Neil Girdhar added the comment:
@eric
Good thinking. Would it make sense to add to the documentation as well that
the __post_init__ methods aren't collected, and you should call super's
__post_init__ if there is one using something like
if hasattr(super(), "__post_i
Neil Girdhar added the comment:
@Raymond yeah I've been thinking about this some more, and there's no way to
have a "top level" method with the dataclass decorator.
I think I will make a case to have a class version of dataclasses that works
with inheritance. Class versions of d
Neil Girdhar added the comment:
> How would an arbitrary derived class know how to call this? It can't. There
> has to be knowledge of the base class's requirements already. Surely knowing
> "__post_init__ must be called with some_arg" isn't too different from "
Neil Girdhar added the comment:
> I'm not crazy about adding a method to every dataclass just for the 0.1% of
> the times it's needed.
I'm not sure I totally understand the cost here. You can have a single shared
global function that you set on each dataclass. So the only cost
Neil Girdhar added the comment:
On Sat, Feb 19, 2022 at 2:51 AM Vedran Čačić wrote:
>
> Vedran Čačić added the comment:
>
> That "except AttributeError" approach is a powerful bug magnet, since it
> can very easily mask real attribute errors stemming from mis
New submission from Neil Girdhar :
When defining a dataclass, it's possible to define a post-init (__post_init__)
method to, for example, verify contracts.
Sometimes, when you inherit from another dataclass, that dataclass has its own
post-init method. If you want that method to also do its
Neil Girdhar added the comment:
Thank you, this would have saved me a lot of time!
On Sat, Feb 12, 2022 at 8:37 PM Alexander wrote:
>
> Alexander added the comment:
>
> Indeed, the error message does not help to identify the problem. Moreover,
> it collides with
New submission from Neil Girdhar :
class C:
@property
def f(self) -> int:
return 2
class D(C):
pass
D().f = 2
Gives:
Traceback (most recent call last):
File "/home/neil/src/cmm/a.py", line 10, in
D().f = 2
AttributeError: can't set attribute
Neil Girdhar added the comment:
FYI: https://github.com/PyCQA/pylint/issues/4586
--
___
Python tracker
<https://bugs.python.org/issue23316>
___
___
Python-bug
Neil Girdhar added the comment:
The problem with `key=lambda item: -item` is that item cannot always be easily
negated. For example, tuples are often used as keys.
--
___
Python tracker
<https://bugs.python.org/issue4
Neil Girdhar added the comment:
> The code generated by oollections.namedtuple was based on patterns already in
> widespread use at the time.
That's fair enough. However, it seems like there is one important difference:
unlike any other Sequence, namedtuples cannot be initi
Neil Girdhar added the comment:
Why can't we add an ABC into a NamedTuple instance's MRO? Because while I like
Eric's solution, it seems to be backwards: tuple and list are not the special
cases—NamedTuple is.
All sequences accept an iterable in their constructor, and NamedTuple doesn't
Neil Girdhar added the comment:
Sorry if I'm intruding here, but I really dislike that we are doing isinstance
versus list, tuple, and dict. And I dislike even more type(x) in (list,
tuple). I think the ideal thing to do would have been to check versus abstract
base classes like
Neil Girdhar <mistersh...@gmail.com> added the comment:
It seems like Python doesn't do very well with dynamically-generated classes.
For that reason, I'm losing interest on this feature.
Is there any interest in merging the documentation changes here:
https://bugs.python.org/review
Neil Girdhar <mistersh...@gmail.com> added the comment:
I'm not sure that this should be in the stdlib. The three-line function can be
enough for your simple case, and it is too simple for including it in the
stdlib. But for general stdlib quality solution it lacks many details.
1. It d
Neil Girdhar <mistersh...@gmail.com> added the comment:
Done: https://github.com/python/cpython/pull/6699
--
___
Python tracker <rep...@bugs.python.org>
<https://bugs.python
Neil Girdhar <mistersh...@gmail.com> added the comment:
I figured it would have to be 3.8, but it looks like Doc/whatsnew/3.8.rst has
not been created? Do I create that?
--
___
Python tracker <rep...@bugs.python.org>
<https://
Change by Neil Girdhar <mistersh...@gmail.com>:
Added file: https://bugs.python.org/file47569/partialclass3.diff
___
Python tracker <rep...@bugs.python.org>
<https://bugs.python
Neil Girdhar <mistersh...@gmail.com> added the comment:
Added functools experts.
Links to relevant stackoverflow questions:
https://stackoverflow.com/questions/38911146/python-equivalent-of-functools-partial-for-a-class-constructor
https://stackoverflow.com/questions/50143864/is-there-
Neil Girdhar <mistersh...@gmail.com> added the comment:
I edited some of the documentation as well to use the technical terms "partial
function application", "partial method application", and "partial class
application". This emphasizes the para
Change by Neil Girdhar <mistersh...@gmail.com>:
Added file: https://bugs.python.org/file47568/partialclass2.diff
___
Python tracker <rep...@bugs.python.org>
<https://bugs.python
Change by Neil Girdhar <mistersh...@gmail.com>:
--
components: +Library (Lib)
type: -> enhancement
___
Python tracker <rep...@bugs.python.org>
<https://bugs.pyt
New submission from Neil Girdhar <mistersh...@gmail.com>:
functools.partial is almost good enough for specifying some of the parameters
of an object's initializer, but the partial object doesn't respond properly to
issubclass. Adding functools.partialclass is similar to the ad
Neil Girdhar <mistersh...@gmail.com> added the comment:
This came up already on python-ideas:
https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/python-ideas/YOpT9fDQyFk
I think this was an oversight, and I'm with Ben that it's unexpected. That
said, this is usually the kind of thing that Guido
Neil Girdhar added the comment:
Okay, I understand what you're saying, but I it says in the documentation that
"if an explicit metaclass is given and it is not an instance of type(), then it
is used directly as the metaclass". My recent updated "metaclass_callable" is
not
Neil Girdhar added the comment:
Thanks for taking the time to explain, but it's still not working for me:
from types import new_class
class MyMetaclass(type):
pass
class OtherMetaclass(type):
pass
def metaclass_callable(name, bases, namespace):
return new_class(name, bases, dict
Neil Girdhar added the comment:
"As a result of this, *both* implementations include a conditional check for a
more derived metaclass in their namespace preparation logic, as well as an
unconditional call to that metaclass derivation logic from type_new if the
calculated metaclass is e
Neil Girdhar added the comment:
>From your comment:
>>> MyDerivedDynamic = new_class("MyDerivedDynamic", (MyClass,),
>>> dict(metaclass=metaclass_callable))
Traceback (most recent call last):
File "", line 1, in
File "/usr/lib64/python3.5/ty
Neil Girdhar added the comment:
The documentation suggests that you can have a metaclass that does is not the
"most derived metaclass" provided you specify one that is not an instance of
type. This doesn't work in CPython, so I would suggest fixing the
documentation using the text
Neil Girdhar added the comment:
Oops, I meant:
MyDerived = new_class("MyDerived", (MyClass,),
dict(metaclass=metaclass_callable))
Nevertheless, the exception line number is totally off because it's tripping in
the C code rather than in the Python code of the typ
New submission from Neil Girdhar:
Minimum working example:
class MyMetaclass(type):
pass
class OtherMetaclass(type):
pass
def metaclass_callable(name, bases, namespace):
return OtherMetaclass(name, bases, namespace)
class MyClass(metaclass=MyMetaclass):
pass
try:
class
Neil Girdhar added the comment:
(never mind about the comparison operators :) Turns out that would break
backwards compatibility.)
--
___
Python tracker <rep...@bugs.python.org>
<http://bugs.python.org/i
Neil Girdhar added the comment:
(there's already an open thread.)
--
___
Python tracker <rep...@bugs.python.org>
<http://bugs.python.org/issue27802>
___
___
Neil Girdhar added the comment:
That's a really good point. Perhaps bring it up on ideas so that it can be
discussed by more people? I don't know what the answer is.
--
___
Python tracker <rep...@bugs.python.org>
<http://bugs.python.org/i
Changes by Neil Girdhar <mistersh...@gmail.com>:
--
title: Add SizedIterable to collections.abc and typing -> Add Collection to
collections.abc and typing
___
Python tracker <rep...@bugs.python.org>
<http://bugs.pyt
Neil Girdhar added the comment:
Given issue http://bugs.python.org/issue27802, it might be worth considering
that all Collections implement __eq__ and __ne__, so maybe these should be
abstract methods on Collection?
--
___
Python tracker <
Changes by Neil Girdhar <mistersh...@gmail.com>:
--
keywords: +patch
Added file: http://bugs.python.org/file44151/abc_eq.diff
___
Python tracker <rep...@bugs.python.org>
<http://bugs.python
Changes by Neil Girdhar <mistersh...@gmail.com>:
--
components: +Library (Lib)
versions: +Python 3.6
___
Python tracker <rep...@bugs.python.org>
<http://bugs.python
New submission from Neil Girdhar:
Both Mapping and Set provide __eq__ and __ne__. Why not have Sequence do the
same?
--
messages: 273114
nosy: neil.g
priority: normal
severity: normal
status: open
title: Add __eq__ and __ne__ to collections.abc.Sequence
Neil Girdhar added the comment:
(added the documentation changes)
--
Added file: http://bugs.python.org/file44146/doc_changes.diff
___
Python tracker <rep...@bugs.python.org>
<http://bugs.python.org/i
Neil Girdhar added the comment:
Great patch. Shouldn't Sequence be a "Reversible, Collection"?
--
___
Python tracker <rep...@bugs.python.org>
<http://bugs.py
Neil Girdhar added the comment:
@gvanrossum is there any reason that subclasshook is implemented by overriding
instead of cooperation? E.g.,:
class Sized(metaclass=ABCMeta):
@classmethod
def __subclasshook__(cls, C):
return (super().__subclasshook__(C
Neil Girdhar added the comment:
Ah, sorry, I somehow went cross-eyed. Not sure offhand which test would test
the BUILD_TUPLE_UNPACK, but I think you're right Serhiy. Could just add both?
--
___
Python tracker <rep...@bugs.python.org>
Neil Girdhar added the comment:
Please don't forget to fix BUILD_SET_UNPACK to match.
--
___
Python tracker <rep...@bugs.python.org>
<http://bugs.python.org/i
Neil Girdhar added the comment:
Also, please add the following test: "{*{True, 1}}"
Should be True.
--
___
Python tracker <rep...@bugs.python.org>
<http://bugs.py
Neil Girdhar added the comment:
I'm also looking for bisect with a key argument (numpy array of records, want
to search on one element). However, I don't see bisect in the what's new:
https://docs.python.org/3.6/whatsnew/3.6.html ? Any luck with the
implementation?
--
nosy: +neil.g
Neil Girdhar added the comment:
Ah, good point.
--
___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
http://bugs.python.org/issue24624
___
___
Python-bugs-list mailing list
New submission from Neil Girdhar:
In the description of the consume recipe:
def consume(iterator, n):
Advance the iterator n-steps ahead. If n is none, consume entirely.
# Use functions that consume iterators at C speed.
if n is None:
# feed the entire iterator into a zero
Neil Girdhar added the comment:
Copied from closed issue 24240:
Since Grammar/Grammar relies on semantic postprocessing in ast.c,
it would be nice to have an update of the (human readable) Grammar
in the language reference docs.
--
___
Python
Neil Girdhar added the comment:
I don't receive emails from the tracker anymore either and I have no idea why
that is.
--
___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
http://bugs.python.org/issue24136
Neil Girdhar added the comment:
Simplified functools.partial documentation.
--
Added file: http://bugs.python.org/file39561/wn2.diff
___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
http://bugs.python.org/issue24136
Changes by Neil Girdhar mistersh...@gmail.com:
Added file: http://bugs.python.org/file39562/wn2.diff
___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
http://bugs.python.org/issue24136
Neil Girdhar added the comment:
Just updated the what's new. Also, thank you for adding my name to
Misc/Acks. Should we also add Joshua Landau's name? He helped me quite a bit
with the implementation, and he wrote the PEP.
--
keywords: +patch
nosy: +neil.g
Added file: http
Neil Girdhar added the comment:
All tests pass. All reviewer comments addressed. Please let me know if
anything else needs to be done from my end.
--
Added file: http://bugs.python.org/file39230/starunpack42.diff
___
Python tracker rep
Neil Girdhar added the comment:
Hi Steve:
I have limited expertise in most of these areas, but I looked at
starunpack40.diff and have these comments:
* tests look to have good coverage of the feature (can't speak to coverage of
the parser/compiler code)
* parsermodule.c changes comprehension
Changes by Neil Girdhar mistersh...@gmail.com:
Added file: http://bugs.python.org/file39059/starunpack41.diff
___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
http://bugs.python.org/issue2292
Changes by Neil Girdhar mistersh...@gmail.com:
Added file: http://bugs.python.org/file38856/starunpack40.diff
___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
http://bugs.python.org/issue2292
Changes by Neil Girdhar mistersh...@gmail.com:
Added file: http://bugs.python.org/file38611/starunpack38.diff
___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
http://bugs.python.org/issue2292
Neil Girdhar added the comment:
Removed a confusing and outdated comment in Lib/importlib/_bootstrap.py
--
Added file: http://bugs.python.org/file38613/starunpack39.diff
___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
http://bugs.python.org/issue2292
Changes by Neil Girdhar mistersh...@gmail.com:
Added file: http://bugs.python.org/file38429/starunpack37.diff
___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
http://bugs.python.org/issue2292
Changes by Neil Girdhar mistersh...@gmail.com:
Added file: http://bugs.python.org/file38395/starunpack36.diff
___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
http://bugs.python.org/issue2292
Neil Girdhar added the comment:
FWIW I looked at the changes. Does it make sense to run tests before there are
actual tests in lib/Test? I'll happily run all tests when some new ones are
added.
--
nosy: +neil.g
___
Python tracker rep
Neil Girdhar added the comment:
Removed dead code. Awaiting code review! :)
--
Added file: http://bugs.python.org/file38341/starunpack35.diff
___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
http://bugs.python.org/issue2292
Neil Girdhar added the comment:
Nice work Alexander. I believe what's left is for it to work with complex
numbers.
--
nosy: +neil.g
___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
http://bugs.python.org/issue23595
Neil Girdhar added the comment:
New changelist for updated patch (before merging changes).
--
Added file: http://bugs.python.org/file38252/starunpack33.diff
___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
http://bugs.python.org/issue2292
Neil Girdhar added the comment:
Finished merge.
--
Added file: http://bugs.python.org/file38253/starunpack34.diff
___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
http://bugs.python.org/issue2292
Changes by Neil Girdhar mistersh...@gmail.com:
Added file: http://bugs.python.org/file38062/starunpack31.diff
___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
http://bugs.python.org/issue2292
Neil Girdhar added the comment:
Thank you, Benjamin.
It's my nature to keep code consistent/clean, but I realize that I can get
carried away. Should I revert all incidental PEP 7 style changes?
Regarding the args/keywords, where do you mean? If you're talking about
compile.c, we can't
Neil Girdhar added the comment:
Removed incidental PEP 7 changes and reran tests.
--
Added file: http://bugs.python.org/file38070/starunpack32.diff
___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
http://bugs.python.org/issue2292
Neil Girdhar added the comment:
Another bug, another test.
--
Added file: http://bugs.python.org/file37926/starunpack29.diff
___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
http://bugs.python.org/issue2292
Neil Girdhar added the comment:
Fixed a bug in ceval.c; added a test to test_unpack_ex.
--
___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
http://bugs.python.org/issue2292
Changes by Neil Girdhar mistersh...@gmail.com:
Added file: http://bugs.python.org/file37924/starunpack28.diff
___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
http://bugs.python.org/issue2292
Changes by Neil Girdhar mistersh...@gmail.com:
Added file: http://bugs.python.org/file37925/starunpack28.diff
___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
http://bugs.python.org/issue2292
Changes by Neil Girdhar mistersh...@gmail.com:
Removed file: http://bugs.python.org/file37924/starunpack28.diff
___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
http://bugs.python.org/issue2292
Neil Girdhar added the comment:
Ready for a code review:
Blocked f(*x for x…) as requested.
Polished up parsermodule.c.
--
Added file: http://bugs.python.org/file37920/starunpack26.diff
___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
http
Neil Girdhar added the comment:
Is it possible to edit the PEP to reflect the current design decisions?
Specifically:
* Remove: Because of the new levity for * and ** unpackings, it may be
advisable to lift some or all of these restrictions. (in both abstract and
specification)
* Extend
Neil Girdhar added the comment:
Fixed a bug and added a test.
--
Added file: http://bugs.python.org/file37921/starunpack27.diff
___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
http://bugs.python.org/issue2292
Neil Girdhar added the comment:
All tests pass.
@Guido: can we get some clarification on f(*… and f(**…? One option is to make
them illegal for now and then open them up in a future PEP when it's more clear
what's wanted?
--
Added file: http://bugs.python.org/file37911/starunpack25
Neil Girdhar added the comment:
Fixed a couple bugs and added a test.
Incremented the magic number.
--
Added file: http://bugs.python.org/file37896/starunpack24.diff
___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
http://bugs.python.org/issue2292
Neil Girdhar added the comment:
Just need to fix the parser now. Minimal example:
parser.sequence2st(parser.expr({1}).totuple())
Traceback (most recent call last):
File stdin, line 1, in module
parser.ParserError: Expected node type 12, got 302
Neil Girdhar added the comment:
def f(a, *b): print(list(a), list(b))
--
___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
http://bugs.python.org/issue2292
___
___
Python-bugs
Neil Girdhar added the comment:
Is this correct?
f(*i for i in ['abc', 'def'])
['a', 'b', 'c', 'd', 'e', 'f'] []
f(**i for i in ['abc', 'def'])
File stdin, line 1
f(**i for i in ['abc', 'def'])
^
SyntaxError: invalid syntax
Should neither work? Both
Neil Girdhar added the comment:
After thinking about this a bit more, my suggestion is not to fix it. Instead,
I suggest that PEP 8 be modified to suggest that all positional arguments and
iterable argument unpackings precede keyword arguments and keyword argument
unpackings. Then, a tool
Neil Girdhar added the comment:
(I also suggest that the evaluation order within a function argument list to be
defined to be positional and iterable before keyword, otherwise left-to-right —
rather than strictly left-to-right).
--
___
Python
Neil Girdhar added the comment:
Could you help me understand this a bit better?
I always thought of f(x for x in l) as equivalent to f( (x for x in l) ).
So, I can see that f(*x for x in l) should be equivalent to f( (*x for x in l)
).
How should we interpret f(**x for x in l)? Is it then f
Neil Girdhar added the comment:
Everything seems to work except two tests are still failing: parser and venv.
Any ideas Joshua?
Also, we have to decide what to do with f(*x for x in l) and f(**x for x in l).
--
Added file: http://bugs.python.org/file37877/starunpack23.diff
Changes by Neil Girdhar mistersh...@gmail.com:
Added file: http://bugs.python.org/file37876/starunpack22.diff
___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
http://bugs.python.org/issue2292
Neil Girdhar added the comment:
fixed a minor bug with the function address, and made a number of polishing
changes.
--
Added file: http://bugs.python.org/file37871/starunpack21.diff
___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
http://bugs.python.org
Neil Girdhar added the comment:
Fixed all tests except test_parser. New node numbers are not reflected here
for some reason.
--
Added file: http://bugs.python.org/file37854/starunpack18.diff
___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
http
Neil Girdhar added the comment:
Dict comprehensions work.
--
Added file: http://bugs.python.org/file37852/starunpack16.diff
___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
http://bugs.python.org/issue2292
Neil Girdhar added the comment:
actually, we accept alternation, so maybe a bit to say whether we start with a
list or a dict followed by a length of the alternating sequence?
--
___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
http://bugs.python.org
Neil Girdhar added the comment:
Yes, sorry David. I got linked here from the other issue. In any case, in the
current code, the longest alternating sequence possible is 4. So one way to
solve this is to change the CALL_FUNCTION parameters to be lists and dicts only
and then process
Neil Girdhar added the comment:
another option is to add a LIST_EXTEND(stack_difference) opcode that would
allow us to take the late iterable and extend a list at some arbitrary stack
position. I had to add something like that for dicts for the other issue, so
it would follow that pattern
Neil Girdhar added the comment:
Dict displays work.
--
Added file: http://bugs.python.org/file37851/starunpack15.diff
___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
http://bugs.python.org/issue2292
Neil Girdhar added the comment:
All tests pass, polishing. Joshua, I'm still not sure how to do show the right
error for the function call with duplicate arguments…
--
Added file: http://bugs.python.org/file37853/starunpack17.diff
___
Python
Neil Girdhar added the comment:
I assume this is the problem:
dis.dis('f(*a(), b=b())')
1 0 LOAD_NAME0 (f)
3 LOAD_NAME1 (a)
6 CALL_FUNCTION0 (0 positional, 0 keyword pair)
9 LOAD_CONST
Neil Girdhar added the comment:
Sounds good. I'll stop working until I see your patch. I tried to make it
easy for you to implement your error idea wrt BUILD_MAP_UNPACK :)
--
___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
http://bugs.python.org
Changes by Neil Girdhar mistersh...@gmail.com:
Added file: http://bugs.python.org/file37821/starunpack14.diff
___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
http://bugs.python.org/issue2292
Changes by Neil Girdhar mistersh...@gmail.com:
Removed file: http://bugs.python.org/file37817/starunpack14.diff
___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
http://bugs.python.org/issue2292
Neil Girdhar added the comment:
By the way, Joshua if you wanted to edit the text of the PEP, it might be nice
to point out that this replaces itertools.chain.from_iterable. I know you
mention one use of itertools.chain, but I think this nicely replaces all uses
of both:
itertools.chain(a, b
1 - 100 of 142 matches
Mail list logo
