I starting g reading this thread in the middle, on a phone.
But was very confused for a while because I didn’t notice that there
were two ‘r’s at the beginning of .rreplace
Just sayin’
-CHB
Sent from my iPhone
> On Jul 19, 2018, at 9:29 AM, Paul Moore wrote:
>
>> On 19 July 2018 at 16:25,
On Sun, Jul 22, 2018 at 11:54 AM, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
> If we gained a function
> or even a keyword from Italian, let's say "ripetere", would that really
> change the nature of Python? I don't think so. English speakers are
> adaptable, we don't so much borrow words from other languages as
On Sun, Jul 22, 2018 at 01:56:35AM +0200, Giampaolo Rodola' wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 19, 2018 at 3:39 PM Steven D'Aprano wrote:
> > Tens of thousands of non-English speakers have had to learn the meaning
> > of what might as well be meaningless, random sets of symbols (to them)
> > like "class",
On Thu, Jul 19, 2018 at 3:39 PM Steven D'Aprano wrote:
> Tens of thousands of non-English speakers have had to learn the meaning
> of what might as well be meaningless, random sets of symbols (to them)
> like "class", "import", "while" and "True". If they can do so, perhaps
> we English-speakers
Coming from the @ side (I was strong +1 on this), I have troubles seeing the
real benefits from ?? (And even more from associates): did we really have long
and complex expressions where the compactness of an operator would help?
Operators are inherently obscure (except for those that are
On Fri, Jul 20, 2018, 02:33 Stefan Behnel, wrote:
> Michael Hall schrieb am 19.07.2018 um 15:51:
> > While I am aware of projects like Cython and mypy, it seems to make sense
> > for CPython to allow optional enforcement of type hints, with compiler
> > optimizations related to it to be used.
A note here:
Earlier in the conversation about standardizing type hinting, I (among
others) was interested in applying it to C-level static typing (e.g.
Cython).
Guido made it very clear that that was NOT a goal of type hints —
rather, they were to be used for dynamic, python style types — so a
> You wrote:
> > I'd argue that the ref counts are not interesting at all, only a
> > side effect of one possible solution to the object life time problem.
>
> I'm happy for you to regard multi-core reference counting (MCRC) as a toy
> problem, which won't become part of useful software.
Perhaps
> my vote would go to `A otherwise B` since it's unambiguous, the case you care
> about the state of comes first, and it doesn't trip your brain up looking
> for 'if'. :)
And I’d hope “otherwise” is a rare variable name :-)
- CHB
>
> ___
>
I think I am with Michael here. I like the parallel between `??` and `or`,
we don't have `or=`, so `??=` is also not needed.
Although I understand a parallel between `obj.attr` and `obj['attr']`, I
think there is an additional point (in addition to two valid points by
Michael) why I don't like
On Sat, Jul 21, 2018 at 11:05:43AM +0100, Daniel Moisset wrote:
[snip interesting and informative discussion, thank you]
> @Steven D'Aprano: you mentioned soemthign about race conditions but I don't
> think this algorithm has any (the article you linked just said that doing
> refcounting in the
Hi Barry
We've met before. Nice to meet you again, this time electronically.
You suggested that is a different problem that needs a solution. To help
maintain focus, I won't respond to that now.
You wrote:
> I'd argue that the ref counts are not interesting at all, only a
> side effect of one
Eric,
> On 17 Jul 2018, at 20:35, Eric Snow wrote:
>
> With this in mind, here's how I'm approaching the problem:
>
> 1. interp A "shares" an object with interp B (e.g. through a channel)
>* the object is incref'ed under A before it is sent to B
> 2. the object is wrapped in a proxy owned
> On 21 Jul 2018, at 08:54, Jonathan Fine wrote:
>
> Hi Steve
>
> Thank you for your message. I think my response below allows us to go move
> forward.
>
> WHAT'S THE PROBLEM
> You asked:
> > What problem are you trying to solve?
> > Its okay if there is no immediate problem, that you're
Hi Steve
Thank you for your message. I think my response below allows us to go move
forward.
WHAT'S THE PROBLEM
You asked:
> What problem are you trying to solve?
> Its okay if there is no immediate problem, that you're just exploring
> alternative garbage collection strategies. Or if you're
Hi Chris
Thank you for your message about two processes together sorting a deck of cards.
My example was in response to a comment from Steve D'Aprano. He
understood in the way it was intended, which was the algorithm is in
execution non-deterministic, but that the outcome is deterministic.
16 matches
Mail list logo
