This is an idea of a new PEP.
I propose to create a portable file format which will list command line
options to run Python scripts with dual purpose:
1. for automatic tests executing scripts from this file (and optionally
checking their stdout against specified values).
2. for running the
On Wed, Aug 08, 2018 at 12:57:51AM +0300, Victor Porton wrote:
> This is an idea of a new PEP.
>
> I propose to create a portable file format which will list command line
> options to run Python scripts with dual purpose:
Feel free to create whatever file format you like. There are tens of
thou
On 08/08/18 02:18, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
On Wed, Aug 08, 2018 at 12:57:51AM +0300, Victor Porton wrote:
This is an idea of a new PEP.
I propose to create a portable file format which will list command line
options to run Python scripts with dual purpose:
Feel free to create whatever file form
a suggest : don't make it obligatory
i think it might come as suggested settings as settings on different
environments different.
or we can specify only in modules like in setup.py the name of the file,
then each user configures it's own (considering pip we can make use it
false by default)
in t
This mostly springs off of a comment I saw in some thread.
The point of a with statement is that it ensures that some resource will be
disposed of, yes? For example, this:
with open(filename) as f:
contents = f.read()
is better than this:
contents = open(filename).read()
becaus
i think a SyntaxError won't be appropriate as it is valid syntax as the
lexer finds nothing wrong
it falls more i think like out of index errors and the like, a
ContextManagerError ?
else, a request to add headings like
EXAMPLES
=
in your discussion
yours,
--
Abdur-Rahmaan Janhangeer
On Tue, Aug 7, 2018 at 11:16 PM Ken Hilton wrote:
> ...
> Now, let's take a look at the following scenario:
>
> def read_multiple(*filenames):
> for filename in filenames:
> with open(filename) as f:
> yield f.read()
>
> Can you spot the problem? The "with
On Wed, Aug 8, 2018 at 4:14 PM, Ken Hilton wrote:
> This mostly springs off of a comment I saw in some thread.
>
> The point of a with statement is that it ensures that some resource will be
> disposed of, yes? For example, this:
>
> with open(filename) as f:
> contents = f.read()
>
>
I don't think this is a major problem. In this case, the file will be
closed when the generator is garbage collected. So you'd also have to
leak the generator to actually get this problem. And if leaking
generators won't harm your application, neither will leaking the
occasional file handle.
Also,
