Re: [Python-Dev] Is 4.0 a major breaking changes release?

On Sat, Feb 3, 2018 at 10:46 PM, Ned Deily > wrote: I've seen comments about making somewhat major changes in 4.0 - now I'm concerned that I should pause my porting effort until that is released. Is python 4 going to be another python 3?

Re: [Python-Dev] Is 4.0 a major breaking changes release?

On Sat, Feb 3, 2018 at 10:46 PM, Ned Deily wrote: > On Feb 3, 2018, at 17:40, Alex Walters wrote: > > I am still working on porting code from 2.x to 3.x. As of late on the > lists > > I've seen comments about making somewhat major changes in 4.0 - now

Re: [Python-Dev] Dataclasses and correct hashability

As a Bear of Relatively Little Brain, I've grown up understanding, and teaching, that mutable things aren't to be used as dict keys. I'm aware that immutability isn't strictly the required condition, but it for most people, that's the primary reason for using frozen sets and tuples, for example,

Re: [Python-Dev] Is 4.0 a major breaking changes release?

On 2/3/2018 5:50 PM, Zachary Ware wrote: On Sat, Feb 3, 2018 at 4:40 PM, Alex Walters wrote: I am still working on porting code from 2.x to 3.x. As of late on the lists I've seen comments about making somewhat major changes in 4.0 - now I'm concerned that I should

Re: [Python-Dev] Is 4.0 a major breaking changes release?

On Sat, Feb 3, 2018 at 2:40 PM, Alex Walters wrote: > I am still working on porting code from 2.x to 3.x. As of late on the lists > I've seen comments about making somewhat major changes in 4.0 - now I'm > concerned that I should pause my porting effort until that is

Re: [Python-Dev] Is 4.0 a major breaking changes release?

On 3 February 2018 at 22:40, Alex Walters wrote: > I am still working on porting code from 2.x to 3.x. As of late on the lists > I've seen comments about making somewhat major changes in 4.0 - now I'm > concerned that I should pause my porting effort until that is

Re: [Python-Dev] Is 4.0 a major breaking changes release?

On Sat, Feb 3, 2018 at 4:40 PM, Alex Walters wrote: > I am still working on porting code from 2.x to 3.x. As of late on the lists > I've seen comments about making somewhat major changes in 4.0 - now I'm > concerned that I should pause my porting effort until that is

Re: [Python-Dev] Is 4.0 a major breaking changes release?

On Feb 3, 2018, at 17:40, Alex Walters wrote: > I am still working on porting code from 2.x to 3.x. As of late on the lists > I've seen comments about making somewhat major changes in 4.0 - now I'm > concerned that I should pause my porting effort until that is released.

[Python-Dev] Is 4.0 a major breaking changes release?

I am still working on porting code from 2.x to 3.x. As of late on the lists I've seen comments about making somewhat major changes in 4.0 - now I'm concerned that I should pause my porting effort until that is released. Is python 4 going to be another python 3?

Re: [Python-Dev] Dataclasses and correct hashability

On 02/02/2018 10:44 PM, Guido van Rossum wrote: It appears Eric and I are the only ones in favor of keeping the current behavior. But I still am not convinced by all the worries about "attractive nuisances" and all the other bad names this feature has been called. We don't know that any of

Re: [Python-Dev] "threading.Lock().locked()" is not documented

On Sat, Feb 3, 2018, at 11:25, Gregory P. Smith wrote: > On Wed, Jan 31, 2018 at 4:46 PM Jesus Cea wrote: > > > https://docs.python.org/3.6/library/threading.html doesn't document > > "threading.Lock().locked()", and it is something quite useful. > > > > In fact, it is used in

Re: [Python-Dev] Dataclasses and correct hashability

On Fri, Feb 2, 2018 at 10:25 PM Nick Coghlan wrote: > > > On 3 Feb. 2018 1:09 am, "Eric V. Smith" wrote: > > > The problem with dropping hash=True is: how would you write __hash__ > yourself? It seems like a bug magnet if you're adding fields to the class

Re: [Python-Dev] "threading.Lock().locked()" is not documented

On Wed, Jan 31, 2018 at 4:46 PM Jesus Cea wrote: > https://docs.python.org/3.6/library/threading.html doesn't document > "threading.Lock().locked()", and it is something quite useful. > > In fact, it is used in "threading.py" itself. For instance, lines 109, > 985, 1289. > > Is

Re: [Python-Dev] Deprecate crypt module and revert PR 3854

You can deprecate the crypt module, update the docs to explain it's outdated and point to other 3rd party solutions. A few years from now we may be able to delete it. (With an intermediate step of issuing a non-silent deprecation warning.) Until then just leave it be. Possibly that's what your

Re: [Python-Dev] A minimal Python interpreter written in Python for experimenting with language changes

Oh and I forgot to mention that since everything is mostly done at run time, there could just be different modules for (slightly) different languages. I don't know if that'd be problematic for maintenance though. asrp > Sent: Saturday, February 03, 2018 at 3:17 PM > From: asrp

Re: [Python-Dev] A minimal Python interpreter written in Python for experimenting with language changes

> Are you aware of pypy? > Yes, but I do not know it well. It seems to be more focused on JIT compiling with many of its functions written for special cases and I did not find a way to make experimental changes easily. I even tried (briefly) to have the main loop of this interpreter run in

Re: [Python-Dev] A minimal Python interpreter written in Python for experimenting with language changes

Hi, (My other reply to Alex and Steven doesn't seems to appear, at least not on pipermail so I hope these don't come in the wrong order.) > In the readme to python_terp you say: > > """ > python_terp is intended to make language modification to Python easier > to preview changes more quickly

Re: [Python-Dev] Deprecate crypt module and revert PR 3854

On 2018-02-02 17:18, Guido van Rossum wrote: > I'm all for nudging people in the direction of xcrypt. I assume we can't > just switch the C-level crypt with xcrypt and leave the Python API > unchanged? > > However until a usable solution exist (either in the stdlib or as 3rd > party) I don't

Re: [Python-Dev] A minimal Python interpreter written in Python for experimenting with language changes

Hi user with no real name yet, On 03.02.18 01:01, asrp asrp wrote: > Hello, > > I don't know if this is the right place to post this. Please redirect as > needed. > > I've made a small Python interpreter in Python with runtime AST node > semantics and edit-and-continue. I thought it could

Re: [Python-Dev] Deprecate crypt module and revert PR 3854

On 2018-02-02 21:21, Nathaniel Smith wrote: > On Feb 2, 2018 7:24 AM, "Christian Heimes" > wrote: > > Shortly after the PR has landed, I was made aware that glibc has > deprecated crypt(3) API [2] and favor of an external library called

Re: [Python-Dev] Deprecate crypt module and revert PR 3854

On 2018-02-02 21:31, Antoine Pitrou wrote: > On Fri, 2 Feb 2018 16:23:20 +0100 > Christian Heimes wrote: >> Hi, >> >> in PR 3854 [1] Serhiy added blowfish, extended DES and NT-Hash to >> Python's crypt mdodule. I vetoed against addition of the APIs because >> all these

Re: [Python-Dev] A minimal Python interpreter written in Python for experimenting with language changes

On 03.02.18 08:12, Steven D'Aprano wrote: > On Sat, Feb 03, 2018 at 12:50:11AM -0500, Terry Reedy wrote: >> On 2/2/2018 7:01 PM, asrp asrp wrote: >>> I don't know if this is the right place to post this. Please redirect as >>> needed. >> >> This list is for development *of* cpython. Development

Re: [Python-Dev] Deprecate crypt module and revert PR 3854

On 2018-02-02 18:05, Serhiy Storchaka wrote: > 02.02.18 18:18, Guido van Rossum пише: >> I'm all for nudging people in the direction of xcrypt. I assume we >> can't just switch the C-level crypt with xcrypt and leave the Python >> API unchanged? >> >> However until a usable solution exist (either