On Sat, Oct 24, 2009 at 10:55 AM, geremy condra wrote:
> My understanding is that the moratorium would preclude changes to
> the builtins. Is that not the case here?
It is as yet undecided.
--
--Guido van Rossum
PS. My elbow needs a couple more weeks of rest. Limiting myself to
ultra-short ema
On Sat, Oct 24, 2009 at 11:28 AM, "Martin v. Löwis" wrote:
>> I'm not being tongue-in-cheek or sarcastic. My question was serious --
>> if there is a moratorium, is there any reason to bother submitting
>> patches for functional changes to built-ins? A lot can change between
>> now and 2013, and I
> I'm not being tongue-in-cheek or sarcastic. My question was serious --
> if there is a moratorium, is there any reason to bother submitting
> patches for functional changes to built-ins? A lot can change between
> now and 2013, and I for one wouldn't bother making a patch that I knew
> wouldn
On Sat, 24 Oct 2009 05:04:33 pm Stephen J. Turnbull wrote:
> Steven D'Aprano writes:
>
> > I'm not being tongue-in-cheek or sarcastic. My question was
> serious -- > if there is a moratorium, is there any reason to bother
> submitting > patches for functional changes to built-ins?
>
> Yes. Python
Steven D'Aprano writes:
> I'm not being tongue-in-cheek or sarcastic. My question was serious --
> if there is a moratorium, is there any reason to bother submitting
> patches for functional changes to built-ins?
Yes. Python is open source. Private and public forks are possible
and (at lea
On Fri, 23 Oct 2009 11:47:22 pm Nick Coghlan wrote:
> Yuvgoog Greenle wrote:
> > On Fri, Oct 23, 2009 at 1:09 PM, Steven D'Aprano
wrote:
> >> Is there any point? Even if accepted, it's too late to make it
> >> into 3.1, and with the overwhelming approval for a moratorium on
> >> changes to built-
Yuvgoog Greenle wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 23, 2009 at 1:09 PM, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
>> Is there any point? Even if accepted, it's too late to make it into 3.1,
>> and with the overwhelming approval for a moratorium on changes to
>> built-ins, it is likely to just sit in the tracker, forgotten, until
On Fri, Oct 23, 2009 at 1:09 PM, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
> Is there any point? Even if accepted, it's too late to make it into 3.1,
> and with the overwhelming approval for a moratorium on changes to
> built-ins, it is likely to just sit in the tracker, forgotten, until
> 2013 or later. How likely
On Fri, 23 Oct 2009 09:37:09 pm Oleg Broytman wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 23, 2009 at 12:23:08PM +0200, Willi Richert wrote:
> > The patch is attached.
>
>Patches should be put to the issue tracker. Thank you.
Is there any point? Even if accepted, it's too late to make it into 3.1,
and with the over
On Fri, Oct 23, 2009 at 12:23:08PM +0200, Willi Richert wrote:
> The patch is attached.
Patches should be put to the issue tracker. Thank you.
Oleg.
--
Oleg Broytmanhttp://phd.pp.ru/p...@phd.pp.ru
Programmers don't die, they just GOSUB without RETURN.
_
Hi,
here is the first shot to provide a faster means of retrieving an arbitrary
element from a set without removing it.
The times for
=
from timeit import *
stat1 = "for i in xrange(100): iter(s).next()"
stat2 = "for i in xrange(100): s.get()"
for stat in [stat1, stat
11 matches
Mail list logo
