On Mon, Nov 12, 2018 at 4:43 PM Nicholas Harrison
wrote:
> Only when this is called (implicitly or explicitly) do checks for valid
> objects and bounds occur. From my experience using slices, this is how they
> work in that context too.
On reconsideration, I've found one more argument in
On Sun, Nov 11, 2018 at 6:59 AM Nicholas Harrison
wrote:
> Any of the values may be omitted and in the slice context the behavior has no
> changes from what it already does: start and stop default to the beginning or
> end of the list depending on direction and the step defaults to 1.
Just to
Julien, would I be correct if I summarized the changes you have in
mind like this:
for dictionaries d1 and d2,
non-Mapping ("scalar") sc,
binary operation ⊛,
and unary operation 퓊 (such as negation or abs()):
d1 ⊛ sc == {k: (v ⊛ sc) for k, v in d1.items()}
sc ⊛ d1 == {k: (sc ⊛ v) for k, v in
On Tue, Oct 23, 2018 at 1:16 PM Chris Angelico wrote:
> a lambda function should be treated as a block of code
> inside another function, and not as its own entity. You don't give a
> name to the block of code between "if" and "else" ...
Very well put! Thanks.
> Currently, lambda functions are
Chris, I'm happy to work with you to hammer out comparisons of various
solutions.
But I can't take on the role of an advocate for "multi-statement lambdas".
I don't even understand what precisely that covers, since we don't have
uni-statement lambdas.
_If that role would be needed for this
Nathaniel, thank you for the pointer to Trio.
Its approach seems very robust. I'm relieved to see that a solution so
fundamentally rebuilt has also settled on very similar semantics for
its `.close_put()`.
I think your `.clone()` idiom is very clear when the communication
objects are treated as
On Mon, Oct 22, 2018 at 12:52 AM Steven D'Aprano wrote:
> > def inc_counter():
> > counter += 1
>
> I don't think that's a real working example.
> ...
> You need to declare counter and sum as global variables.
Good catch!
None of the examples were real, in the sense of being copied directly
On Sun, Oct 21, 2018 at 8:45 PM MRAB wrote:
> FTR, this has been discussed before:
>
> [Python-ideas] `__iter__` for queues?
> https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-ideas/2010-January/006711.html
Thank you!
For the sake of clarity, I want to outline a few differences between
that discussion
Hi!
I originally submitted this as a pull request. Raymond Hettinger
suggested it should be given a shakeout in python-ideas first.
https://github.com/python/cpython/pull/10018
https://bugs.python.org/issue35034
--
Briefly:
Add a close() method to Queue, which should simplify many common
