Jonathan Fine wrote:
Perhaps "argue" is not the right word here. It sounds too much for or
against. And it has implications of being heated and angry.
At least arguing about the nature of argument is a very
Pythonic thing to do.
"That's not arguing, it's just contradiction!"
"No, it isn't!"
On Thu, Jul 19, 2018 at 8:40 PM Michael Lee
wrote:
>
>1. ...
>
>2. We can already easily get the same functionality using standard
>Python. E.g., instead of doing foo?["bar"]?[0]?["baz"], we could do
> lookup(foo,
>"bar", 0, "baz") where lookup is a function that looks roughly
Terry Reedy writes:
> On 7/19/2018 4:32 AM, Stephen J. Turnbull wrote:
> > make me cringe. Exactly one of two things is true:
>
> It seems to me that the problem is returning None.
Exactly, but this seems to indicate that the problem I'm talking about
is the code. It's not; my issue is
as it requires only a log, i think it is worth it as pip acts covertly
meaning you don't see which pip is being used in a multi-py environment,
yes you can have version pip info
Abdur-Rahmaan Janhangeer
https://github.com/Abdur-rahmaanJ
Mauritius
>
>
On Thu, Jul 19, 2018 at 5:45 PM, Al Sweigart wrote:
> The goal of this idea is to make it easier to find out when someone has
> installed packages for the wrong python installation. I'm coming across
> quite a few StackOverflow posts and emails where beginners are using pip to
> install a
David Mertz wrote:
"APL and Perl territory" means "use lots of punctuation characters in
somewhat cryptic ways, often combining several for a distinct
semantics."
And APL takes it a step further by freely making up new
characters when it runs out of existing ones. At least
nobody has
On Thu, Jul 19, 2018 at 5:29 PM Steve Dower wrote:
> * "It makes it more complex"
> * "It's harder to follow the flow"
>
> Depends on your measure of complexity. For me, I prioritise "area under
> the indentation" as my preferred complexity metric (more lines*indents
> == more complex), as well
On Thu, Jul 19, 2018 at 11:39:50AM -0700, Brendan Barnwell wrote:
> On 2018-07-19 06:38, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
> >*Its just spelling*. If it is a useful and well-defined feature, we'll
> >get used to the spelling soon enough.
> >
> >That's not to say that spelling is not important *at all*, or
On Fri, Jul 20, 2018 at 10:45 AM, Al Sweigart wrote:
> The goal of this idea is to make it easier to find out when someone has
> installed packages for the wrong python installation. I'm coming across
> quite a few StackOverflow posts and emails where beginners are using pip to
> install a
On Thu, Jul 19, 2018, 9:39 AM Steven D'Aprano wrote:
> *Its just spelling*. If it is a useful and well-defined feature, we'll
> get used to the spelling soon enough.
>
> That's not to say that spelling is not important *at all*, or that we
> should never prefer words to symbols. But if the only
On Fri, Jul 20, 2018 at 10:03 AM, Greg Ewing
wrote:
> Rhodri James wrote:
>>
>> If anyone can think of a good word for "if it isn't None, otherwise", I'd
>> be all for it :-)
>
>
> I don't think there's any single Engish word that captures
> all of that, so we'd have to invent one.
>
> Some
Rhodri James wrote:
On 19/07/18 07:06, Greg Ewing wrote:
There's no such tradition for the new
operators being proposed.
There is, actually, it's just not a long one. C# has had null-aware
operators for a while, for example.
THere's a precedent, yes, but I wouldn't call it a tradition.
A
Calvin Spealman wrote:
Operators that only vary by case would be... confusing.
Also I'd prefer to see AND and OR (or maybe And and Or) reserved for
possible use as overridable, non-short-circuiting forms of "and"
and "or" for use by DSLs.
--
Greg
Sorry, I meant "pip list", rather than "pip info".
I thought about the fact that "pip --version" provides this info, but 1) it
provides the location of pip, not the python interpreter it installs
packages for and 2) it would be an additional step for the question-asker
to go through after
Steve Dower writes:
> But for me, the ?? operator makes its strongest case when you are
> getting attributes from potentially None values:
>
> x = maybe_get()?.get_int() ?? 0
> y = maybe_get()?.get_list() ?? []
>
> In this case, using 'or' may replace an intentionally falsie
The goal of this idea is to make it easier to find out when someone has
installed packages for the wrong python installation. I'm coming across
quite a few StackOverflow posts and emails where beginners are using pip to
install a package, but then finding they can't import it because they have
Nathan wrote:
How many programmer will read "||" or "OR" as a classic "or" operator?
It will certainly confuse someone who has any C reflexes, since
"||" in C is just a boolean "or".
--
Greg
___
Python-ideas mailing list
Python-ideas@python.org
`python -m site` and its docs may also be useful for troubleshooting
end-user installations.
A diagnostic script with e.g. these commands could also be helpful:
which python
which pip
python -m site # sys.path, USER_SITE (pip --user)
python -m pip --version
>>> print((os.name, sys.platform,
On Thu, Jul 19, 2018 at 05:32:48PM +0900, Stephen J. Turnbull wrote:
> To be honest, code transformations like this
>
> > class BaseUploadObject(object):
> > def find_content_type(self, filename):
> > ctype, encoding = mimetypes.guess_type(filename)
> >
On Thu, Jul 19, 2018 at 2:19 PM Terry Reedy wrote:
> It seems to me that the problem is returning None.
If functions raised errors instead of returning None, we wouldn't have so
much trouble. Much of the benefit of PEP-572 was handling Nones and similar
sentinel values.
Instead of providing
Rhodri James wrote:
If anyone can think of a good word for "if it isn't None, otherwise",
I'd be all for it :-)
I don't think there's any single Engish word that captures
all of that, so we'd have to invent one.
Some suggestions:
inno (If Not None, Otherwise)
oft (Or, Failing That)
--
On Thu, Jul 19, 2018, 08:47 Rhodri James wrote:
> On 19/07/18 09:33, Antoine Pitrou wrote:
> > There is a use case I sympathize with: the argument-is-None case. For
> > that I would suggest a simpler form: "A else B" which would evaluate
> > to A if A is not None, otherwise to B (parentheses
On Fri, 20 Jul 2018, 09:52 Nathaniel Smith, wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 19, 2018 at 5:45 PM, Al Sweigart wrote:
> > The goal of this idea is to make it easier to find out when someone has
> > installed packages for the wrong python installation. I'm coming across
> > quite a few StackOverflow posts
On 19/07/18 09:33, Antoine Pitrou wrote:
There is a use case I sympathize with: the argument-is-None case. For
that I would suggest a simpler form: "A else B" which would evaluate
to A if A is not None, otherwise to B (parentheses may be mandatory).
So e.g. one of the examples would read:
On Thu, Jul 19, 2018 at 11:22 AM Antoine Pitrou wrote:
>
> On Thu, 19 Jul 2018 19:11:33 +1000
> Chris Angelico wrote:
>
> > On Thu, Jul 19, 2018 at 4:06 PM, Greg Ewing
> > wrote:
> > > Chris Angelico wrote:
> > >>
> > >> I'd love to hear an explanation of WHY this doesn't look like Python
> >
FWIW, I like ??
It is short and distinctive.
There is prior art in this spelling in c#.
It requires no new keyword, nor does it give new meaning to an existing one.
I understand why ?[ needs to be spelled using only a single ?, but I am
afraid it will be used infrequently, and people will
On 19 July 2018 at 13:39, Rhodri James wrote:
>> After updating to use the ``?[]`` and ``??`` operators::
>>
>> def _get_const_info(const_index, const_list):
>> argval = const_list?[const_index] ?? const_index
>> return argval, repr(argval)
>
>
> Here's where I start to
Hi Stephan
Thank you for the extract from the GC Handbook, which I think I may have
seen before. Yes, it is GOOD that it's an already known idea.
Searching for "buffered reference counting" I found
https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2016-October/146696.html
in which Larry Hastings says
On Thu, Jul 19, 2018, 5:12 AM Chris Angelico wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 19, 2018 at 4:06 PM, Greg Ewing
> wrote:
> > There's a very long tradition of using the symbol "+" to
> > represent addition, so it's something most people are
> > familiar with. There's no such tradition for the new
> >
On 18/07/18 18:43, Steve Dower wrote:
Possibly this is exactly the wrong time to propose the next big syntax
change, since we currently have nobody to declare on it, but since we're
likely to argue for a while anyway it probably can't hurt (and maybe
this will become the test PEP for whoever
On 19/07/18 07:06, Greg Ewing wrote:
Chris Angelico wrote:
I'd love to hear an explanation of WHY this doesn't look like Python
any more. For instance, is the + operator somehow wrong for Python,
and it should have been the word "add"?
There's a very long tradition of using the symbol "+" to
On 19 July 2018 at 13:30, Jonathan Fine wrote:
> Hi
>
>> There is a formatted version of this PEP at
>> https://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0505/
>
> I've taken a look at this, and have some comments on the first two
> examples drawn from standard library code. (And a very grateful +10
> for
I am rather fond of the idea of null-coalescing, at the very least, for
mutable default values:
def foo(a=None):
a ??= []
...
but I worry about the code messes we will run into with some of the other
options.
Woe be unto anyone forced to understand the behavior of:
Hi Jonathan,
2018-07-19 8:33 GMT+02:00 Jonathan Fine :
> I call any such scheme BUFFERED multi-core reference count garbage
> collection. The worker processes know nothing about how garbage collection
> is managed. Instead, they pass over to the GC process sufficient
> information to allow it to
Hi
> There is a formatted version of this PEP at
> https://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0505/
I've taken a look at this, and have some comments on the first two
examples drawn from standard library code. (And a very grateful +10
for writing a script to find such examples.)
I've started a
On Thu, Jul 19, 2018 at 8:47 AM Rhodri James wrote:
> On 19/07/18 09:33, Antoine Pitrou wrote:
> > There is a use case I sympathize with: the argument-is-None case. For
> > that I would suggest a simpler form: "A else B" which would evaluate
> > to A if A is not None, otherwise to B
> I've started a subthread, just to discuss the ?= and ?? operators. And
> something newish, that I call OR.
I would think `||` would be much better.
It could be a kind of "semantic or" which could use the aforementioned
dunder has_value.
-1, though, but to the general None-awareness.
Pål
Hi,
>
> Note that this everything you said here also exactly describes the
> programming model for the existing 'multiprocessing' module:
> "structured clone" is equivalent to how multiprocessing uses pickle to
> transfer arbitrary objects, or you can use multiprocessing.Array to
> get a shared
Hi
Based on other people's work (including in particular talks by Larry
Hastings) and my own thinking, I've come up with a scheme for multi-core
reference count garbage collection. I think it works, and much or all of it
comes from others. It might even be in the literature. Of course, if it's
Honestly speaking, I don't want make Python syntax more complex.
But when comparing to accepted PEP 572, I think this PEP is useful
often enough. And PEP 505 doesn't break border between
expression and statement unlike PEP 572.
Especially, ?? and ??= seems useful very often.
And `x ?? default`
On Thu, Jul 19, 2018 at 4:06 PM, Greg Ewing wrote:
> Chris Angelico wrote:
>>
>> I'd love to hear an explanation of WHY this doesn't look like Python
>> any more. For instance, is the + operator somehow wrong for Python,
>> and it should have been the word "add"?
>
>
> There's a very long
On Thu, 19 Jul 2018 19:11:33 +1000
Chris Angelico wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 19, 2018 at 4:06 PM, Greg Ewing
> wrote:
> > Chris Angelico wrote:
> >>
> >> I'd love to hear an explanation of WHY this doesn't look like Python
> >> any more. For instance, is the + operator somehow wrong for Python,
>
On Thu, Jul 19, 2018 at 5:45 PM, Brice Parent wrote:
> The biggest drawback of this, is that (if I understand it well), it may be
> done quite easily without any change to the language:
>
> def first_set(*elements): # please don't mind the name of the function,
> it's not the purpose here
>
Hi Nathaniel,
2018-07-19 1:33 GMT+02:00 Nathaniel Smith :
> Note that this everything you said here also exactly describes the
> programming model for the existing 'multiprocessing' module:
> "structured clone" is equivalent to how multiprocessing uses pickle to
> transfer arbitrary objects, or
Hi,
I think this breaks one of the most important aspect which makes Python
more and more popular every year: its readability. Until now, you didn't
need to know the language very well to have some understanding about
what a script did. Some parts of it could be a bit complicated (like
Chris Angelico wrote:
I'd love to hear an explanation of WHY this doesn't look like Python
any more. For instance, is the + operator somehow wrong for Python,
and it should have been the word "add"?
There's a very long tradition of using the symbol "+" to
represent addition, so it's something
This is adding a whole range of new operators without enough of a use
case. It is also making code harder to read, as evaluation can stop at
any of the "?*" operators. And it looks like noise (or like Perl 6,
which is the same).
There is a use case I sympathize with: the argument-is-None
Chris Angelico writes later in thread:
> On Thu, Jul 19, 2018 at 9:55 AM, Giampaolo Rodola'
> wrote:
> Personally, I'm +0 on this. It'd be a few small wins here and there,
> nothing huge, and I could easily live without it; but it's something
> that I know some people will love.
I am 100%
Operators that only vary by case would be... confusing. I'm not super keen
on the other syntax (either the ?? or .? operators) but I do think they
read well in C# where they come from. Different things work in different
languages, some times.
What about a new keyword: default
So you'd write the
On Wed, Jul 18, 2018 at 08:05:56PM -0400, David Mertz wrote:
> '??' and '?.' and ?[]' are really just marching
> into APL and Perl territory. Yes, I know such operators exist in other
> languages, but it feels very unpythonic.
If these features exist in "other languages", and *don't* exist in
"APL and Perl territory" means "use lots of punctuation characters in
somewhat cryptic ways, often combining several for a distinct semantics." I
did not mean "APL and Perl use those specific characters with the proposed
meaning."
On Thu, Jul 19, 2018, 9:39 AM Steven D'Aprano wrote:
> On Wed,
On 7/19/2018 11:22 AM, Calvin Spealman wrote:
If its treated as a missing parameter, and currently doesn't do
anything, then it wouldn't be used... right? and it could be safe to add
behavior for it... right?
It currently does something: it replaces all instances, just as if you
hadn't
On Thu, Jul 19, 2018 at 10:02 AM, Eric Fahlgren
wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 19, 2018 at 6:52 AM Michael Hall
> wrote:
>
>> 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
On Thu, Jul 19, 2018 at 10:07 AM, Stephan Houben
wrote:
> You are aware of numba?
>
> https://numba.pydata.org/
>
> Stephan
>
> Op do 19 jul. 2018 16:03 schreef Eric Fahlgren :
>
>> On Thu, Jul 19, 2018 at 6:52 AM Michael Hall
>> wrote:
>>
>>> While I am aware of projects like Cython and mypy,
If we're about to use a new keyword, it could be infix too:
a = b ifnone c
Although the assignment version looks unusual:
b ifnone= c
Then with the "default b = c" would look like this:
ifnone b = c
Le jeu. 19 juil. 2018 à 15:30, Calvin Spealman a
écrit :
> Operators that only vary by case
On Wed, Jul 18, 2018 at 8:20 PM Graham Gott
wrote:
>
> Thoughts? Support/oppose?
>
+1, along with an overall rework of str methods to make them more
consistent.
The find, replace and split families should all gain the same
tuple-as-search-string that endswith and startswith use. (Discussed
On Thu, Jul 19, 2018 at 6:52 AM Michael Hall
wrote:
> 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. While this would not receive the
> same level of
If its treated as a missing parameter, and currently doesn't do anything,
then it wouldn't be used... right? and it could be safe to add behavior for
it... right?
On Thu, Jul 19, 2018 at 11:17 AM, Eric V. Smith wrote:
> On 7/19/2018 10:01 AM, Calvin Spealman wrote:
>
>> As an alternative
On 2018-07-19 14:26, Stephan Houben wrote:
FWIW, I like ??
It is short and distinctive.
There is prior art in this spelling in c#.
It requires no new keyword, nor does it give new meaning to an existing one.
I understand why ?[ needs to be spelled using only a single ?, but I am
afraid it
On 2018-07-19 11:53, Jonathan Fine wrote:
Hi Stephan
Thank you for the extract from the GC Handbook, which I think I may have
seen before. Yes, it is GOOD that it's an already known idea.
Searching for "buffered reference counting" I found
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. While this would not receive the
same level of performance benefits as using ctypes directly, there do
appear to
It would be consistent to apply it to other functions and I'd be in favour
of that, yes.
On Thu, Jul 19, 2018 at 10:06 AM, Eric Fahlgren
wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 19, 2018 at 7:01 AM Calvin Spealman
> wrote:
>
>> As an alternative suggestion: What if the count parameter to
>> str.replace() counted
As an alternative suggestion: What if the count parameter to str.replace()
counted from the right with negative values? That would be consistent with
other things like indexing and slicing.
On Thu, Jul 19, 2018 at 9:47 AM, Eric Fahlgren
wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 18, 2018 at 8:20 PM Graham Gott com>
On 7/19/2018 10:01 AM, Calvin Spealman wrote:
As an alternative suggestion: What if the count parameter to
str.replace() counted from the right with negative values? That would be
consistent with other things like indexing and slicing.
We couldn't make this change because negative values
On 2018-07-19 16:22, Calvin Spealman wrote:
If its treated as a missing parameter, and currently doesn't do
anything, then it wouldn't be used... right? and it could be safe to add
behavior for it... right?
Are you sure that it wouldn't break some existing code?
Plus, we already have
Hello.
Even if I'm -1 on the general idea of a None-aware, for a lot of reason already
mentionned in this thread, the syntax "??" proposed (that I find much less
readable than the current version) is still better IMHO.
How many programmer will read "||" or "OR" as a classic "or" operator?
On Thu, Jul 19, 2018 at 7:01 AM Calvin Spealman wrote:
> As an alternative suggestion: What if the count parameter to str.replace()
> counted from the right with negative values? That would be consistent with
> other things like indexing and slicing.
>
That could certainly be made to work, but
The concatenated name reads a little weird. Alternatively, extend the
conditional expression syntax.
a = b if None c
equivalent to
a = b if b is None else c
On Thu, Jul 19, 2018 at 9:35 AM, Robert Vanden Eynde
wrote:
> If we're about to use a new keyword, it could be infix too:
>
> a = b
You are aware of numba?
https://numba.pydata.org/
Stephan
Op do 19 jul. 2018 16:03 schreef Eric Fahlgren :
> On Thu, Jul 19, 2018 at 6:52 AM Michael Hall
> wrote:
>
>> While I am aware of projects like Cython and mypy, it seems to make sense
>> for CPython to allow optional enforcement of
On 2018-07-19 06:38, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
*Its just spelling*. If it is a useful and well-defined feature, we'll
get used to the spelling soon enough.
That's not to say that spelling is not important *at all*, or that we
should never prefer words to symbols. But if the only objection we have
On 7/19/2018 4:33 AM, Antoine Pitrou wrote:
This is adding a whole range of new operators without enough of a use
case. It is also making code harder to read, as evaluation can stop at
any of the "?*" operators. And it looks like noise (or like Perl 6,
which is the same).
There is a use case
Let me just address this point:
2018-07-19 20:36 GMT+02:00 Brendan Barnwell :
> As far as I can see, these null-coalescing operators would break
> that model. The PEP doesn't seem to provide for a "real" magic method
> allowing users to override the actual behavior of the method. (You
On 7/19/2018 4:32 AM, Stephen J. Turnbull wrote:
Chris Angelico writes later in thread:
> On Thu, Jul 19, 2018 at 9:55 AM, Giampaolo Rodola'
wrote:
> Personally, I'm +0 on this. It'd be a few small wins here and there,
> nothing huge, and I could easily live without it; but it's
On 2018-07-19 02:11, Chris Angelico wrote:
Okay. What about bitwise operators, then? They don't have centuries of
mathematical backing to support them, yet it isn't considered
"unpythonic" to have &|^~ peppering our code. Judging by the current
levels of backlash against symbolic operators, it
On Fri, Jul 20, 2018 at 4:45 AM, Stephan Houben wrote:
> Let me just address this point:
>
> 2018-07-19 20:36 GMT+02:00 Brendan Barnwell :
>>
>> As far as I can see, these null-coalescing operators would break
>> that model. The PEP doesn't seem to provide for a "real" magic method
>>
On Thu, Jul 19, 2018 at 11:37 AM Brendan Barnwell
wrote:
>
> As far as I can see, these null-coalescing operators would break
> that
> model. The PEP doesn't seem to provide for a "real" magic method
> allowing users to override the actual behavior of the method. (You can
> only
On 7/19/2018 8:30 AM, Jonathan Fine wrote:
Hi
There is a formatted version of this PEP at
https://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0505/
I've taken a look at this, and have some comments on the first two
examples drawn from standard library code. (And a very grateful +10
for writing a script to
On 2018-07-19 20:23, Terry Reedy wrote:
On 7/19/2018 8:30 AM, Jonathan Fine wrote:
Hi
There is a formatted version of this PEP at
https://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0505/
I've taken a look at this, and have some comments on the first two
examples drawn from standard library code. (And a
On 19 July 2018 at 16:25, Eric V. Smith wrote:
> It currently does something: it replaces all instances, just as if you
> hadn't supplied a count (see my example below). You can't change its
> behavior.
... without a deprecation cycle. Which is of course not worth it for
something which could
Thanks everyone for the feedback and discussion so far. I want to
address some of the themes, so apologies for not quoting individuals and
for doing this in one post instead of twenty.
--
* "It looks like line noise"
Thanks for the feedback. There's nothing constructive for me to take
80 matches
Mail list logo
