On 16 November 2017 at 04:39, Ivan Levkivskyi wrote:
> Nick is exactly right here. Jim, if you want to propose alternative
> wording, then we could consider it.
>
Jim also raised an important point that needs clarification at the spec
level: given multiple entries in
On Wed, Nov 15, 2017 at 10:14 PM, Nathaniel Smith wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 15, 2017 at 4:27 PM, Ethan Furman wrote:
>> The second way is fairly similar, but instead of replacing the entire
>> sys.modules entry, its class is updated to be the class just created --
On Wed, Nov 15, 2017 at 5:49 PM, Guido van Rossum wrote:
>> If not, why not, and if so, shouldn't PEP 562's __getattr__ also take a
>> 'self'?
>
> Not really, since there's only one module (the one containing the
> __getattr__ function). Plus we already have a 1-argument
On Wed, Nov 15, 2017 at 4:27 PM, Ethan Furman wrote:
> The second way is fairly similar, but instead of replacing the entire
> sys.modules entry, its class is updated to be the class just created --
> something like sys.modules['mymod'].__class__ = MyNewClass .
>
> My request:
Ethan Furman wrote:
The second way is fairly similar, but instead of replacing the entire
sys.modules entry, its class is updated to be the class just created --
something like sys.modules['mymod'].__class__ = MyNewClass .
If the recent suggestion to replace the global namespace
dict with the
CWE (Common Weakness Enumeration) has numbers (and URLs) and a graph model,
and code examples, and mitigations for bugs, vulnerabilities, faults,
design flaws, weaknesses.
https://cwe.mitre.org/
Research Concepts
https://cwe.mitre.org/data/definitions/1000.html
Development Concepts
On Wed, Nov 15, 2017 at 6:50 PM, Guido van Rossum wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 15, 2017 at 6:37 PM, Armin Rigo wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> On 14 November 2017 at 14:55, Jan Claeys wrote:
>> > Sounds like https://www.iso.org/standard/71094.html
>> >
Hi,
Since Brett and Nick like the idea and nobody complained against it, I
implemented the -X dev option:
https://bugs.python.org/issue32043
(Right now, it's a pull request.)
I removed the -b option.
Victor
2017-11-14 3:57 GMT+01:00 Nick Coghlan :
> On 14 November 2017 at
On Wed, Nov 15, 2017 at 6:37 PM, Armin Rigo wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On 14 November 2017 at 14:55, Jan Claeys wrote:
> > Sounds like https://www.iso.org/standard/71094.html
> > which is updating https://www.iso.org/standard/61457.html
> > (which you can download
Hi,
On 14 November 2017 at 14:55, Jan Claeys wrote:
> Sounds like https://www.iso.org/standard/71094.html
> which is updating https://www.iso.org/standard/61457.html
> (which you can download from there if you search a bit; clearly either
> ISO doesn't have a UI/UX "standard" or
On Wed, Nov 15, 2017 at 4:27 PM, Ethan Furman wrote:
> So there are currently two ways to customize a module, with PEP 562
> proposing a third.
>
> The first method involves creating a standard class object, instantiating
> it, and replacing the sys.modules entry with it.
>
>
So there are currently two ways to customize a module, with PEP 562 proposing a
third.
The first method involves creating a standard class object, instantiating it,
and replacing the sys.modules entry with it.
The second way is fairly similar, but instead of replacing the entire sys.modules
On 11/14/2017 3:26 PM, Ivan Levkivskyi wrote:
After some discussion on python-ideas, see
https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-ideas/2017-September/047220.html,
this PEP received positive comments. The updated version that takes into
account the comments that appeared in the discussion so
On Wed, Nov 15, 2017 at 8:02 PM, Ethan Furman wrote:
> On 11/15/2017 04:55 AM, Koos Zevenhoven wrote:
>
>> On Tue, Nov 14, 2017 at 10:34 PM, Ivan Levkivskyi wrote:
>>
>
>
>> Rationale
>>> =
>>>
>>> [...] It would be convenient to simplify this
>>> procedure by
On Wed, Nov 15, 2017 at 5:37 PM, Nick Coghlan wrote:
> On 16 November 2017 at 00:20, Jim J. Jewett wrote:
>
>> I *think* the following will happen:
>>
>> "NewList[int]" will be evaluated, and __class_getitem__ called, so
>> that the bases tuple will
Nick is exactly right here. Jim, if you want to propose alternative
wording, then we could consider it.
--
Ivan
On 15 November 2017 at 16:37, Nick Coghlan wrote:
> On 16 November 2017 at 00:20, Jim J. Jewett wrote:
>
>> I *think* the following will
On 11/15/2017 04:55 AM, Koos Zevenhoven wrote:
On Tue, Nov 14, 2017 at 10:34 PM, Ivan Levkivskyi wrote:
Rationale
=
[...] It would be convenient to simplify this
procedure by recognizing ``__getattr__`` defined directly in a module that
would act like a normal ``__getattr__``
I think it's reasonable for the PEP to include some examples, consequences
and best practices. I don't think it's reasonable for the PEP to also
define the API and implementation of helper functions that might be added
once the mechanisms are in place. Those are better developed as 3rd party
On 16 November 2017 at 00:20, Jim J. Jewett wrote:
> I *think* the following will happen:
>
> "NewList[int]" will be evaluated, and __class_getitem__ called, so
> that the bases tuple will be (A, GenericAlias(NewList, int), B)
>
> # (A) I *think* __mro_entries__
For anyone confused about similar things, I expect you to be interested in
my post on python-ideas from today:
https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-ideas/2017-November/047896.html
––Koos
On Wed, Nov 15, 2017 at 4:20 PM, Jim J. Jewett wrote:
> (1) I found the
(1) I found the following (particularly "bases classes") very confusing:
"""
If an object that is not a class object appears in the bases of a class
definition, then ``__mro_entries__`` is searched on it. If found,
it is called with the original tuple of bases as an argument. The result
of the
On Tue, Nov 14, 2017 at 10:34 PM, Ivan Levkivskyi
wrote:
[..]
> Rationale
> =
>
> It is sometimes convenient to customize or otherwise have control over
> access to module attributes. A typical example is managing deprecation
> warnings. Typical workarounds are
15.11.17 12:53, Ivan Levkivskyi пише:
On 15 November 2017 at 08:43, Serhiy Storchaka > wrote:
It is worth to mention that using name as a module global will
bypass __getattr__. And this is intentional, otherwise calling
__getattr__
On 15 November 2017 at 08:43, Serhiy Storchaka wrote:
> 14.11.17 22:34, Ivan Levkivskyi пише:
>
>> This function will be called only if ``name`` is not found in the module
>> through the normal attribute lookup.
>>
>
> It is worth to mention that using name as a module
24 matches
Mail list logo