Yes, that's intentional. (We have a separate tracker for this module,
https://github.com/python/typing/issues)
On Tue, Oct 18, 2016 at 11:08 AM, Ryan Gonzalez wrote:
> E.g.:
>
>
> import typing
> print(typing.Pattern, typing.Match) # Works.
> from typing import *
>
E.g.:
import typing
print(typing.Pattern, typing.Match) # Works.
from typing import *
print(Pattern, Match) # NameError: name 'Pattern' is not defined
A quick look shows that typing.py doesn't have Pattern and Match in
__all__. Was this intentional, or just an oversight?
--
Ryan
[ERROR]:
On Wed, Oct 19, 2016 at 2:57 AM, Chris Barker - NOAA Federal
wrote:
>> The proposal is that it should be documented as being part of the
>> language spec starting in 3.4 (or whatever).
>
> Is the performance characteristics of any object part of the language spec?
>
> I.e
> The proposal is that it should be documented as being part of the
> language spec starting in 3.4 (or whatever).
Is the performance characteristics of any object part of the language spec?
I.e if someone wrote an implementation with an O(n) insert dict, it
would suck, but wouldn't it still be
>>
>>
>> Method proliferation on builtins is a Big Deal(TM)
>
> I wanted to quantify this concept, so here's a quick metric that helps
> convey how every time we add a new builtin method we're immediately
> making Python harder to comprehend:
>
def get_builtin_types():
>... import