Hi Larry, sets (and mappings, ie dicts), have a common functionality among
many languages and libraries that does Not include an ordering. Already, in
CPython, there is a need to somehow indicate that insertion ordering is
being used in dicts or use OrderedDict. I am quite happy with keeping sets
a
Mark wrote, in reply to me:
> On 09/12/2019 3:01 pm, Paddy McCarthy wrote:
> > "Bear in mind that the costs of higher limits are paid by everyone, but
> > the benefits are gained by few."
> >
> > Is there some evidence for the above statement? One of the issu
One aspect of scripting is being able to throw something together to create
a correct solution to an immediate problem. If the proprietary software
that you script around takes over 300 Gigs to lay out a CPU and delays are
hugely expensive, then I don't want to waste time on optimisations to get
ar
I would not have such a small limit.
I can envisage generating code from a log then evaluating that code. 1
million lines could be small, given the speed of the interpreter on modern
machines.
One might want to generate data as a Python file rather than a pile and
load that as a module. There might
On Sat, 7 Jul 2018 at 16:50, Guido van Rossum wrote:
> This seems more suitable for a style guide.
>
Which would be good enough, if the automatic checkers were improved to
flag such poor use of ':='..
Would that be possible?
___
Python-Dev mailing li
On Tue, 8 May 2018, 16:33 Jeroen Demeyer, wrote:
> On 2018-05-06 09:35, Nick Coghlan wrote:
> > Thanks for this update Jeroen! If it doesn't come up otherwise, I'll try
> > to claim one of the lightning talk slots at the Language Summit to
> > discuss this with folks in person :)
>
> Sounds great
> > Whatever anyone may think of this, it worked.
I help on other forums and have two practises that I work at:
When asking a question I try to be polite. It may be more challenging to be
ultra polite but sometimes it's worthwhile. Being told I am polite online
is a much rarer accolade and can l
On 30 April 2018 at 17:37, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
>
> On Mon, Apr 30, 2018 at 08:09:35AM +0100, Paddy McCarthy wrote:
> [...]
> > A PEP that can detract from readability; *readability*, a central
> > tenet of Python, should
> > be rejected, (on principle!), whe
The PEP s section on Frequently raised objections includes:
(https://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0572/#this-could-be-used-to-create-ugly-code)
> This could be used to create ugly code!
>
> So can anything else. This is a tool, and it is up to the programmer to use
> it where
> it makes sense, an
