On 16 May 2018 at 05:35, Alex Walters wrote:
> In the spirit of learning why there is a fence across the road before I tear
> it down out of ignorance [1], I'd like to know the rationale behind source
> only releases of cpython. I have an opinion on their utility and perhaps an
> idea about chang
16.05.18 07:35, Alex Walters пише:
In the spirit of learning why there is a fence across the road before I tear
it down out of ignorance [1], I'd like to know the rationale behind source
only releases of cpython. I have an opinion on their utility and perhaps an
idea about changing them, but I'd
16.05.18 07:35, Alex Walters пише:
[1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Chesterton%27s_fence
And I wish that every author who suggested the idea for Python was
familiar with the Chesterton's fence principle.
___
Python-Dev mailing list
Pyth
On 16 May 2018 at 09:34, Serhiy Storchaka wrote:
> 16.05.18 07:35, Alex Walters пише:
>>
>> [1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Chesterton%27s_fence
>
>
> And I wish that every author who suggested the idea for Python was familiar
> with the Chesterton's fence principle.
Agreed - thanks
On 5/16/18 4:34 AM, Serhiy Storchaka wrote:
16.05.18 07:35, Alex Walters пише:
[1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Chesterton%27s_fence
And I wish that every author who suggested the idea for Python was
familiar with the Chesterton's fence principle.
Indeed! It's refreshing. Thanks,
On May 16, 2018, at 00:35, Alex Walters wrote:
> In the spirit of learning why there is a fence across the road before I tear
> it down out of ignorance [1], I'd like to know the rationale behind source
> only releases of cpython. I have an opinion on their utility and perhaps an
> idea about cha
On May 16, 2018, at 00:35, Alex Walters wrote:
>
> In the spirit of learning why there is a fence across the road before I tear
> it down out of ignorance [1], I'd like to know the rationale behind source
> only releases of cpython.
Historically, it was a matter of resources. Making binary rele
On 05/15/18 17:55, Jeroen Demeyer wrote:
On 2018-05-15 18:36, Petr Viktorin wrote:
Naturally, large-scale
changes have less of a chance there.
Does it really matter that much how large the change is? I think you are
focusing too much on the change instead of the end result.
As I said in my
Petr Viktorin schrieb am 15.05.2018 um 18:36:
> On 05/15/18 05:15, Jeroen Demeyer wrote:
>> An important note is that it was never my goal to create a minimal PEP. I
>> did not aim for changing as little as possible. I was thinking: we are
>> changing functions, what would be the best way to implem
On 2018-05-16 17:31, Petr Viktorin wrote:
The larger a change is, the harder it is to understand
I already disagree here...
I'm afraid that you are still confusing the largeness of the *change*
with the complexity of the *result* after the change was implemented.
A change that *removes* compl
This may be known but I wanted to ask this esteemed body first.
I understand that from Python3.3 there was a security fix to ensure that
different python processes would generate different hash value for the
same input - to prevent denial of service based on crafted hash conflicts.
I opened t
> On May 16, 2018, at 5:48 PM, Anthony Flury via Python-Dev
> wrote:
>
> However the frozen set hash, the same in both cases, as is the hash of the
> tuples - suggesting that the vulnerability resolved in Python 3.3 wasn't
> resolved across all potentially hashable values.
You are correct.
On 2018-05-16 18:10, Raymond Hettinger wrote:
>
>
>> On May 16, 2018, at 5:48 PM, Anthony Flury via Python-Dev
>> wrote:
>>
>> However the frozen set hash, the same in both cases, as is the hash of the
>> tuples - suggesting that the vulnerability resolved in Python 3.3 wasn't
>> resolved acr
Thank you, that's exactly what I needed to read.
> -Original Message-
> From: Ned Deily
> Sent: Wednesday, May 16, 2018 7:07 AM
> To: Alex Walters
> Cc: Python-Dev
> Subject: Re: [Python-Dev] What is the rationale behind source only
releases?
>
> On May 16, 2018, at 00:35, Alex Walters
This is precisely what I meant. Before asking this question, I didn’t fully
understand why, for example, 3.5.4 got a binary installer for windows and mac,
but 3.5.5 did not. This thread has cleared that up for me.
From: Python-Dev On
Behalf Of Donald Stufft
Sent: Wednesday, May 16, 2018 1
> -Original Message-
> From: Paul Moore
> Sent: Wednesday, May 16, 2018 4:07 AM
> To: Alex Walters
> Cc: Python Dev
> Subject: Re: [Python-Dev] What is the rationale behind source only releases?
>
> On 16 May 2018 at 05:35, Alex Walters wrote:
> > In the spirit of learning why there
On 5/16/2018 11:46 PM, Alex Walters wrote:
This is actually the heart of the reason I asked the question. CI tools are
fairly good now. If the CI tools could be used in such a way to make the
building of binary artifacts less of a burden on the release managers, would
there be interest in d
Hi,
String hash is randomized, but not the integer hash:
$ python3.5 -c 'print(hash("abc"))'
-8844814677999896014
$ python3.5 -c 'print(hash("abc"))'
-7757160699952389646
$ python3.5 -c 'print(hash(1))'
1
$ python3.5 -c 'print(hash(1))'
1
frozenset hash is combined from values of the set. So it
18 matches
Mail list logo
