Re: [Python-Dev] Slow down...

On Mon, May 7, 2018 at 10:21 AM, Glenn Linderman wrote: > On 5/7/2018 7:59 AM, Eric Snow wrote: > > On Sun, May 6, 2018 at 8:25 PM, Nick Coghlan wrote: > > I'm inclined to agree that a Python 3.8 PEP in the spirit of the PEP 3003 > language moratorium

Re: [Python-Dev] Slow down...

09.05.18 14:35, Antoine Pitrou пише: I proposed the idea in another thread that Python had reached "peak syntax" and maybe it was time to consider the core language essentially mature. Of course, we don't know what the future will bring and perhaps some fundamentally new programming idiom will

Re: [Python-Dev] Slow down...

On Wed, May 09, 2018 at 01:35:53PM +0200, Antoine Pitrou wrote: > > > I would remove "for a while". "Try to avoid major language features" > > > sounds good. > > > > It sounds good, until you ask about "What if we had that policy from > > the beginning?" [...] > "Try to avoid" would make it

Re: [Python-Dev] Slow down...

On Wed, 9 May 2018 14:25:06 +1000 Steven D'Aprano wrote: > On Mon, May 07, 2018 at 10:23:32PM +0200, Antoine Pitrou wrote: > > On Mon, 07 May 2018 19:19:28 + > > Ryan Gonzalez wrote: > > > 10 years feels like a simultaneously long and arbitrary limit.

Re: [Python-Dev] Slow down...

Serhiy Storchaka wrote: Like tab-delimited tables. No, the obvious way to do tables is to allow HTML-marked-up source code. There would be other benefits to that as well. For example we could decree that all keywords must be formatted in bold, and then there would be no trouble adding new

Re: [Python-Dev] Slow down...

Serhiy Storchaka writes: > 09.05.18 07:25, Steven D'Aprano пише: > > If we could look forward to 2028, when we're running Python 3.14 or so > > (4.7 if you prefer), how many fantastic language features that we cannot > > bear to give up would we be missing out on? > > Like

Re: [Python-Dev] Slow down...

[Steven D'Aprano ] > ... > If we could look forward to 2028, when we're running Python 3.14 or so > (4.7 if you prefer), how many fantastic language features that we cannot > bear to give up would we be missing out on? This, for just one: k = 6 if >!{myobj.meth(arg)[2]}

Re: [Python-Dev] Slow down...

09.05.18 07:25, Steven D'Aprano пише: If we could look forward to 2028, when we're running Python 3.14 or so (4.7 if you prefer), how many fantastic language features that we cannot bear to give up would we be missing out on? Like tab-delimited tables.

Re: [Python-Dev] Slow down...

On Mon, May 07, 2018 at 10:23:32PM +0200, Antoine Pitrou wrote: > On Mon, 07 May 2018 19:19:28 + > Ryan Gonzalez wrote: > > 10 years feels like a simultaneously long and arbitrary limit. IMO a policy > > of "try to avoid major language features for a while" would work

Re: [Python-Dev] Slow down...

On Mon, May 07, 2018 at 10:21:13AM -0700, Glenn Linderman wrote: > Dan's original comment about language versus library is interesting, > though. It is probably true that one should resist adding language where > library suffices, but sometimes a lack of certain expressiveness in the >

Re: [Python-Dev] Slow down...

This seems like a rather bad idea. None of the core changes in the last few versions were on the radar 10 years in advance. And likewise, no one really knows what new issues will become critical over the next 10. The asyncio module and the async/await keywords only developed as important concerns

Re: [Python-Dev] Slow down...

> On May 8, 2018, at 11:48 AM, Brett Cannon wrote: > > > >> On Tue, 8 May 2018 at 08:26 Craig Rodrigues wrote: >>> On Mon, May 7, 2018 at 2:24 PM Barry Warsaw wrote: >>> On May 7, 2018, at 11:49, Craig Rodrigues

Re: [Python-Dev] Slow down...

On Tue, 8 May 2018 at 08:26 Craig Rodrigues wrote: > On Mon, May 7, 2018 at 2:24 PM Barry Warsaw wrote: > >> On May 7, 2018, at 11:49, Craig Rodrigues wrote: >> > >> > Would it be reasonable to request a 10 year moratorium on

Re: [Python-Dev] Slow down...

On Mon, May 7, 2018 at 2:24 PM Barry Warsaw wrote: > On May 7, 2018, at 11:49, Craig Rodrigues wrote: > > > > Would it be reasonable to request a 10 year moratorium on making changes > to the core Python language, > > and for the next 10 years only

Re: [Python-Dev] Slow down...

, 2018 14:26 To: Python Dev Subject: Re: [Python-Dev] Slow down... On May 7, 2018, at 11:49, Craig Rodrigues <rodr...@crodrigues.org> wrote: > > Would it be reasonable to request a 10 year moratorium on making changes to > the core Python language, > and for the next 10 years on

Re: [Python-Dev] Slow down...

On 2018-05-07 19:49, Craig Rodrigues wrote: [snip] Would it be reasonable to request a 10 year moratorium on making changes to the core Python language, and for the next 10 years only focus on things that do not require core language changes, such as improving/bugfixing existing libraries,

Re: [Python-Dev] Slow down...

On May 7, 2018, at 11:49, Craig Rodrigues wrote: > > Would it be reasonable to request a 10 year moratorium on making changes to > the core Python language, > and for the next 10 years only focus on things that do not require core > language changes, > such as

Re: [Python-Dev] Slow down...

On Mon, 07 May 2018 19:19:28 + Ryan Gonzalez wrote: > 10 years feels like a simultaneously long and arbitrary limit. IMO a policy > of "try to avoid major language features for a while" would work better. I would remove "for a while". "Try to avoid major language features"

Re: [Python-Dev] Slow down...

10 years feels like a simultaneously long and arbitrary limit. IMO a policy of "try to avoid major language features for a while" would work better. On Mon, May 7, 2018 at 2:11 PM Craig Rodrigues wrote: > > > On Sun, May 6, 2018 at 7:35 PM Nick Coghlan

Re: [Python-Dev] Slow down...

On Sun, May 6, 2018 at 7:35 PM Nick Coghlan wrote: > > I'm inclined to agree that a Python 3.8 PEP in the spirit of the PEP 3003 > language moratorium could be a very good idea. Between matrix > multiplication, enhanced tuple unpacking, native coroutines, f-strings, and >

Re: [Python-Dev] Slow down...

On 5/7/2018 7:59 AM, Eric Snow wrote: On Sun, May 6, 2018 at 8:25 PM, Nick Coghlan wrote: I'm inclined to agree that a Python 3.8 PEP in the spirit of the PEP 3003 language moratorium could be a very good idea. Note that the PEP specifically applies to "syntax, semantics,

Re: [Python-Dev] Slow down...

> On May 7, 2018, at 9:57 AM, Brett Cannon wrote: > > > > On Mon, 7 May 2018 at 09:55 Ivan Levkivskyi > wrote: > On 7 May 2018 at 17:32, Brett Cannon > wrote: > On Mon, 7 May

Re: [Python-Dev] Slow down...

On Mon, 7 May 2018 at 09:55 Ivan Levkivskyi wrote: > On 7 May 2018 at 17:32, Brett Cannon wrote: > >> On Mon, 7 May 2018 at 08:18 João Santos wrote: >> >>> Hi, >>> >>> I would like to see this go even further and have a tick-tock

Re: [Python-Dev] Slow down...

On 7 May 2018 at 17:32, Brett Cannon wrote: > > > On Mon, 7 May 2018 at 08:18 João Santos wrote: > >> Hi, >> >> I would like to see this go even further and have a tick-tock approach to >> python versions, i.e. adopt new syntax and other large changes on one

Re: [Python-Dev] Slow down...

On Mon, 7 May 2018 at 08:18 João Santos wrote: > Hi, > > I would like to see this go even further and have a tick-tock approach to > python versions, i.e. adopt new syntax and other large changes on one > version (for example odd versions) and polish everything up in the next >

Re: [Python-Dev] Slow down...

Hi, I would like to see this go even further and have a tick-tock approach to python versions, i.e. adopt new syntax and other large changes on one version (for example odd versions) and polish everything up in the next (even versions). Best regards, João Santos On Mon, 7 May 2018 at 11:19 Ivan

Re: [Python-Dev] Slow down...

On Sun, May 6, 2018 at 8:25 PM, Nick Coghlan wrote: > I'm inclined to agree that a Python 3.8 PEP in the spirit of the PEP 3003 > language moratorium could be a very good idea. Note that the PEP specifically applies to "syntax, semantics, and built-ins". Here's the full

Re: [Python-Dev] Slow down...

07.05.18 16:50, Joao S. O. Bueno пише: May it is important to note that Python 3.7 already has very little syntactic changes. Actually, there are no new syntac changes with PEP 563 - (Postponed Evaluation of Annotations) being maybe the only change to existing behavior, and PEP 562 as new

Re: [Python-Dev] Slow down...

May it is important to note that Python 3.7 already has very little syntactic changes. Actually, there are no new syntac changes with PEP 563 - (Postponed Evaluation of Annotations) being maybe the only change to existing behavior, and PEP 562 as new "non-library-dependent" feature, even though

Re: [Python-Dev] Slow down...

07.05.18 14:19, Nick Coghlan пише: And as the current python-ideas discussion about accessing paths relative to __file__ shows, I can't believe this is discussed seriously. Forgot about the Python 2 legacy, just use importlib. ___ Python-Dev

Re: [Python-Dev] Slow down...

On 7 May 2018 at 19:17, Ivan Levkivskyi wrote: > These are all god points. I think it will be a good idea to take a little > pause with syntactic additions and other "cognitively loaded" changes. On > the other hand, I think it is fine to work on performance improvements >

Re: [Python-Dev] Slow down...

On 7 May 2018 at 03:25, Nick Coghlan wrote: > On 7 May 2018 at 11:30, Dan Stromberg wrote: > >> I'd very much like a live in a world where Jython and IronPython and >> MicroPython and Cython and Pyjamas can all catch up and implement >> Python 3.7, 3.8,

Re: [Python-Dev] Slow down...

On Mon, 7 May 2018 12:25:46 +1000 Nick Coghlan wrote: > On 7 May 2018 at 11:30, Dan Stromberg wrote: > > > I'd very much like a live in a world where Jython and IronPython and > > MicroPython and Cython and Pyjamas can all catch up and implement > >

Re: [Python-Dev] Slow down...

On 7 May 2018 at 11:30, Dan Stromberg wrote: > I'd very much like a live in a world where Jython and IronPython and > MicroPython and Cython and Pyjamas can all catch up and implement > Python 3.7, 3.8, and so forth. > I'm inclined to agree that a Python 3.8 PEP in the

[Python-Dev] Slow down...

When I think of why Python is so far ahead of Perl in language design, I think it's simply that Python is the result of cautious design, and Perl is the result of exuberant design. I think Python is in danger of becoming a large language - which isn't a good thing. A great language, like Scheme