On 07.09.16 07:21, Eric V. Smith wrote:
The implementation of '_' in numeric literals is here:
http://bugs.python.org/issue26331
And to add '_' in int.__format__ is here:
http://bugs.python.org/issue27080
But I don't want to add support in int.__format__ unless numeric literal
support is added.
Hi all,
The documentation at https://docs.python.org/3/reference/simple_stmts.html
says that:
"Names listed in a global statement must not be used in the same code block
textually preceding that global statement"
But then later:
"CPython implementation detail: The current implementation does no
On 7 September 2016 at 09:56, Eric Snow wrote:
> I'm not anticipating much discussion on this, but wanted to present a
> summary of my notes from the project I proposed last year and have
> since tabled.
>
> http://ericsnowcurrently.blogspot.com/2016/09/solving-mutli-core-python.html
Thanks for t
Thank you, Guido!
I've updated the PEP to make shutdown_asyncgens a coroutine, as we
discussed.
Yury
On 2016-09-06 7:10 PM, Guido van Rossum wrote:
Thanks Yury!
I am hereby accepting PEP 525 provisionally. The acceptance is so that
you can go ahead and merge this into 3.6 before the feat
Thanks Yury! (Everyone else following along, the PEP is accepted
provisionally, and we may make small tweaks from time to time during
Python 3.6's lifetime.)
___
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python.org
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python
+1
On Wed, Sep 7, 2016 at 7:10 AM, Ivan Levkivskyi wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> The documentation at https://docs.python.org/3/reference/simple_stmts.html
> says that:
>
> "Names listed in a global statement must not be used in the same code block
> textually preceding that global statement"
>
> But then
I'm hijacking this thread to provisionally accept PEP 529. (I'll also
do this for PEP 528, in its own thread.)
I've talked things over with Steve and Victor and we're going to do an
experiment (as now written up in the PEP:
https://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0529/#beta-experiment) to tease
out an
Congrats Steve!
I'm provisionally accepting PEP 528. You can mark it as provisionally
accepted in the PEP, preferably with a link to the mail.python.org
archival copy of this message.
Good luck with the implementation.
--
--Guido van Rossum (python.org/~guido)
__
To conclude our discussion about using C99 features, I've updated PEP 7
to allow the following features:
- Standard integer types in and
- ``static inline`` functions
- designated initializers
- intermingled declarations
- booleans
I've been adding examples of these to 3.6 over the last
2016-09-07 10:56 GMT-07:00 Benjamin Peterson :
> To conclude our discussion about using C99 features, I've updated PEP 7
> to allow the following features:
> - Standard integer types in and
> - ``static inline`` functions
> - designated initializers
> - intermingled declarations
> - boole
On 07Sep2016 1037, Guido van Rossum wrote:
I'm hijacking this thread to provisionally accept PEP 529. (I'll also
do this for PEP 528, in its own thread.)
I've talked things over with Steve and Victor and we're going to do an
experiment (as now written up in the PEP:
https://www.python.org/dev/pe
I'm accepting PEP 526 provisionally.
I am personally confident that this PEP is adding a useful new feature
to the language: annotations that can be used by a wide variety of
tools, whether off-line type checkers or frameworks that add runtime
checking (e.g. traits or traitlets).
The provisional
PEP 3156 and the asyncio module it defines have been provisional for
the lifetime of Python 3.4 and 3.5. The module is now quite mature. I
propose that we end the provisional period and make asyncio subject to
the usual backwards compatibility rules: new features only appear in
"minor" releases (e.
W00t! I will have to rewrite my brain. :-)
On Wed, Sep 7, 2016 at 11:07 AM, Victor Stinner
wrote:
> 2016-09-07 10:56 GMT-07:00 Benjamin Peterson :
>> To conclude our discussion about using C99 features, I've updated PEP 7
>> to allow the following features:
>> - Standard integer types in and
On Wed, 7 Sep 2016 11:53:14 -0700
Guido van Rossum wrote:
> W00t! I will have to rewrite my brain. :-)
... Is your brain coded in C89?
>
> On Wed, Sep 7, 2016 at 11:07 AM, Victor Stinner
> wrote:
> > 2016-09-07 10:56 GMT-07:00 Benjamin Peterson :
> >> To conclude our discussion about using
Wonder if it's ever segfaulted...
...hey, I just figured out why we got Python 3! ;)
--
Ryan
[ERROR]: Your autotools build scripts are 200 lines longer than your
program. Something’s wrong.
http://kirbyfan64.github.io/
On Sep 7, 2016 2:02 PM, "Antoine Pitrou" wrote:
> On Wed, 7 Sep 2016 11:
Thanks for the post. :) There's some typo in the title and url. :/ :D
On 07.09.2016 01:56, Eric Snow wrote:
I'm not anticipating much discussion on this, but wanted to present a
summary of my notes from the project I proposed last year and have
since tabled.
http://ericsnowcurrently.blogspot.co
Thank you Guido! :-)
--
Ivan
On 7 September 2016 at 20:18, Guido van Rossum wrote:
> I'm accepting PEP 526 provisionally.
>
> I am personally confident that this PEP is adding a useful new feature
> to the language: annotations that can be used by a wide variety of
> tools, whether off-line typ
:D
--
Ryan
[ERROR]: Your autotools build scripts are 200 lines longer than your
program. Something’s wrong.
http://kirbyfan64.github.io/
On Sep 7, 2016 1:20 PM, "Guido van Rossum" wrote:
> I'm accepting PEP 526 provisionally.
>
> I am personally confident that this PEP is adding a useful new fea
The repos which used to send to Python-checkins no longer do so since their
respective migrations (devguide, peps). I don't know who's responsible for
that, so I figured I'd post here.
-Emanuel
___
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python.org
https://ma
On Wed, 7 Sep 2016 at 14:24 Emanuel Barry wrote:
> The repos which used to send to Python-checkins no longer do so since their
> respective migrations (devguide, peps). I don't know who's responsible for
> that, so I figured I'd post here.
>
If people want those back on then that could be arrang
Fair enough. I never really bothered to set up any complicated design to get
commits, and my emails all get automatically sorted into folders so it doesn’t
matter which list it goes to. Although now that you mention it, I could simply
subscribe to the GitHub repos and get the notifications for f
One more thing I forgot: C++-style line comments are kosher, too.
On Wed, Sep 7, 2016, at 10:56, Benjamin Peterson wrote:
> To conclude our discussion about using C99 features, I've updated PEP 7
> to allow the following features:
> - Standard integer types in and
> - ``static inline`` f
On Wed, 7 Sep 2016 at 14:46 Emanuel Barry wrote:
> Fair enough. I never really bothered to set up any complicated design to
> get commits, and my emails all get automatically sorted into folders so it
> doesn’t matter which list it goes to. Although now that you mention it, I
> could simply subsc
Thank you very much Benjamin.
On 7 September 2016 at 17:56, Benjamin Peterson wrote:
> To conclude our discussion about using C99 features, I've updated PEP 7
> to allow the following features:
> - Standard integer types in and
Perhaps PEP 7 should clarify if the optional types like ui
On Wed, Sep 7, 2016, at 15:58, Martin Panter wrote:
> Thank you very much Benjamin.
>
> On 7 September 2016 at 17:56, Benjamin Peterson
> wrote:
> > To conclude our discussion about using C99 features, I've updated PEP 7
> > to allow the following features:
> > - Standard integer types in
Let's see if watching the git repo (and filtering if necessary) covers
this use case before we build more custom infrastructure.
On Wed, Sep 7, 2016 at 2:46 PM, Emanuel Barry wrote:
> Fair enough. I never really bothered to set up any complicated design to get
> commits, and my emails all get aut
Folks,
At the sprint both Victor and Yury have petitioned me to accept this
PEP. I now agree. Let's do it! PEP 509 is hereby officially accepted.
(Some implementation details have to be sorted out, but I need to
unblock Victor before the sprint is over.)
--
--Guido van Rossum (python.org/~guido)
I don't know if feedback from a single, humble Python programmer is of
any value, but:
+1
I do sometimes have global statements at the start of the bit of code to
which they apply (rather than having all global statements agglomerated
at the start of the function they are in). This seems to
On 8 September 2016 at 04:18, Guido van Rossum wrote:
> There's been some quite contentious discussion about the PEP, on and
> off python-dev, regarding how the mere presence of annotation syntax
> in the language will change the way people will see the language. My
> own experience using mypy and
On 8 September 2016 at 04:31, Guido van Rossum wrote:
> There's also the issue of starttls, a feature that we know we'd like
> to add but don't have ready for 3.6b1. I think the right approach
> there is to provide an add-on package on PyPI that implements a
> starttls-capable Transport class, and
On Wed, Sep 7, 2016 at 8:43 PM, Nick Coghlan wrote:
> On 8 September 2016 at 04:31, Guido van Rossum wrote:
>> There's also the issue of starttls, a feature that we know we'd like
>> to add but don't have ready for 3.6b1. I think the right approach
>> there is to provide an add-on package on PyPI
On 8 September 2016 at 03:37, Guido van Rossum wrote:
> On Sun, Sep 4, 2016 at 11:58 PM, Nick Coghlan wrote:
>> While calling system native apps that way will still have many
>> portability challenges, there are also plenty of cases where folks use
>> sys.executable to launch new Python processes
33 matches
Mail list logo
