On Sat., 7 Nov. 2020, 9:56 am Greg Ewing,
wrote:
> On 7/11/20 4:03 am, Thomas Wouters wrote:
>
> > It's also why I'm not in favour of PEP 642 and other proposals for
> > solving some of the problems in the Structural Pattern Matching proposal
> > (sigils, etc): it widens the gap instead of closin
Hi folks,
I have updated PEP 642 significantly based on the feedback received
over the past week.
Since the Discourse thread hadn't received any comments on it, I
amended the existing thread in place rather than making a new one:
https://discuss.python.org/t/pep-642-constraint-pattern-syntax-for-
Hi, Riccardo.
I'm who removed the __cause__ from tutorial, and I had translated
Japanese translation of official Python document hard.
On Sun, Nov 8, 2020 at 3:07 AM Riccardo Polignieri via Python-Dev
wrote:
>
> This morning I noticed this new commit, referring to bpo-42179: "Remove
> mention
Dear all,
I am the maintainer of an Italian translation of the Python Tutorial:
https://pytutorial-it.readthedocs.io.
Since the Italian translation is kept in sync with the original repo (across
all the branches!), from time to time I get an alert when a change is
committed.
This morning I
Just one note. Please don’t confuse illumos and the illumos community with
Oracle or Solaris. While the illumos code base owes its origins to Solaris,
that was due to the acts of Sun and not Oracle and today Oracle refuses to even
acknowledge the existence of illumos. illumos is fully open so
Guido van Rossum writes:
> This I also agree with. We should not assume readers know any
> particular other language,
Most of my students have Python as their first language, and my
university mandates using it in introductory courses as of this year.
I agree that there are two audiences: thos
As I remember the webmaster@ discussions, Mats did go so far as to start a
re-write of the classes section, but it never got as far as a PR.
Kind regards,
Steve
On Fri, Nov 6, 2020 at 5:51 PM Guido van Rossum wrote:
> Ouch, that's bad. It seems the class tutorial could use an overhaul.
>
> We
