 PM, Brett Cannon
gmail.com > wrote:
> On Friday, April 18, 2014 2:35:32 PM, Benjamin Peterson
> @
> python.org>
wrote:
>> On Fri, Apr 18, 2014, at 11:29, Antoine Pitrou wrote:
>
On Fri, Apr 18, 2014, at 17:30, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 18, 2014 at 02:57:55PM -0700, Benjamin Peterson wrote:
> > On Fri, Apr 18, 2014, at 14:46, Jim J. Jewett wrote:
> > > (1) I believe the recent consensus was that the number of comparisons
> > > made in a dict lookup is an impleme
On Fri, Apr 18, 2014 at 02:57:55PM -0700, Benjamin Peterson wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 18, 2014, at 14:46, Jim J. Jewett wrote:
> > (1) I believe the recent consensus was that the number of comparisons
> > made in a dict lookup is an implementation detail. (Please correct me
> > if I am wrong.)
>
> Ab
On Apr 18, 2014, at 6:37 PM, Nick Coghlan wrote:
> On 18 April 2014 18:28, Donald Stufft wrote:
>>
>> On Apr 18, 2014, at 6:24 PM, Nick Coghlan wrote:
>>
>>> On 18 April 2014 18:17, Paul Moore wrote:
On 18 April 2014 22:57, Donald Stufft wrote:
> Maybe Nick meant ``pip install ipy
On 18 April 2014 18:28, Donald Stufft wrote:
>
> On Apr 18, 2014, at 6:24 PM, Nick Coghlan wrote:
>
>> On 18 April 2014 18:17, Paul Moore wrote:
>>> On 18 April 2014 22:57, Donald Stufft wrote:
Maybe Nick meant ``pip install ipython[all]`` but I don’t actually know
what that
inc
On Apr 18, 2014, at 6:24 PM, Nick Coghlan wrote:
> On 18 April 2014 18:17, Paul Moore wrote:
>> On 18 April 2014 22:57, Donald Stufft wrote:
>>> Maybe Nick meant ``pip install ipython[all]`` but I don’t actually know
>>> what that
>>> includes. I’ve never used ipython except for the console.
On 18 April 2014 18:17, Paul Moore wrote:
> On 18 April 2014 22:57, Donald Stufft wrote:
>> Maybe Nick meant ``pip install ipython[all]`` but I don’t actually know what
>> that
>> includes. I’ve never used ipython except for the console.
>
> The hard bit is the QT Console, but that's because the
On 18 April 2014 18:16, Greg Ewing wrote:
> Nick Coghlan wrote:
>>
>> there are actually now *two* main ways of consuming
>> Python:
>
>
> Really? We'd better do something about that. We don't want
> anyone consuming Python -- we want some left over for the
> rest of us!
>
> (I'm making a serious
On 18 April 2014 22:57, Donald Stufft wrote:
> Maybe Nick meant ``pip install ipython[all]`` but I don’t actually know what
> that
> includes. I’ve never used ipython except for the console.
The hard bit is the QT Console, but that's because there aren't wheels
for PySide AFAICT.
Paul
_
Nick Coghlan wrote:
there are actually now *two* main ways of consuming
Python:
Really? We'd better do something about that. We don't want
anyone consuming Python -- we want some left over for the
rest of us!
(I'm making a serious point -- it's annoying when people use
the word "consume" as th
On Apr 18, 2014, at 5:48 PM, Paul Moore wrote:
> On 18 April 2014 22:40, Nick Coghlan wrote:
>> Perhaps we can get the "pip install ipython" experience to a good
>> place faster than I currently expect, and we can duck this entire
>> question (at least for Windows and Mac OS X).
>
> Huh? Last
On Fri, Apr 18, 2014, at 14:46, Jim J. Jewett wrote:
> (1) I believe the recent consensus was that the number of comparisons
> made in a dict lookup is an implementation detail. (Please correct me
> if I am wrong.)
Absolutely.
>
> (2) Is "the item will be hashed at least once" a language guar
On 18 April 2014 22:40, Nick Coghlan wrote:
> Perhaps we can get the "pip install ipython" experience to a good
> place faster than I currently expect, and we can duck this entire
> question (at least for Windows and Mac OS X).
Huh? Last time I tried, it was pretty trivial.
pip install pyzmq pyr
(1) I believe the recent consensus was that the number of comparisons
made in a dict lookup is an implementation detail. (Please correct me
if I am wrong.)
(2) Is "the item will be hashed at least once" a language guarantee?
For small mappings, it might well be more efficient to just store the
On 18 April 2014 17:22, Donald Stufft wrote:
>
> On Apr 18, 2014, at 5:08 PM, Nick Coghlan wrote:
>
>> On 18 April 2014 16:50, Donald Stufft wrote:
>>> So I’m not really worried about a competition or anything. I’m mostly
>>> worried
>>> about confusion of users. What you’re suggestion we give
On 18 April 2014 22:08, Nick Coghlan wrote:
> Note that one of my requirements was that "pip install foo" *must* do
> the right thing in conda environments (whatever we decide the "right
> thing" means in that context).
Is this specifically a requirement for conda? Or do you expect the
same to be
On Apr 18, 2014, at 5:08 PM, Nick Coghlan wrote:
> On 18 April 2014 16:50, Donald Stufft wrote:
>> So I’m not really worried about a competition or anything. I’m mostly worried
>> about confusion of users. What you’re suggestion we give to use is *two* ways
>> to install Python packages (and 2
On 18 April 2014 21:59, Nick Coghlan wrote:
> What I am advocating for is that *we are currently doing it wrong*, as
> these are unlikely to be the best thing to install for most new Python
> users.
For Windows users at least, I disagree. I have directed a lot of
people to the python.org Windows
Hi,
On Thu, Apr 17, 2014 at 9:09 PM, Brett Cannon wrote:
>
>
> On Thu Apr 17 2014 at 1:34:23 PM, Jurko Gospodnetić
> wrote:
>>
>>Hi.
>>
>> On 14.4.2014. 23:51, Brett Cannon wrote:
>> > Now the question is whether the maintenance cost of having to rebuild
>> > Python for a select number of st
On 18 April 2014 16:50, Donald Stufft wrote:
> So I’m not really worried about a competition or anything. I’m mostly worried
> about confusion of users. What you’re suggestion we give to use is *two* ways
> to install Python packages (and 2 or 3 ways to virtualize a Python instance).
Note that on
On 18 April 2014 16:27, Paul Moore wrote:
> On 18 April 2014 20:18, Nick Coghlan wrote:
>> At this point, however, I'm mainly looking for consensus that there
>> *are* two different problems to be solved here, and solving them both
>> well in a single tool is likely to be nigh on impossible. (I'm
On Apr 18, 2014, at 4:50 PM, Donald Stufft wrote:
> So I’m not really worried about a competition or anything. I’m mostly worried
> about confusion of users. What you’re suggestion we give to use is *two* ways
> to install Python packages (and 2 or 3 ways to virtualize a Python instance).
> That
On Apr 18, 2014, at 4:22 PM, Nick Coghlan wrote:
> On 18 April 2014 15:39, Donald Stufft wrote:
>>
>> On Apr 18, 2014, at 3:18 PM, Nick Coghlan wrote:
>>
>>> At this point, however, I'm mainly looking for consensus that there
>>> *are* two different problems to be solved here, and solving th
On 18 April 2014 20:18, Nick Coghlan wrote:
> At this point, however, I'm mainly looking for consensus that there
> *are* two different problems to be solved here, and solving them both
> well in a single tool is likely to be nigh on impossible. (I'm aware
> we're really on the wrong list for that
On 18 April 2014 15:39, Donald Stufft wrote:
>
> On Apr 18, 2014, at 3:18 PM, Nick Coghlan wrote:
>
>> At this point, however, I'm mainly looking for consensus that there
>> *are* two different problems to be solved here, and solving them both
>> well in a single tool is likely to be nigh on impo
Hi,
On Thu, Apr 17, 2014 at 10:23 PM, Guido van Rossum wrote:
> It's definitely something that should be put in some documentation,
see http://bugs.python.org/issue14840 and
https://docs.python.org/3/tutorial/datastructures.html#tuples-and-sequences
:
"""
Though tuples may seem similar to lists,
On Apr 18, 2014, at 3:18 PM, Nick Coghlan wrote:
> At this point, however, I'm mainly looking for consensus that there
> *are* two different problems to be solved here, and solving them both
> well in a single tool is likely to be nigh on impossible. (I'm aware
> we're really on the wrong list f
On 18 April 2014 12:55, Paul Moore wrote:
> On 18 April 2014 16:58, Nick Coghlan wrote:
>> As part of thrashing out the respective distribution ecosystem roles
>> of pip and conda (still a work in progress), we're at least converging
>> on the notion that there are actually now *two* main ways of
On Apr 18, 2014, at 2:31 PM, Antoine Pitrou wrote:
> On Fri, 18 Apr 2014 12:04:10 +
> Kristján Valur Jónsson wrote:
>>
>> 2. Feature enhancement to 2.8. Take a robust and popular version of
>> python and add some of the language goodies that have been added to 3.x and
>> that don’
On Fri, Apr 18, 2014 at 1:54 PM, Brett Cannon wrote:
> On Friday, April 18, 2014 2:35:32 PM, Benjamin Peterson
> wrote:
>> On Fri, Apr 18, 2014, at 11:29, Antoine Pitrou wrote:
>> > On Mon, 14 Apr 2014 23:18:42 +0200 (CEST)
>> > brett.cannon wrote:
>> > > http://hg.python.org/devguide/rev/c14c8a
On Friday, April 18, 2014 2:35:32 PM, Benjamin Peterson
wrote:
>
> On Fri, Apr 18, 2014, at 11:29, Antoine Pitrou wrote:
> > On Mon, 14 Apr 2014 23:18:42 +0200 (CEST)
> > brett.cannon wrote:
> > > http://hg.python.org/devguide/rev/c14c8a195fec
> > > changeset: 686:c14c8a195fec
> > > user:
On Fri, Apr 18, 2014, at 11:29, Antoine Pitrou wrote:
> On Mon, 14 Apr 2014 23:18:42 +0200 (CEST)
> brett.cannon wrote:
> > http://hg.python.org/devguide/rev/c14c8a195fec
> > changeset: 686:c14c8a195fec
> > user:Brett Cannon
> > date:Mon Apr 14 17:18:37 2014 -0400
> > summary:
>
On Fri, 18 Apr 2014 12:04:10 +
Kristján Valur Jónsson wrote:
>
> 2. Feature enhancement to 2.8. Take a robust and popular version of
> python and add some of the language goodies that have been added to 3.x and
> that don’t have an inherent 3.x aspect. Yield from. New exception mod
On Mon, 14 Apr 2014 23:18:42 +0200 (CEST)
brett.cannon wrote:
> http://hg.python.org/devguide/rev/c14c8a195fec
> changeset: 686:c14c8a195fec
> user:Brett Cannon
> date:Mon Apr 14 17:18:37 2014 -0400
> summary:
> Add note about Kushal Das' privs
I have no objection to Kushal g
On 18 April 2014 08:04, Kristján Valur Jónsson wrote:
> Here, a week later, are some of my thoughts from the summit, for the record:
> 1. An aid in the conversion from 2.x series to 3.x series. Enabling a
> bunch of warnings and such by default. Perhaps allowing 3.x syntax in some
> places
On Fri, Apr 18, 2014 at 12:55 PM, Paul Moore wrote:
> On 18 April 2014 16:58, Nick Coghlan wrote:
>> As part of thrashing out the respective distribution ecosystem roles
>> of pip and conda (still a work in progress), we're at least converging
>> on the notion that there are actually now *two* ma
On 18 April 2014 16:58, Nick Coghlan wrote:
> As part of thrashing out the respective distribution ecosystem roles
> of pip and conda (still a work in progress), we're at least converging
> on the notion that there are actually now *two* main ways of consuming
> Python: as a "software integrator"
On 18 April 2014 04:21, Jeff Allen wrote:
>
> The "think of tuples like a struct in C" explanation immediately reminded me
> that ...
>
> On 16/04/2014 21:42, Taavi Burns wrote (in his excellent notes from the
> language summit):
>
> The demographics have changed. How do
> we change the docs and
Could I summarize that as "software integrators build from source, while
end users use an installer"? And the rest of the discussion is about which
installer (in the widest sense of the word) to recommend, where the choices
include Linux vendor distros, sumo Python distros, Mac/Win installers, as
w
ACTIVITY SUMMARY (2014-04-11 - 2014-04-18)
Python tracker at http://bugs.python.org/
To view or respond to any of the issues listed below, click on the issue.
Do NOT respond to this message.
Issues counts and deltas:
open4579 (+12)
closed 28493 (+88)
total 33072 (+100)
Open issues wi
On 16 Apr 2014 21:03, "R. David Murray" wrote:
> There is an 'Installing Python on Windows' link further down the google
> results that links to a fairly good page from python-guide.org, whose
> first link lets you download the 2.7.6 msi. I guess that's the 32
> bit version. But it then tells yo
Here, a week later, are some of my thoughts from the summit, for the record:
2.8:
The issue of a hyptothetical 2.8 never fails to entertain. However, I noticed
that there seem to be at least two distinct missions of such a thing.
1. An aid in the conversion from 2.x series to 3.x series.
The "think of tuples like a struct in C" explanation immediately
reminded me that ...
On 16/04/2014 21:42, Taavi Burns wrote (in his excellent notes from the
language summit):
The demographics have changed. How do
we change the docs and ecosystem to avoid the assumption that Python
program
50 matches
Mail list logo
