On 4/20/2015 9:07 PM, Chris Angelico wrote:
On Tue, Apr 21, 2015 at 10:52 AM, Ben Finney ben+pyt...@benfinney.id.au wrote:
Jack is not complaining only about *writing* code. He's complaining
about the effect this will have on code that we all are expected to
*read*.
For reading, good
On Tue, 21 Apr 2015 10:10:06 -0700, Guido van Rossum gu...@python.org wrote:
On Tue, Apr 21, 2015 at 9:17 AM, R. David Murray rdmur...@bitdance.com
wrote:
Please be respectful rather than inflammatory. If you read what I
wrote, I did not say that I was going to stop contributing, I
Hello,
On Tue, 21 Apr 2015 09:50:59 -0700
Ethan Furman et...@stoneleaf.us wrote:
On 04/21, Paul Sokolovsky wrote:
And for example yesterday's big theme was people blackmailing that
they stop contributing to stdlib if annotations are in [...]
A volunteer's honest reaction is not
On Tue, Apr 21, 2015 at 01:54:55PM -0400, Donald Stufft wrote:
Anyways, I'll have access to the data set for another day or two before I
shut down the (expensive) server that I have to use to crunch the numbers so
if
there's anything anyone else wants to see before I shut it down, speak up
On Tue, Apr 21, 2015 at 10:03 AM, Carol Willing
willi...@willingconsulting.com wrote:
Two areas of clarification would be helpful for me:
1. Optional: What does this really mean in practice? Am I opting in to
static type checking and type hints? Or must I opt out of type hints?
Having to
On 21 April 2015 at 17:55, Gregory P. Smith g...@krypto.org wrote:
I view most of this thread as FUD. The fear is understandable, I'm trying to
tell people to stop panicing.
I think (hope!) everyone is clear that what's being expressed in this
thread is honest (emotional) reactions. There's a
On 04/21/2015 04:50 AM, Tal Einat wrote:
As for the default set of accepted types for various convertors, if we
could choose any syntax we liked, something like accept=+{NoneType}
would be much better IMO.
In theory Argument Clinic could use any syntax it likes. In practice,
under the
On Tue, Apr 21, 2015 at 9:47 AM, Antoine Pitrou solip...@pitrou.net wrote:
On Tue, 21 Apr 2015 09:28:45 -0700
Guido van Rossum gu...@python.org wrote:
On Tue, Apr 21, 2015 at 12:49 AM, Antoine Pitrou solip...@pitrou.net
wrote:
On Mon, 20 Apr 2015 20:43:38 -0400
R. David Murray
On Tue, 21 Apr 2015 18:27:50 +0300
Paul Sokolovsky pmis...@gmail.com wrote:
Let me try: MicroPython already uses type annotations for statically
typed functions. E.g.
def add(x:int, y:int):
return x + y
will translate the function to just 2 machine instructions.
That's quite nice.
On Tue, 21 Apr 2015 16:55:49 -, Gregory P. Smith g...@krypto.org wrote:
We will not be putting type annotations anywhere in the stdlib or expecting
anyone else to maintain them there. That would never happen until tools
that are convincing enough in their utility for developers to _want_ to
On Apr 21, 2015, at 11:23 AM, Guido van Rossum gu...@python.org wrote:
2. Clearly, great thought has been put into this PEP. If anyone has a good
analysis of the potential impact on Python 3 adoption, please do pass along.
I would be interested in reading the information.
I wish I had
Just thought I'd share this since it shows how what people are using to
download things from PyPI have changed over the past year. Of particular
interest to most people will be the final graphs showing what percentage of
downloads from PyPI are for Python 3.x or 2.x.
As always it's good to keep
On 4/21/15 9:17 AM, R. David Murray wrote:
Please be respectful rather than inflammatory.
Thank you David.
If you read what I
wrote, I did not say that I was going to stop contributing, I
specifically talked about that gut reaction being both emotional and
illogical. That doesn't make the
On Apr 21, 2015, at 3:15 PM, Toshio Kuratomi a.bad...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Apr 21, 2015 at 01:54:55PM -0400, Donald Stufft wrote:
Anyways, I'll have access to the data set for another day or two before I
shut down the (expensive) server that I have to use to crunch the numbers so
if
Hi python-dev,
I'm moving the discussion from python-ideas to here.
The updated version of the PEP should be available shortly
at https://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0492
and is also pasted in this email.
Updates:
1. CO_ASYNC flag was renamed to CO_COROUTINE;
2. sys.set_async_wrapper() was
On Tue, Apr 21, 2015 at 8:31 PM, Larry Hastings la...@hastings.org wrote:
On 04/21/2015 04:50 AM, Tal Einat wrote:
As for the default set of accepted types for various convertors, if we
could choose any syntax we liked, something like accept=+{NoneType}
would be much better IMO.
In theory
Thanks for the detailed research!
On Tue, Apr 21, 2015 at 10:54 AM, Donald Stufft don...@stufft.io wrote:
Just thought I'd share this since it shows how what people are using to
download things from PyPI have changed over the past year. Of particular
interest to most people will be the final
Hello,
On Tue, 21 Apr 2015 12:17:01 -0400
R. David Murray rdmur...@bitdance.com wrote:
On Tue, 21 Apr 2015 18:27:50 +0300, Paul Sokolovsky
pmis...@gmail.com wrote:
I was replying to Steven's message. Did you read it?
Yes. And I try to follow general course of discussion, as its hard
On Tue, Apr 21, 2015 at 1:10 PM, Guido van Rossum gu...@python.org wrote:
On Tue, Apr 21, 2015 at 9:17 AM, R. David Murray rdmur...@bitdance.com
wrote:
Please be respectful rather than inflammatory. If you read what I
wrote, I did not say that I was going to stop contributing, I
On Tue, Apr 21, 2015 at 2:23 PM, Guido van Rossum gu...@python.org wrote:
At least nobody will be writing type hints in Cyrillic. :-)
Why not? It works just fine:
Список = list
def sum(x: Список):
... pass
...
(See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rapira for some prior art.)
On Tue, 21 Apr 2015 21:31:49 +0300, Paul Sokolovsky pmis...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, 21 Apr 2015 09:50:59 -0700 Ethan Furman et...@stoneleaf.us wrote:
On 04/21, Paul Sokolovsky wrote:
And for example yesterday's big theme was people blackmailing that
they stop contributing to stdlib
On Mon, 20 Apr 2015 20:43:38 -0400
R. David Murray rdmur...@bitdance.com wrote:
+1 to this from me too. I'm afraid that means I'm -1 on the PEP.
I didn't write this in my earlier email because I wasn't sure about it,
but my gut reaction after reading Harry's email was if type annotations
are
On 21 April 2015 at 01:45, Chris Angelico ros...@gmail.com wrote:
When you're writing a library, it can be a great help to provide type
annotations, because every application that uses your library can
benefit.
It can be a great help to whom? Not to me (the library author),
because I can't use
On Tue, 21 Apr 2015 22:47:23 +1000
Steven D'Aprano st...@pearwood.info wrote:
Ironically, type hinting will *reduce* the need for intrusive,
anti-duck-testing explicit calls to isinstance() at runtime:
It won't, since as you pointed out yourself, type checks are purely
optional and entirely
On Tue, Apr 21, 2015 at 11:56:15AM +0100, Rob Cliffe wrote:
(Adding a type hint that restricted the argument to say a
sequence of numbers turns out to be a mistake.
Let's find out how big a mistake it is with an test run.
py def sorter(alist: List[int]) - List[int]:
... return
On 21 April 2015 at 12:23, Gustavo Carneiro gjcarne...@gmail.com wrote:
Documentation is not checked. It often loses sync with the actual code.
Docs say one thing, code does another.
Agreed. I don't think anyone would disagree here. I'm talking from the
position of being a library author,
On Tue, Apr 21, 2015 at 01:25:34PM +0100, Chris Withers wrote:
Anyway, I've not posted much to python-dev in quite a while, but this is
a topic that I would be kicking myself in 5-10 years time when I've had
to move to Javascript or insert new language here because everyone
else has
On 21 April 2015 at 13:47, Steven D'Aprano st...@pearwood.info wrote:
On Tue, Apr 21, 2015 at 11:56:15AM +0100, Rob Cliffe wrote:
(Adding a type hint that restricted the argument to say a
sequence of numbers turns out to be a mistake.
Let's find out how big a mistake it is with an
On 21.04.2015 05:37, Guido van Rossum wrote:
On Mon, Apr 20, 2015 at 4:41 PM, Jack Diederich jackd...@gmail.com wrote:
* Uploading stubs for other people's code is a terrible idea. Who do I
contact when I update the interface to my library? The random Joe who
helped by uploading annotations
On 21 April 2015 at 10:10, Chris Angelico ros...@gmail.com wrote:
At this point, you may want to just stop caring about the exact type.
Part of the point of gradual typing is that you can short-cut a lot of
this. And quite frankly, this isn't really helping anything. Just skip
it and say that
On Tue, Apr 21, 2015 at 6:58 PM, Cory Benfield c...@lukasa.co.uk wrote:
On 21 April 2015 at 01:45, Chris Angelico ros...@gmail.com wrote:
When you're writing a library, it can be a great help to provide type
annotations, because every application that uses your library can
benefit.
It can be
On 21 April 2015 at 15:31, Chris Angelico ros...@gmail.com wrote:
Granted, there are some
vague areas - how many functions take a file-like object, and are
they all the same? - but between MyPy types and the abstract base
types that already exist, there are plenty of ways to formalize duck
On Apr 20 2015, Chris Angelico ros...@gmail.com wrote:
Maybe it'd be of value to have a quick code stripper that takes away
all the annotations, plus any other junk/framing that you're not
interested in, and gives you something you can browse in a text
editor?
If you need to preprocess your
On 20/04/2015 20:09, Paul Moore wrote:
On 20 April 2015 at 19:41, Barry Warsaw ba...@python.org wrote:
tldr; type hints in python source are scary. Would reserving them for stub
files be better?
I think so. I think PEP 8 should require stub files for stdlib modules and
strongly encourage them
Le 21/04/2015 15:50, Paul Sokolovsky a écrit :
Hello,
On Tue, 21 Apr 2015 15:08:27 +0200
Antoine Pitrou solip...@pitrou.net wrote:
[]
Because the user might not run the type checker, obviously. To quote
you: When we say that type checking is optional, we mean it.
You can't at the
On Wed, Apr 22, 2015 at 12:51 AM, Cory Benfield c...@lukasa.co.uk wrote:
On 21 April 2015 at 15:31, Chris Angelico ros...@gmail.com wrote:
Granted, there are some
vague areas - how many functions take a file-like object, and are
they all the same? - but between MyPy types and the abstract base
Hey, I just wanted to say to everyone, thanks for being so patient and
willing to engage with this discussion, despite my not having done my
research and read the (substantial) prior discussion on the topic. Here it
is (or at least, some of it!) for any other newcomers:
On 20/04/2015 19:30, Harry Percival wrote:
Hi all,
tldr; type hints in python source are scary. Would reserving them for
stub files be better?
I was trying to find Jack's original post as I think his summary is
excellent and aligns well with where I think I'm coming from on this:
On Tue, Apr 21, 2015 at 03:08:27PM +0200, Antoine Pitrou wrote:
On Tue, 21 Apr 2015 22:47:23 +1000
Steven D'Aprano st...@pearwood.info wrote:
Ironically, type hinting will *reduce* the need for intrusive,
anti-duck-testing explicit calls to isinstance() at runtime:
It won't, since as
So. This is how you try and get me to care about Python 3. Can't speak
for others, but this does the opposite for me. This makes me ecstatic
that Python 2 has a nearly-frozen api.
___
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python.org
Hi Yury, Hi List,
I do certainly like the idea of PEP 492, just some small comments:
why do we need two keywords? To me it is not necessarily intuitive
when to use async and when to use await (why is it async for and not
await for?), so wouldn't it be much simpler, and more symmetric, to
just
Hello,
On Tue, 21 Apr 2015 11:56:15 +0100
Rob Cliffe rob.cli...@btinternet.com wrote:
On 21/04/2015 10:33, Cory Benfield wrote:
On 21 April 2015 at 10:10, Chris Angelico ros...@gmail.com wrote:
At this point, you may want to just stop caring about the exact
type. Part of the point of
Hello,
On Tue, 21 Apr 2015 15:08:27 +0200
Antoine Pitrou solip...@pitrou.net wrote:
[]
Because the user might not run the type checker, obviously. To quote
you: When we say that type checking is optional, we mean it.
You can't at the same time point out that type checking has no
power or
On Tue, Apr 21, 2015 at 7:56 PM, Arnaud Delobelle arno...@gmail.com wrote:
If people constantly get told by their editor / IDE that they are calling
function with the wrong argument types, what are they going to do? They may
start adopting the same approach as in Java / C++ etc... where
On Tue, 21 Apr 2015 23:16:19 +1000
Steven D'Aprano st...@pearwood.info wrote:
I could keep going, but I hope I've made my point.
I don't think so. Just because other languages are looking at it
doesn't mean it will end up successful. It means it's an interesting
idea, that's all.
A litmus
On Tue, 21 Apr 2015 at 09:59 Cory Benfield c...@lukasa.co.uk wrote:
[...]
Further, Python's type system is not sufficiently flexible to allow
library authors to adequately specify the types their code actually
works on. I need to be able to talk about interfaces, because
interfaces are the
On Apr 21, 2015, at 01:34 PM, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
Putting the type information in a stub file is an exponentially more distant
fourth best, or to put it another way, *the worst* solution for where to put
type hints. Not only do you Repeat Yourself with the name of the parameter,
but also the
On 20/04/2015 19:30, Harry Percival wrote:
Hi all,
tldr; type hints in python source are scary. Would reserving them for
stub files be better?
I think Jack's summary of this is excellent and aligns well with where I
think I'm coming from on this:
On 21/04/2015 10:33, Cory Benfield wrote:
On 21 April 2015 at 10:10, Chris Angelico ros...@gmail.com wrote:
At this point, you may want to just stop caring about the exact type.
Part of the point of gradual typing is that you can short-cut a lot of
this. And quite frankly, this isn't really
On 21 April 2015 at 11:56, Rob Cliffe rob.cli...@btinternet.com wrote:
On 21/04/2015 10:33, Cory Benfield wrote:
On 21 April 2015 at 10:10, Chris Angelico ros...@gmail.com
ros...@gmail.com wrote:
At this point, you may want to just stop caring about the exact type.
Part of the point of
On 20/04/2015 20:09, Paul Moore wrote:
On 20 April 2015 at 19:41, Barry Warsaw ba...@python.org wrote:
tldr; type hints in python source are scary. Would reserving them for stub
files be better?
I think so. I think PEP 8 should require stub files for stdlib modules and
strongly encourage them
On 21/04/2015 12:23, Gustavo Carneiro wrote:
Well,
(i) can be done with good documentation (docstrings etc.).
Documentation is not checked. It often loses sync with the actual
code. Docs say one thing, code does another.
That certainly something that could be fixed by formalising
On Tue, Apr 21, 2015 at 12:33 AM, M.-A. Lemburg m...@egenix.com wrote:
On 21.04.2015 05:37, Guido van Rossum wrote:
On Mon, Apr 20, 2015 at 4:41 PM, Jack Diederich jackd...@gmail.com
wrote:
* Uploading stubs for other people's code is a terrible idea. Who do I
contact when I update the
On Wed, 22 Apr 2015 01:09:52 +1000, Chris Angelico ros...@gmail.com wrote:
def incremental_parser(input: FileLike) - List[Token]:
tokens = []
data =
while True:
if not data:
data = input.read(64)
token = Token(data[0]); data = data[1:]
while
Hello,
On Tue, 21 Apr 2015 16:11:51 +0200
Antoine Pitrou anto...@python.org wrote:
[]
You can't at the same time point out that type checking has no
power or control over runtime behaviour, and then claim that type
checking makes runtime behaviour (for example, ability to accept or
Hello,
On Tue, 21 Apr 2015 08:05:59 -0700
Nikolaus Rath nikol...@rath.org wrote:
On Apr 20 2015, Chris Angelico ros...@gmail.com wrote:
Maybe it'd be of value to have a quick code stripper that takes
away all the annotations, plus any other junk/framing that you're
not interested in, and
On 21 April 2015 at 16:09, Chris Angelico ros...@gmail.com wrote:
Pretty accurate, yeah. Here's how I see it:
def incremental_parser(input: FileLike) - List[Token]:
tokens = []
data =
while True:
if not data:
data = input.read(64)
token =
Hi Martin,
On 2015-04-21 4:23 AM, Martin Teichmann wrote:
Hi Yury, Hi List,
I do certainly like the idea of PEP 492, just some small comments:
Thank you!
why do we need two keywords? To me it is not necessarily intuitive
when to use async and when to use await (why is it async for and not
On Tue, Apr 21, 2015 at 9:09 AM, Chris Angelico ros...@gmail.com wrote:
...
Pretty accurate, yeah. Here's how I see it:
def incremental_parser(input: FileLike) - List[Token]:
tokens = []
data =
while True:
if not data:
data = input.read(64)
On Mon, Apr 20, 2015 at 6:55 AM Barry Warsaw ba...@python.org wrote:
On Apr 19, 2015, at 01:19 AM, Larry Hastings wrote:
We should rename types to accept. accept should takes a set of
types;
these types specify the types of Python objects the Clinic parameter
should
accept. For the funny
(Gmail messed up the attributions - apologies if I didn't fix them up
correctly).
21 April 2015 at 19:55, Łukasz Langa luk...@langa.pl wrote:
On Apr 21, 2015, at 11:23 AM, Guido van Rossum gu...@python.org wrote:
2. Clearly, great thought has been put into this PEP. If anyone has a good
Hi Yury,
In your PEP 492 draft, in the Grammar section, I think you're missing
the modifications to the flow_stmt line.
Cheers,
Damien.
___
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python.org
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe:
On 22 April 2015 at 04:28, Guido van Rossum gu...@python.org wrote:
On Tue, Apr 21, 2015 at 12:49 AM, Antoine Pitrou solip...@pitrou.net
wrote:
On Mon, 20 Apr 2015 20:43:38 -0400
R. David Murray rdmur...@bitdance.com wrote:
+1 to this from me too. I'm afraid that means I'm -1 on the PEP.
On 20 April 2015 at 09:16, Larry Hastings la...@hastings.org wrote:
There is now a third type of Windows installer for Python 3.5. In addition
to the conventional installer and the web-based installer, Python 3.5 now
has an embeddable installer designed to be run as part of a larger
On 22 April 2015 at 08:26, Guido van Rossum gu...@python.org wrote:
In the end this should be up to you and the reviewers, but for such a
venerable module like unittest I'd be hesitant to be an early adopter. I'd
also expect that much of unittest is too dynamic in nature to benefit from
type
On Apr 21, 2015, at 11:35 PM, Gregory P. Smith g...@krypto.org wrote:
On Tue, Apr 21, 2015 at 10:55 AM Donald Stufft don...@stufft.io
mailto:don...@stufft.io wrote:
Just thought I'd share this since it shows how what people are using to
download things from PyPI have changed over the
On Tue, Apr 21, 2015 at 10:55 AM Donald Stufft don...@stufft.io wrote:
Just thought I'd share this since it shows how what people are using to
download things from PyPI have changed over the past year. Of particular
interest to most people will be the final graphs showing what percentage of
On Tue, Apr 21, 2015 at 2:33 AM, Cory Benfield c...@lukasa.co.uk wrote:
It seems like the only place the type annotations will get used is in
relatively trivial cases where the types are obvious anyway. I don't
deny that *some* bugs will be caught, but I suspect they'll
overwhelmingly be
On Apr 21, 2015, at 7:18 PM, Steve Dower steve.do...@microsoft.com wrote:
Donald Stufft wrote:
Is this version statically linked by any chance?
No, there's no change to the compilation process, so you can get exactly the
same result by using the regular installer and copying the files
On Mon, Apr 20, 2015 at 3:52 PM, Saul Shanabrook s.shanabr...@gmail.com wrote:
I started trying some CPythong development a week ago at PyCon and first got
testing working using Docker on my mac. This had the advantage of not having
to worry about installing and dependencies, and also let me
ITSM for gmail accounts, the activation mail is always in the spam folder.
--
吾輩は猫である。ホームーページはhttp://introo.me。
___
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python.org
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe:
On Apr 21, 2015, at 6:33 PM, Paul Moore p.f.mo...@gmail.com wrote:
On 21 April 2015 at 23:05, Steve Dower steve.do...@microsoft.com wrote:
It is indeed just a run-and-dump extractor. I haven't had a chance to write
up any docs for it yet, but there are some open bugs I want to fix first
On Tue, Apr 21, 2015 at 11:58 AM, Paul Sokolovsky pmis...@gmail.com wrote:
It does, and hope people won't be caught in static typechecking
loop and consider other usages too.
Im confused -- from the bit I've been skimming the discussion, over on
python-ideas, and now here, is that this is all
Hi Damien,
Thanks for noticing! I pushed a fix to the peps repo.
Thanks,
Yury
On 2015-04-21 5:20 PM, Damien George wrote:
Hi Yury,
In your PEP 492 draft, in the Grammar section, I think you're missing
the modifications to the flow_stmt line.
Cheers,
Damien.
Donald Stufft wrote:
Is this version statically linked by any chance?
No, there's no change to the compilation process, so you can get exactly the
same result by using the regular installer and copying the files around.
Not sure if this is what you're referring to, but on Windows DLLs are
Paul Moore wrote:
On 20 April 2015 at 09:16, Larry Hastings la...@hastings.org wrote:
There is now a third type of Windows installer for Python 3.5. In addition
to the conventional installer and the web-based installer, Python 3.5 now
has an embeddable installer designed to be run as part of
Thank you Jack.
Jack: I hate code and I want as little of it as possible in our product
I love that quote -- and I ALWAYS use it when I teach newbies Python. It's
kind of the point of Python -- you can get a lot done by writing very
little code.
I'm still confused about what all this type
On 21 April 2015 at 23:05, Steve Dower steve.do...@microsoft.com wrote:
It is indeed just a run-and-dump extractor. I haven't had a chance to write
up any docs for it yet, but there are some open bugs I want to fix first
(specifically http://bugs.python.org/issue23955) before this becomes too
Cory Benfield c...@lukasa.co.uk
python-dev@python.org python-dev@python.org
On Tue, Apr 21, 2015 at 8:47 AM, Cory Benfield c...@lukasa.co.uk wrote:
I'm talking from the position of being a library author, where supporting
versions of Python lower than 3.5 will be a reality for at least 5 more
On Apr 21, 2015, at 3:23 AM, Martin Teichmann lkb.teichm...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi Yury, Hi List,
I do certainly like the idea of PEP 492, just some small comments:
why do we need two keywords? To me it is not necessarily intuitive
when to use async and when to use await (why is it async
On Mon, Apr 20, 2015 at 08:37:28PM -0700, Guido van Rossum wrote:
On Mon, Apr 20, 2015 at 4:41 PM, Jack Diederich jackd...@gmail.com wrote:
Twelve years ago a wise man said to me I suggest that you also propose a
new name for the resulting language
The barrage of FUD makes me feel like
On Sun, Apr 19, 2015 at 11:19 AM, Larry Hastings la...@hastings.org wrote:
On 08/07/2014 09:41 PM, Larry Hastings wrote:
Well! It's rare that the core dev community is so consistent in its
opinion. I still think nullable is totally appropriate, but I'll change
it to allow_none.
On Tue, 21 Apr 2015 09:28:45 -0700
Guido van Rossum gu...@python.org wrote:
On Tue, Apr 21, 2015 at 12:49 AM, Antoine Pitrou solip...@pitrou.net
wrote:
On Mon, 20 Apr 2015 20:43:38 -0400
R. David Murray rdmur...@bitdance.com wrote:
+1 to this from me too. I'm afraid that means I'm -1 on
On 04/21, Paul Sokolovsky wrote:
And for example yesterday's big theme was people blackmailing that they
stop contributing to stdlib if annotations are in [...]
A volunteer's honest reaction is not blackmail, and categorizing it as such
is not helpful to the discussion.
--
~Ethan~
On Tue, Apr 21, 2015 at 12:50 AM Antoine Pitrou solip...@pitrou.net wrote:
On Mon, 20 Apr 2015 20:43:38 -0400
R. David Murray rdmur...@bitdance.com wrote:
+1 to this from me too. I'm afraid that means I'm -1 on the PEP.
I didn't write this in my earlier email because I wasn't sure about
On Tue, Apr 21, 2015 at 7:51 AM, Cory Benfield c...@lukasa.co.uk wrote:
The correct specification is read method with this type signature
and seek method with this type signature. I would even be prepared
to waive the type signatures on read and seek, given that enforcing
the type hinting on
On Apr 21 2015, Paul Sokolovsky pmis...@gmail.com wrote:
Hello,
On Tue, 21 Apr 2015 08:05:59 -0700
Nikolaus Rath nikol...@rath.org wrote:
On Apr 20 2015, Chris Angelico ros...@gmail.com wrote:
Maybe it'd be of value to have a quick code stripper that takes
away all the annotations, plus
On Tue, Apr 21, 2015 at 9:17 AM, R. David Murray rdmur...@bitdance.com
wrote:
Please be respectful rather than inflammatory. If you read what I
wrote, I did not say that I was going to stop contributing, I
specifically talked about that gut reaction being both emotional and
illogical. That
On Tue, Apr 21, 2015 at 03:51:05PM +0100, Cory Benfield wrote:
On 21 April 2015 at 15:31, Chris Angelico ros...@gmail.com wrote:
Granted, there are some
vague areas - how many functions take a file-like object, and are
they all the same? - but between MyPy types and the abstract base
On Tue, Apr 21, 2015 at 1:18 PM, Robert Collins robe...@robertcollins.net
wrote:
On 22 April 2015 at 04:28, Guido van Rossum gu...@python.org wrote:
Until some point in a possible but distant future when we're all thinking
back fondly about the argument we're currently having, it will be the
On Tue, 21 Apr 2015 18:27:50 +0300, Paul Sokolovsky pmis...@gmail.com wrote:
I was replying to Steven's message. Did you read it?
Yes. And I try to follow general course of discussion, as its hard to
follow individual sub-threads. And for example yesterday's big theme
was people
On Tue, Apr 21, 2015 at 12:49 AM, Antoine Pitrou solip...@pitrou.net
wrote:
On Mon, 20 Apr 2015 20:43:38 -0400
R. David Murray rdmur...@bitdance.com wrote:
+1 to this from me too. I'm afraid that means I'm -1 on the PEP.
I didn't write this in my earlier email because I wasn't sure about
92 matches
Mail list logo
