On 7/19/2017 12:15 PM, Larry Hastings wrote:
>
>
> On 07/19/2017 05:59 AM, Victor Stinner wrote:
>> Mercurial startup time is already 45.8x slower than Git whereas tested
>> Mercurial runs on Python 2.7.12. Now try to sell Python 3 to Mercurial
>> developers, with a startup time 2x - 3x slower...
Is it possible to get the release notes included on the download page(s)?
On Tue, May 1, 2018 at 10:35 AM, Guido van Rossum wrote:
> Simple. I misread "latest" for "last" and was hopeful that no new bugs
> would need to be fixed between now and 2020. I will post a correction on
> Twitter now.
>
FWIW, this thread is about what "Python 4000" means and does not mean.
Namely, Python feature deprecation and removal is not prohibited but
the bar is high (as always), especially for syntax. While I
appreciate the level of interest in certain under-consideration
proposals, you'd be better served
Simple. I misread "latest" for "last" and was hopeful that no new bugs
would need to be fixed between now and 2020. I will post a correction on
Twitter now.
On Tue, May 1, 2018 at 2:58 AM, Alex Walters
wrote:
> I've gotten some mixed signals on the status of this release, notably from
> the BDFL
I've gotten some mixed signals on the status of this release, notably from
the BDFL:
https://twitter.com/gvanrossum/status/991170064417153025
"Python 2.7.15 released -- the last 2.7 release!" (and a link to this
thread)
I was under the impression that 2.7 was being supported until 2020. If this
On Tue, May 1, 2018 at 2:14 AM, Steve Holden wrote:
> On Tue, May 1, 2018 at 3:36 AM, Chris Jerdonek
> wrote:
>>
>> On Thu, Apr 26, 2018 at 10:33 AM, Sven R. Kunze wrote:
>> > On 25.04.2018 01:19, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
>> >>
>> >> Sorry, gcd(diff, n) is not the "perfect name", and I will tell y
On Tue, May 1, 2018 at 3:36 AM, Chris Jerdonek
wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 26, 2018 at 10:33 AM, Sven R. Kunze wrote:
> > On 25.04.2018 01:19, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
> >>
> >> Sorry, gcd(diff, n) is not the "perfect name", and I will tell you that
> >> sometimes g is better. [...]
> >
> > We were talki
On Tue, May 01, 2018 at 11:04:55AM +1000, Chris Angelico wrote:
> To be fair, I don't see many people replacing "x = 1" with "for x in
> [1]: pass". Even though it IS going to have the same effect. :-)
Aside from the pass, that is precisely one of the current work-arounds
for lack of binding-exp
