Re: [Python-Dev] Timeout for PEP 550 / Execution Context discussion

2017-10-18 Thread Nick Coghlan
On 19 October 2017 at 04:53, Guido van Rossum wrote: > Actually after recent debate I think > this PEP should *not* be provisional. > +1 from me - "contextvars._set_ctx()" is the only part I think we're really unsure about in your latest API design, and marki

Re: [Python-Dev] Timeout for PEP 550 / Execution Context discussion

2017-10-18 Thread Guido van Rossum
Actually after recent debate I think this PEP should *not* be provisional. On Wed, Oct 18, 2017 at 11:45 AM, Yury Selivanov wrote: > On Wed, Oct 18, 2017 at 2:21 PM, Guido van Rossum > wrote: > > On Wed, Oct 18, 2017 at 10:50 AM, Yury Selivanov < > yselivano

Re: [Python-Dev] Timeout for PEP 550 / Execution Context discussion

2017-10-18 Thread Yury Selivanov
On Wed, Oct 18, 2017 at 2:21 PM, Guido van Rossum wrote: > On Wed, Oct 18, 2017 at 10:50 AM, Yury Selivanov > wrote: >> >> The main reason why I don't like 'set_ctx()' is because it would make >> it harder for us to adopt PEP 550-like design later in the future >> (*if* we need that.) >> >> PEP 5

Re: [Python-Dev] Timeout for PEP 550 / Execution Context discussion

2017-10-18 Thread Guido van Rossum
On Wed, Oct 18, 2017 at 10:50 AM, Yury Selivanov wrote: > The main reason why I don't like 'set_ctx()' is because it would make > it harder for us to adopt PEP 550-like design later in the future > (*if* we need that.) > > PEP 550 is designed in such a way, that 'generator.send()' is the only > t

Re: [Python-Dev] Timeout for PEP 550 / Execution Context discussion

2017-10-18 Thread Yury Selivanov
On Wed, Oct 18, 2017 at 2:10 PM, Ethan Furman wrote: [..] > Unless it's extremely difficult to not seg-fault in such a situation I don't > think this is a valid argument. Well, you don't think so, but I do, after writing a few implementations of this PEP family. It would complicate the design, b

Re: [Python-Dev] Timeout for PEP 550 / Execution Context discussion

2017-10-18 Thread Ethan Furman
On 10/18/2017 10:50 AM, Yury Selivanov wrote: On Wed, Oct 18, 2017 at 1:06 PM, Guido van Rossum wrote: On Tue, Oct 17, 2017 at 9:40 PM, Nick Coghlan wrote: [..] By contrast, "contextvars.set_ctx" would need various wrappers to handle correctly reverting the context change, and would hence be

Re: [Python-Dev] Timeout for PEP 550 / Execution Context discussion

2017-10-18 Thread Yury Selivanov
On Wed, Oct 18, 2017 at 1:06 PM, Guido van Rossum wrote: > On Tue, Oct 17, 2017 at 9:40 PM, Nick Coghlan wrote: [..] >> By contrast, "contextvars.set_ctx" would need various wrappers to handle >> correctly reverting the context change, and would hence be prone to "changed >> the active context wi

Re: [Python-Dev] Timeout for PEP 550 / Execution Context discussion

2017-10-18 Thread Guido van Rossum
On Tue, Oct 17, 2017 at 9:40 PM, Nick Coghlan wrote: > On 18 October 2017 at 05:55, Yury Selivanov > wrote: > >> I actually like what you did in >> https://github.com/gvanrossum/pep550/blob/master/simpler.py, it seems >> reasonable. The only thing that I'd change is to remove "set_ctx" >> from

[Python-Dev] Tracking fixes of security vulnerabilies: we are good!

2017-10-18 Thread Victor Stinner
Hi, Since the beginning of the year, I'm working on a tool to track if all security vulnerabilities are fixed in all Python maintained versions (versions still accepting security fixes): http://python-security.readthedocs.io/vulnerabilities.html Currently, five branches are maintained: 2.7, 3