Hi,
I didn't get much feedback on this PEP. Since the Python 3.6 branch is
open (default), it's probably better to push such change in the
beginning of the 3.6 cycle, to catch issues earlier.
Are you ok to chain exceptions at C level by default?
Relatedi issue:
Victor Stinner schrieb am 20.06.2015 um 09:30:
Are you ok to chain exceptions at C level by default?
I agree that it can be a bit non-obvious where exceptions are chained and
when they are not and my guess is that most C code simply doesn't take care
of chaining exceptions at all. If only
Hello,
There appeared a question in the discussion on
http://bugs.python.org/issue24129 about documenting the behavior that
unbound local variables in a class definition do not follow the normal
rules.
Guido said 13 years ago that this behavior should not be changed:
On 20 June 2015 at 19:00, Stefan Behnel stefan...@behnel.de wrote:
And that is the crux in your proposal: you're changing the default
behaviour into its opposite. In order to do that, it should be reasonably
likely that the current standard behaviour is not intended in more than
half of the
On 19 June 2015 at 22:56, Martin Teichmann lkb.teichm...@gmail.com wrote:
to get something out of the database. But getting something in, I have
to write something like
await table.set(key, value)
It would be cool if I could just write
await table[key] = value
You've introduced an
On 06/20/2015 12:12 PM, Ron Adam wrote:
On 06/20/2015 02:51 AM, Ivan Levkivskyi wrote:
Guido said 13 years ago that this behavior should not be changed:
https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2002-April/023428.html,
however, things changed a bit in Python 3.4 with the introduction
On 06/20/2015 02:51 AM, Ivan Levkivskyi wrote:
Hello,
There appeared a question in the discussion on
http://bugs.python.org/issue24129 about documenting the behavior that
unbound local variables in a class definition do not follow the normal rules.
Guido said 13 years ago that this behavior
On 20.06.2015 09:30, Victor Stinner wrote:
Hi,
I didn't get much feedback on this PEP. Since the Python 3.6 branch is
open (default), it's probably better to push such change in the
beginning of the 3.6 cycle, to catch issues earlier.
Are you ok to chain exceptions at C level by default?
On 2015-06-20 3:16 PM, M.-A. Lemburg wrote:
On 20.06.2015 09:30, Victor Stinner wrote:
Hi,
I didn't get much feedback on this PEP. Since the Python 3.6 branch is
open (default), it's probably better to push such change in the
beginning of the 3.6 cycle, to catch issues earlier.
Are you ok to
Hi Martin,
Actually, I think that it's better to adopt a bit different design:
async with db.transaction():
table[key1] = 'a'
table[key2] = 'b'
And then, in __aexit__ you should flush the updates to the database
in bulk. Usually, when working with an ORM, you need to update
Nick Coghlan wrote:
What if we're assigning to
multiple targets, do the run in parallel? How is tuple unpacking
handled? How is augmented assignment handled?
If we allow asynchronous assignment, do we allow asynchronous deletion as well?
Yeah, we'd kind of be letting the camel's nose in
here.
11 matches
Mail list logo
