p.m., Guido van Rossum wrote:
>
> But as long as the imbalance is less than 0x_2000_, the refcount will
> remain in the inclusive range [ 0x_4000_ , 0x_7FFF_ ] and we can
> test for immortality by testing a single bit:
>
> if (o->ob_refcnt & 0x_4000_)
>
>
objects that we plan to immortalize are all widely shared --
who cares if the refcount for None is 5000 or 1610612736? As long as the
refcount of *mortal* objects is the same as it was before, this shouldn't
be a problem.
--
--Guido van Rossum (python.org/~guido)
*Pronouns: he/him **(why is my pro
days. I enjoyed his sense of humor as well. I'm sad that he passed away."
We will miss him.
--
--Guido van Rossum (python.org/~guido)
*Pronouns: he/him **(why is my pronoun here?)*
<http://feministing.com/2015/02/03/how-using-they-as-a-singular-pronoun-can-change-the-world/>
ves.
> > [3] The addition of Include/cpython and Include/internal helped us
> > stop accidentally adding to the limited API.
> > [4] It also makes the groupings deterministically discoverable by tools.
> > [5] explicit use of "extern" indicate
; Python-Dev mailing list -- python-dev@python.org
> To unsubscribe send an email to python-dev-le...@python.org
> https://mail.python.org/mailman3/lists/python-dev.python.org/
> Message archived at
> https://mail.python.org/archives/list/python-dev@python.org/message/UFPN4VUV3Y4ZV4TYJA
it can even begin testing).
>
Yeah, this sounds like a good approach *for things where the alternative is
never to fix it*.
--
--Guido van Rossum (python.org/~guido)
*Pronouns: he/him **(why is my pronoun here?)*
<http://feministing.com/2015/02/03/how-using-they-as-a-singular-pronoun-can-ch
On Tue, Dec 7, 2021 at 11:02 AM Christian Heimes
wrote:
> On 07/12/2021 19.28, Guido van Rossum wrote:
> > I assume it would be insensitive to ask whether we could just get rid of
> > the stable ABI altogether and focus on the limited API? Just tell
> > everyone they h
eir dependencies to solve the issue first before
they can even start testing, and so on. (For example, many libraries still
don't have wheels for Python 3.10, even though it was released over two
months ago and 3.10.1 is already out.)
--
--Guido van Rossum (python.org/~guido)
*Pronouns: he/him **(
On Tue, Dec 7, 2021 at 12:58 AM Petr Viktorin wrote:
> On 06. 12. 21 21:50, Guido van Rossum wrote:
> > On Mon, Dec 6, 2021 at 12:12 PM Petr Viktorin > <mailto:encu...@gmail.com>> wrote:
> >
> > On 06. 12. 21 20:29, Guido van Rossum wrote:
> >
On Mon, Dec 6, 2021 at 12:12 PM Petr Viktorin wrote:
> On 06. 12. 21 20:29, Guido van Rossum wrote:
> > Hi Petr,
> >
> > In PEP 384 it is written that no functions starting with an underscore
> > are part of the stable ABI:
> >
> > PEP 384 -- Defini
just out of date? Or how can the discrepancy be
explained?
--
--Guido van Rossum (python.org/~guido)
*Pronouns: he/him **(why is my pronoun here?)*
<http://feministing.com/2015/02/03/how-using-they-as-a-singular-pronoun-can-change-the-world/>
___
Pyt
On Tue, Nov 30, 2021 at 4:48 PM Oscar Benjamin
wrote:
> On Tue, 30 Nov 2021 at 23:37, Guido van Rossum wrote:
> >
> > We should definitely push back on zealous new converts to typing who
> insist that everything should be annotated. But we should also recognize
> that even
emendous value from typing stubs, in the form of improved auto-complete
and hover-doc functionality.)
--
--Guido van Rossum (python.org/~guido)
*Pronouns: he/him **(why is my pronoun here?)*
<http://feministing.com/2015/02/03/how-using-they-as-a-singular-pronoun-can-change-the-world/>
Victor Stinner
> * `[C API] Disallow using PyFloat_AS_DOUBLE() as l-value
> <https://bugs.python.org/issue45476>`_
> (October 2021)
> * `[capi-sig] Py_TYPE() and Py_SIZE() become static inline functions
> <
> https://mail.python.org/archives/l
vior and
running a static checker is a choice, like running a linter. Three-space
indents or capitalized function names are never going to be disallowed
either, even though PEP 8 says that's not how you ought to code.)
--
--Guido van Rossum (python.org/~guido)
*Pronouns: he/him **(why is my pronou
Fri, Nov 26, 2021 at 1:47 PM Guido van Rossum wrote
> > It's easy enough to do something at runtime with `def f(a: list[int])
> -> int`. It's not so simple to handle `def f(a: Sequence[T]) -> T` or `def
> f(cb: (T) -> tuple[str, T], Sequence[T]) -> Mapping[str, T]`. Pres
On Fri, Nov 26, 2021 at 11:58 AM Paul Moore wrote:
> On Fri, 26 Nov 2021 at 17:13, Guido van Rossum wrote:
>
> >> Although the more I think about it, given that I believe dataclasses
> >> use eval "under the hood", the less I understand *how* it manages to
I'd like to see a clearer statement from "somewhere" about how APIs
> should use annotations at runtime, such that Python users have a much
> clearer intuition about APIs like the dataclass one, and library
> designers can build their APIs based on a clear "common understanding&q
to be a big use case, hence the
mistaken belief at the time PEP 563 was accepted that stringifying
annotations would be sufficient for the introspection use case.
So I'm in agreement with Stephen, but since he left out any mention of
offline static checking, his observation isn't helping much.
Brandt looked at coz for Python but it didn't seem to find anything useful
-- it singled out random lines in the code. :-(
On Wed, Nov 24, 2021 at 10:13 AM Terry Reedy wrote:
> On 11/23/2021 6:21 PM, Guido van Rossum wrote:
>
> > Thanks Antoine. We definitely need
Emery Berger video linked there if you haven't already).
--
--Guido van Rossum (python.org/~guido)
*Pronouns: he/him **(why is my pronoun here?)*
<http://feministing.com/2015/02/03/how-using-they-as-a-singular-pronoun-can-change-the-world/>
___
Python-
an email to python-dev-le...@python.org
> https://mail.python.org/mailman3/lists/python-dev.python.org/
> Message archived at
> https://mail.python.org/archives/list/python-dev@python.org/message/ZLC3H2XLEYJLFV3TRQ2EWRKRGZZ7DRMC/
> Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/
Accepted, and to merge your
> changes to Python 3.11 at your convenience.
>
> With our appreciation,
> -Barry (on behalf of the Python Steering Council)
>
>
--
--Guido van Rossum (python.org/~guido)
*Pronouns: he/him **(why is my pronoun here?)*
<http://feministing.com
thon.org/archives/list/python-dev@python.org/message/FV73RE3TSWDYBOJLZIONUJCX6FA32SZB/
> Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/
>
--
--Guido van Rossum (python.org/~guido)
*Pronouns: he/him **(why is my pronoun here?)*
<http://feministing.com/2015/02
ython.org/
> Message archived at
> https://mail.python.org/archives/list/python-dev@python.org/message/LZOOLX5EKOITW55TW7JQYKLXJUPCAJB4/
> Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/
>
--
--Guido van Rossum (python.org/~guido)
*Pronouns: he/him **(why is my pronoun here?)*
<http
r and one
> supplies one positional argument, then that argument must be bound to
> that parameter name.
>
Terry, maybe that is *your* proposal. But Sebastian's proposal works like
he describes. You can argue that there is a problem with those semantics,
but you cannot argue that that is not
he empty set emphatically is a subset of all
sets (this is the most basic mainstream set theory you can think of).
--
--Guido van Rossum (python.org/~guido)
*Pronouns: he/him **(why is my pronoun here?)*
<http://feministing.com/2015/02/03/how-using-they-as-a-singular-pronoun-can-change-the-world/>
___
f F1 and F3:
flags = 0b101
F1 & flags is a bitwise AND of 0b001 and 0b101, which of course is 0b001
(and so on):
F1 & flags == 0b001 & 0b101 == 0b001
F2 & flags == 0b010 & 0b101 == 0b000
F3 & flags == 0b100 & 0b101 == 0b100
IF weird_case is F2 combined with F3,
SomeFlag.something <-- ???
>
This case definitely sounds to me like there is that confusion. Assuming
'nothing' is zero, it is not an *element*, so it should not be tested with
'in'. The 'in' operator should only be used if the left operator represents
exactly one flag set.
--
--Guido van Rossum (python.org/~
Remember that py stone is a terrible benchmark. It only exercises a few
byte codes and a modern CPU’s caching and branch prediction make minced
meat of those. Sam wrote a whole new register-based VM so perhaps that
exercises different byte codes.
On Sun, Oct 31, 2021 at 05:19 Skip Montanaro
(Off-topic)
On Sat, Oct 23, 2021 at 07:42 Steven D'Aprano wrote:
> I expect that people were using strings for forward references before
> PEP 484, but it was 484 that made it official.
I doubt it. We invented that specifically for mypy. I am not aware of any
prior art.
—Guido
>
> --
NameError"
> faction, including Guido (IIUC).
>
Yes, I still want this part of your PEP changed. I find your
characterization of my position misleading -- there is no rule to break
here(*), just an API.
(*) The Zen of Python does not have rules.
--
--Guido van Rossum (python.org/~guido)
of
Python users, but not of Python core devs). I worry that the experienced
folks may perhaps be a little too eager to protect newbies from shooting
themselves in the foot.
--
--Guido van Rossum (python.org/~guido)
*Pronouns: he/him **(why is my pronoun here?)*
<http://feministing.com/2015/02/03/
's the kind of data you're given and that's the kind
of app you have to write, and you can't control the format of the data.
Using ?. this can be written as
y = config?.get("handler")?.get("parameters")?.get("y")
More examples are in PEP 505 itself, see
https://www.pyt
Wasn't there a change in a micro version of Python 2? I can't remember
> the details, but from hindsight it was seen as a mistake that should not
> be repeated.
>
That was in the olden days. In particular, bool() and True/False were
introduced in Python 2.2.1 (
https://docs.python.org/2.7/library/f
).
+ Address edge cases like trailing commas, `Concatenate` for `ParamSpec`,
> and runtime value of the expression.
> + Explicitly discuss the function-name-as-a-type proposal.
>
> We will be drafting the PEP over the coming month.
>
Awesome. You have my blessing.
--
--Guido van Rossu
dev-le...@python.org
> https://mail.python.org/mailman3/lists/python-dev.python.org/
> Message archived at
> https://mail.python.org/archives/list/python-dev@python.org/message/XZZIV42XGG3EIHRBBCCTTCFPWWSOT7MX/
> Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/
>
--
--Guido van
is a string
should also work, so int() can't call __trunc__ (as was explained earlier
in the thread).
--
--Guido van Rossum (python.org/~guido)
*Pronouns: he/him **(why is my pronoun here?)*
<http://feministing.com/2015/02/03/how-using-they-as-a-singular-pronoun
On Mon, Oct 11, 2021 at 3:22 PM Erik Demaine wrote:
> On Mon, 11 Oct 2021, Guido van Rossum wrote:
>
No, I didn't write that, Lukasz did.
> I always found the following more obvious:
> >
> > def data_to_table(d: Iterable[Mapping[str, float]], *, sort: bool =
> False
def Comparison(a: T, b: T) -> Literal[-1, 0, 1]:
...
my first thought is that it's a comparison function that someone hasn't
finished writing yet, not a function type -- since if it did have at least
one line of code in the body, it *would* be that.
--
--Guido van Rossum (python.org/~gui
ev@python.org
> To unsubscribe send an email to python-dev-le...@python.org
> https://mail.python.org/mailman3/lists/python-dev.python.org/
> Message archived at
> https://mail.python.org/archives/list/python-dev@python.org/message/73BMYW3TY7PJB7KRQ3Q3OROGU5UJVJAW/
> Code of Conduct:
On Sun, Oct 10, 2021 at 12:27 PM Patrick Reader <_...@pxeger.com> wrote:
> On 10/10/2021 18:33, Guido van Rossum wrote:
>
> On Sun, Oct 10, 2021 at 10:28 AM Brandt Bucher
> wrote:
>
>> the peephole optimizer shouldn’t be tasked with “fixing” poorly-written
>>
mizer can prove that it can't raise a name
error.)
--
--Guido van Rossum (python.org/~guido)
*Pronouns: he/him **(why is my pronoun here?)*
<http://feministing.com/2015/02/03/how-using-they-as-a-singular-pronoun-can-change-the-world/>
___
Python-D
iling list -- python-dev@python.org
> To unsubscribe send an email to python-dev-le...@python.org
> https://mail.python.org/mailman3/lists/python-dev.python.org/
> Message archived at
> https://mail.python.org/archives/list/python-dev@python.org/message/767FGRV4ZL5IVBHWSAW5TJGQMGQS244Z/
&g
Maybe instead of tobytes() you can use memoryview().
On Sun, Oct 10, 2021 at 08:21 Facundo Batista
wrote:
> El dom, 10 de oct. de 2021 a la(s) 11:50, Serhiy Storchaka
> (storch...@gmail.com) escribió:
> >
> > 10.10.21 17:19, Facundo Batista пише:
> > > I have a long list of nums (several
hon/cpython/pull/28488
--
--Guido van Rossum (python.org/~guido)
*Pronouns: he/him **(why is my pronoun here?)*
<http://feministing.com/2015/02/03/how-using-they-as-a-singular-pronoun-can-change-the-world/>
___
Python-Dev mailing list -- python-d
ething introspectable is the same.) Union objects have an
`__args__` attribute that gives the underlying types, and a
`__parameters__` attribute giving any type variables.
Note that the implementation of this introspectable type should ultimately
be in C.
--
--Guido van Rossum (python.org/~guido)
*Pronou
lace Callable in
> the initial PEP (option 1) or to specify a more complete syntax from the
> beginning (option 2).
>
> 5. Serhiy Storchaka
>
> > How could you replace Callable[..., int] and Callable[Concatenate[str,
> P], int] ?
>
> To represent a Callable that accepts arbitr
return x+1" and you can't write "f 42". Allowing the omission of the
parentheses here would be inconsistent (even if some other languages allow
it).
--
--Guido van Rossum (python.org/~guido)
*Pronouns: he/him **(why is my pronoun here?)*
<http://femi
To be clear, Sam’s basic approach is a bit slower for single-threaded code,
and he admits that. But to sweeten the pot he has also applied a bunch of
unrelated speedups that make it faster in general, so that overall it’s
always a win. But presumably we could upstream the latter easily,
separately
some + expression group as e: …
Argh. This would be very easy to overlook. As the senior author of PEP 654
I am going to go with "except*". Since it was shown that "except group" has
ambiguous edge cases the proposals have gotten worse, which to me is a good
sign that we
The question was about which style to *recommend* (a la PEP-8).
On Mon, Oct 4, 2021 at 8:03 AM Jonathan Goble wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 4, 2021 at 1:24 AM Guido van Rossum wrote:
>
>> On Sun, Oct 3, 2021 at 9:20 PM Jonathan Goble wrote:
>>
>>> Therefore my vote
On Sun, Oct 3, 2021 at 9:20 PM Jonathan Goble wrote:
> Therefore my vote is for requiring `except* E` and keeping `except *E` as
> a SyntaxError.
>
You can't do that with our current lexer+parser.
--
--Guido van Rossum (python.org/~guido)
*Pronouns: he/him **(why is my pronoun here
be bikeshedding the syntax. This thread
was meant to solicit feedback on how to *format* it: does the space go
before or after the '*'.
--
--Guido van Rossum (python.org/~guido)
*Pronouns: he/him **(why is my pronoun here?)*
<http://feministing.com/2015/02/03/how-using-they-
We’ll, typically you don’t explicitly mention ExceptionGroup — it’s implied
by the ‘except*’ syntax. Introducing match semantics probably wouldn’t open
up new functionality, you can already write ‘except (E1, E2):’.
On Sun, Oct 3, 2021 at 09:00 Thomas Grainger wrote:
> What about `except case
What I have heard repeatedly, from people who are paid to know, is that
most users don’t care about the latest features, and would rather stick to
a release until it becomes unsupported. (Extreme example: Python 2.)
Numpy isn’t random, it’s at the bottom of the food chain for a large
ecosystem or
-optimizations`, which doesn't
mention PGO -- IIUC it turns on PGO and LTO, if they're available.
So my *actual* proposal (call it #2') is to use a separate compile-time
flag, which is set by `./configure --enable-optimizations` regardless of
whether PGO/LTO are possible, and which on Window
In this case I am inclined not to backport.
In general we should look at existing usage before making changes.
Somebody’s code might break — but does it matter? That depends on a lot of
factors. E.g. if parsing an error message has become a common way to get
useful info out of the error that is
t the time because we were coming from
"{xxx}".format(...), where the parser doesn't know that the string is a
format string.
--
--Guido van Rossum (python.org/~guido)
*Pronouns: he/him **(why is my pronoun here?)*
<http://feministing.com/2015/02/03/how-using-they-as-a-singul
.py")}.c: $(srcdir)/{source}")
print("\t$(COMMAND)")
So these two tools, at least, seem to be doing all right (maybe because
they both come from the JavaScript culture, where nested interpolations are
well-known).
--
--Guido van Rossum
ot;.py")}.c: $(srcdir)/{source}")
^
SyntaxError: f-string: unmatched '('
```
--
--Guido van Rossum (python.org/~guido)
*Pronouns: he/him **(why is my pronoun here?)*
<http://feministing.com/2015/02/03/how-using-they-as-a-singular-pronoun-can-change-
On Mon, Sep 20, 2021 at 1:07 PM Patrick Reader <_...@pxeger.com> wrote:
> > The current restrictions will also confuse some users (e.g. those used
> to bash, and IIRC JS, where the rules are similar as what Pablo is
> proposing).
> > --
> > --Guido van Rossum (python
> https://mail.python.org/archives/list/python-dev@python.org/message/TWSJKE4KKSW7YD3OCHKGKJC52VUG6FY5/
> Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/
>
--
--Guido van Rossum (python.org/~guido)
*Pronouns: he/him **(why is my pronoun here?)*
<http://feministing.com/2015/02/
this works:
for x in S(): ...
However this doesn't:
for x in iter(S()): ...
In Steven's view, A does not deserve to work in the former case: Because A
is a "broken" iterator, he seems to want it rejected by the iter() call
that is *implicit* in the for-loop.
Reminder about how for-loops work:
to python-dev-le...@python.org
> https://mail.python.org/mailman3/lists/python-dev.python.org/
> Message archived at
> https://mail.python.org/archives/list/python-dev@python.org/message/KEURSMCLUVI7VPKM6M2VUV4JIW6FP66Z/
> Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/
>
--
--Guid
On Tue, Sep 14, 2021 at 11:44 PM Steven D'Aprano
wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 14, 2021 at 09:38:38PM -0700, Guido van Rossum wrote:
>
> > > I don't know what I would call an object that only has __next__,
> > > apart from "broken" :-(
> > >
> >
> &
__next__,
> apart from "broken" :-(
>
It's still an iterator, since it duck-types in most cases where an iterator
is required (notably "for", which is the primary use case for the iteration
protocols -- it's in the first sentence of PEP 234's abstract).
--
-
On Tue, Sep 14, 2021 at 9:03 PM Steven D'Aprano wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 14, 2021 at 12:33:32PM -0700, Guido van Rossum wrote:
> > My view of this is:
> >
> > A. It's not an iterator if it doesn't define `__next__`.
> >
> > B. It is strongly recommended tha
On Tue, Sep 14, 2021 at 4:33 PM Brandt Bucher
wrote:
> Guido van Rossum wrote:
> > On Tue, Sep 14, 2021 at 3:49 PM Brandt Bucher brandtbuc...@gmail.com
> > wrote:
> > > I think it's also worth noting that a missing "`__iter__` that returns
> > > self" i
er things
that don't follow the letter of the protocol, just to get things going.
(This is common for complex protocols like Mapping, where some function you
have no control over insists on a Mapping but only calls one or two common
methods.
Duck typing is alive and kicking!
--
--Guido van Rossu
https://mail.python.org/mailman3/lists/python-dev.python.org/
> Message archived at
> https://mail.python.org/archives/list/python-dev@python.org/message/3W7TDX5KNVQVGT5CUHBK33M7VNTP25DZ/
> Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/
>
--
--Guido van
On Tue, Sep 7, 2021 at 10:00 AM Stefan Behnel wrote:
> Guido van Rossum schrieb am 07.09.21 um 00:44:
> > In addition, I just heard from the SC that they've approved the
> exception.
> > So we will remove these two APIs from 3.11 without deprecation.
>
> Erm, hang on
On Fri, Sep 3, 2021 at 4:12 PM Victor Stinner wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 2, 2021 at 11:15 PM Guido van Rossum wrote:
> > FWIW I've applied for an exception from the two-release deprecation
> policy from the SC:
> > https://github.com/python/steering-council/issues/75
>
> On th
Quick reaction: This feels like a bait and switch to me. Also, there are
many advantages to using a standard format like zip (many formats are
really zip with some conventions). Finally, the bytecode format you are
using is “marshal”, and is fully portable — as is zip.
On Thu, Sep 2, 2021 at
s the __[a]iter__ method call feels more
> legitimate in the actual for loop syntax, it just feels odd to me if the
> builtin isn't forcing the call.
>
> Cheers,
> Nick.
>
>>
>
>
>
>>
> ___
> Python-Dev mail
ssage/TDLCJHNQSPNE7UXEJ33PV2VNQOPUFUT7/
> Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/
>
--
--Guido van Rossum (python.org/~guido)
*Pronouns: he/him **(why is my pronoun here?)*
<http://feministing.com/2015/02/03/how-using-they-as-a-singular-pronoun-can-change-the-world/&
for these two
functions.
That means:
- Get rid of PyCode_NewWithPosArgs altogether
- PyCode_New becomes unstable (and gets a new posinlyargcount argument)
On Wed, Sep 1, 2021 at 11:52 AM Guido van Rossum wrote:
> (context)
>
>> Guido van Rossum schrieb am 13.08.21 um 19:24:
>&g
(context)
> Guido van Rossum schrieb am 13.08.21 um 19:24:
> > In 3.11 we're changing a lot of details about code objects. Part of this
> is
> > the "Faster CPython" work, part of it is other things (e.g. PEP 657 --
> Fine
> > Grained Error Locations in Trac
weird interactions if a trace hook is
> enabled during the initial start up of the interpreter and tries to trace
> the proxy implementation code.
>
Of course. But it would still be interesting to have pseudo-code in your
PEP showing the semantics you intend to implement -- that way we can
c
cost
of the extra indirection is irrelevant, this is always going to be a slow
interface meant for occasional use in a debugger.
--
--Guido van Rossum (python.org/~guido)
*Pronouns: he/him **(why is my pronoun here?)*
<http://feministing.com/2015/02/03/how-using-they-as-a-singular-pronoun-can-change-th
would be the use case for that? I
guess to start over with a computation. But there are better ways to do
that. So let's not worry too much about preventing the user from shooting
themselves in the foot -- surely at the global level, "globals().clear()"
will do weird shit too. :-)
--
--Guid
On Thu, Aug 26, 2021 at 1:29 AM Nick Coghlan wrote:
> On Mon, 23 Aug 2021 at 13:07, Guido van Rossum wrote:
> > But... I also care about backwards compatibility, and I have a crazy
> idea for making PyEval_GetLocals() work in a useful manner without
> compromising the behavior
l.python.org/mailman3/lists/python-dev.python.org/
> Message archived at
> https://mail.python.org/archives/list/python-dev@python.org/message/MK7N36L3XCXVY5R4DIIYIDU2W7EGJKZ3/
> Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/
>
--
--Guido van Rossum (python.org/~guido)
*Pronouns: h
propose to fix the bug by not writing things back that way, instead
writing back whenever a key in the proxy is set. The discussion is about
subtler differences between the proposals.
—Guido
On Mon, Aug 23, 2021 at 22:19 Steven D'Aprano wrote:
> On Sat, Aug 21, 2021 at 05:46:52PM -0700, Guido
On Mon, Aug 23, 2021 at 8:46 AM Mark Shannon wrote:
> Hi Guido,
>
> On 23/08/2021 3:53 pm, Guido van Rossum wrote:
> > On Mon, Aug 23, 2021 at 4:38 AM Mark Shannon > <mailto:m...@hotpy.org>> wrote:
> >
> > Hi Nick,
> >
>
.
> None of this is clear (at least not to me) from PEP 558.
>
One problem with PEP 558 is that it's got too many words, and it's lacking
a section that crisply describes the semantics of the proposed
implementation. I've suggested to Nick that he add a section with
pseudo-code for the impleme
On Sat, Aug 21, 2021 at 8:52 PM Nick Coghlan wrote:
>
> On Sun, 22 Aug 2021, 10:47 am Guido van Rossum, wrote:
>
>>
>> Everything here is about locals() and f_locals in *function scope*. (I
>> use f_locals to refer to the f_locals field of frame objects
Hm, I don’t think the major use for bchr() will be with a constant.
On Sun, Aug 22, 2021 at 14:48 Gregory P. Smith wrote:
>
> On Tue, Aug 10, 2021 at 3:48 PM Christopher Barker
> wrote:
>
>> On Tue, Aug 10, 2021 at 3:00 PM wrote:
>>
>>> The history of bytes/bytearray is a dual-purpose view.
n3/lists/python-dev.python.org/
> Message archived at
> https://mail.python.org/archives/list/python-dev@python.org/message/4RH5YCXIHIP6MRVTCOKOOO4GKCIMH4GJ/
> Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/
>
--
--Guido van Rossum (python.org/~guido)
*Pro
en we change internal APIs that things
>> depend on, the more people will move their projects towards doing the right
>> thing with regards to either not using said APIs or rerunning an up to date
>> code generator as part of their build instead of checking in generated
>> unsta
an idea now: the C
equivalent to .replace() could use the same input structure; one can leave
fields NULL that should be copied from the original unmodified.
--
--Guido van Rossum (python.org/~guido)
*Pronouns: he/him **(why is my pronoun here?)*
<h
On Mon, Aug 16, 2021 at 9:30 AM Steve Dower wrote:
> On 8/16/2021 12:47 AM, Guido van Rossum wrote:
> > My current proposal is to issue a DeprecationWarning in PyCode_New() and
> > PyCode_NewWithPosArgs(), which can be turned into an error using a
> > command-line flag. If i
On Sat, Aug 14, 2021 at 4:56 AM Serhiy Storchaka
wrote:
> 13.08.21 20:24, Guido van Rossum пише:
> > If these weren't part of the stable ABI, I'd choose (E). But because
> > they are, I think only (A) or (B) are our options. The problem with (C)
> > is that if there's co
On Fri, Aug 13, 2021 at 11:17 AM Terry Reedy wrote:
> On 8/13/2021 1:24 PM, Guido van Rossum wrote:
> [...]
> > Unfortunately, PyCode_New() and PyCode_NewWithPosArgs() are part of the
> > PEP 387 stable ABI. What should we do?
>
> PEP 387 is Backwards Comp
especially interested in Petr's opinion given that this is a
case where we'd like to deprecate something in the stable ABI.
See also discussion in https://bugs.python.org/issue40222 (esp. near the
end).
--
--Guido van Rossum (python.org/~guido)
*Pronouns: he/him **(why is my pronoun her
I will try to find time to review the code.
On Thu, Aug 12, 2021 at 08:56 Larry Hastings wrote:
>
> On 8/12/21 8:25 AM, Guido van Rossum wrote:
>
> Maybe we could specialize the heck out of this and not bother with a
> function object? In the end we want to execute the cod
nction objects for annotation too.
>
> Function objects are heavier than code objects. And they are GC-tracked
> objects.
>
> I want to know how we can reduce the function objects created for
> annotation in PEP 649, before deprecating PEP 563.
>
> --
> Inada Naoki
>
Oh, I agree it shouldn’t reference the typing module. But it should not
raise NameError. This whole thing already is a special case. We can debate
what else it should, e.g. skip the name, return a fixed error token, return
an error token that includes the name that failed (this is part if the
As it happens, I have a working prototype of lazy in marshaling that would
work well for this.
On Wed, Aug 11, 2021 at 06:07 Larry Hastings wrote:
> On 8/11/21 5:21 AM, Inada Naoki wrote:
>
> But memory footprint and GC time is still an issue.
> Annotations in PEP 649 semantics can be much
gt;>
> I implemented a version of this in
> https://github.com/larryhastings/co_annotations/pull/3 but Larry didn't
> like it.
>
However, I do like it, despite all Larry's arguing against it.
--
--Guido van Rossum (python.org/~guido)
*Pronouns: he/him **(why is my pronoun here?)*
101 - 200 of 5880 matches
Mail list logo
