Thanks Brett. I'll stay put (and hopeful) then. Thanks for all the great
work you're doing out there. Despite the (loud) dissenters, a lot of us
(silently) appreciate it.
On Thu, Feb 25, 2021 at 10:57 AM Brett Cannon wrote:
>
>
> On Thu, Feb 25, 2021 at 8:46 AM Thor Whalen wrote:
>
>> Finally!
If interested, you can try it out from my github branch:
https://github.com/stefanoborini/cpython/tree/PEP-637-implementation-attempt-2
I am going to sync it against python master in a few minutes (it's
been a while, there probably will be conflicts).
Please break it.
On Thu, 25 Feb 2021 at
On Thu, Feb 25, 2021 at 8:46 AM Thor Whalen wrote:
> Finally! One of my top python wishes!
>
> Where can I vote?
>
There is no explicit voting, but thanks for sharing your opinion!
>
> How can I get my hands on a back port?
>
Probably can't since it will be new to 3.10 if the PEP gets
Finally! One of my top python wishes!
Where can I vote?
How can I get my hands on a back port?
How can I help getting this sooner?
___
Python-Dev mailing list -- python-dev@python.org
To unsubscribe send an email to python-dev-le...@python.org
Yes. It's already supported in the branch. You can do
MyType[whatever=5]. One could possibly change dict to allow both the
specification dict[str, int] and dict[key=str, value=int], but this
specific change of the dict class is not part of the implementation
nor the PEP (nor I expect it to happen,
On Sat, Feb 6, 2021 at 03:13 Larry Hastings wrote:
> On 2/5/21 4:25 PM, Stefano Borini wrote:
>
> dicts and lists will keep working as before. They will not support
> keyword arguments (probably ever, as there is no clear semantic for
> them) and the current implementation simply throws an error
On 2/5/21 4:25 PM, Stefano Borini wrote:
dicts and lists will keep working as before. They will not support
keyword arguments (probably ever, as there is no clear semantic for
them) and the current implementation simply throws an error if the
user tries to.
Is the plan to add PEP 637 support
On Sat, 6 Feb 2021 at 08:56, Batuhan Taskaya wrote:
>
> Lurking around the discussions I started to wonder whether this syntax
> actually worths the burden it introduces.
It has been discussed for weeks on py-ideas.
> As you have commented out
> earlier, there are no use cases in the built-in
Lurking around the discussions I started to wonder whether this syntax
actually worths the burden it introduces. As you have commented out
earlier, there are no use cases in the built-in types, perhaps a
research would be great regarding possible use cases of keyword
arguments in and out of the
dicts and lists will keep working as before. They will not support
keyword arguments (probably ever, as there is no clear semantic for
them) and the current implementation simply throws an error if the
user tries to.
Other classes will take advantage of the syntax for enhanced behavior.
We are
I missed the discussion around the PEP. I don't mean to start another
one, I'd just like a clarification. The PEP describes the new
functionality, and the interfaces, and that's all fine. But I didn't
see where it discussed where this technology would be used.
Would this mainly be used
We have examined every possible permutation already, I think this would be
a distraction to pursue.
On Thu, Feb 4, 2021 at 04:20 Walter Dörwald wrote:
> On 2 Feb 2021, at 12:36, Stefano Borini wrote:
>
> Hi all,
>
> I would like to request feedback by python-dev on the current
> implementation
On 2 Feb 2021, at 12:36, Stefano Borini wrote:
Hi all,
I would like to request feedback by python-dev on the current
implementation of PEP 637 - Support for indexing with keyword
arguments.
https://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0637/
The PEP is ready for SC submission and it has a prototype
On Thu, 4 Feb 2021 at 10:34, Stefano Borini wrote:
> I'd focus only on the use of the feature "from the outside", that is,
> using the indexing operation as a common user.
> For implementing the dunders, it's an advanced feature and it's
> unlikely to be discussed during basic teaching sessions.
On Thu, 4 Feb 2021 at 01:21, Petr Viktorin wrote:
> The PEP does lack a "How to teach" section.
I can add it tonight, and I think it would clarify some corner cases
to make them more natural.
Do you have something specific you are concerned about, when it comes
to "teachability" (stress point,
On 2/2/21 12:36 PM, Stefano Borini wrote:
Hi all,
I would like to request feedback by python-dev on the current
implementation of PEP 637 - Support for indexing with keyword
arguments.
https://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0637/
The PEP is ready for SC submission and it has a prototype
I like.
On Wed, 2021-02-03 at 15:48 -0800, Guido van Rossum wrote:
> Anyone? I'm +1 on this PEP as it is, and I imagine a few other core
> devs are too (Brandt, Steven). If nobody responds before the end of
> the week I think we can say that there was no disagreement and
> Stefano can submit PEP
Anyone? I'm +1 on this PEP as it is, and I imagine a few other core devs
are too (Brandt, Steven). If nobody responds before the end of the week I
think we can say that there was no disagreement and Stefano can submit PEP
637 to the SC.
On Tue, Feb 2, 2021 at 3:43 AM Stefano Borini
wrote:
> Hi
18 matches
Mail list logo
