On Wed, Nov 02 2016, "Stephen J. Turnbull"
wrote:
> > Where/how should RFC patches be posted?
>
> To the issue tracker, bugs.python.org. A follow-up here (and if you
> choose to post to python-list, there) to mention the issue number and
> URL is a good idea.
Thanks. Turns out to be a lot eas
On Wed, Nov 02, 2016 at 07:03:27PM -0300, Francisco Couzo wrote:
> Some functions that take a predicate from itertools accept None as its
> predicate:
[...]
> I'd be interested in writing a patch to make itertools more consistent if
> there's a consensus.
There's a line in PEP 8 about foolish cons
Hi Python-Dev,
I'm trying to get my head around on what's accepted in f-strings --
https://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0498/ seems very light on the details
on what it does accept as an expression and how things should actually be
parsed (and the current implementation still doesn't seem to be in
Stephen, dropwhile(None, ...) was an example, takewhile(None, ...) doesn't
works either and it makes a lot of sense IMO.
On Thu, Nov 3, 2016 at 7:07 AM, Stephen J. Turnbull <
turnbull.stephen...@u.tsukuba.ac.jp> wrote:
> Francisco Couzo writes:
>
> > I'd be interested in writing a patch to make
Francisco Couzo writes:
> I'd be interested in writing a patch to make itertools more consistent if
> there's a consensus.
I don't understand what you mean by "consistent". I would argue that
in Python, an argument of None means "use the TOOWTDI default". For
"filterfalse", bool() is pretty o
