On 9/29/05, Guido van Rossum wrote:
> After a long discussion I've decided to add a shortcut conditional
> expression to Python 2.5.
>
> The syntax will be
>
> A if C else B
>
[snip]
>
> Congratulations gracefully accepted.
Congratulations, and many thanks for making this decision before the
t
Nick Coghlan wrote:
> So my vote would actually go for deprecating the use of square brackets to
> surround an assignment target list - it makes it look like an actual list
> object should be involved somewhere, but there isn't one.
I've found myself using square brackets a few times for more
comp
Nick Coghlan wrote:
> Having module attribute access obey the descriptor protocol (__get__, __set__,
> __delete__) sounds like a pretty good option to me.
>
> It would even be pretty backwards compatible, as I'd be hardpressed to think
> why anyone would have a descriptor *instance* as a top-level
Barry Warsaw wrote:
> On Mon, 2005-10-17 at 21:55, Guido van Rossum wrote:
>
> > Let's change the property built-in so that its arguments can be either
> > functions or strings (or None). If they are functions or None, it
> > behaves exactly like it always has.
> >
> > If an argument is a string, i
Michele Simionato wrote:
> This reminds me of an idea I have kept in my drawer for a couple of years or
> so.
> Here is my proposition: we could have the statement syntax
>
> :
>
>
> to be syntactic sugar for
>
> = (, , )
>
[snip]
> BTW, if the proposal was implemented, the 'class' would be
On 11/18/05, "Martin v. Löwis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Noam Raphael wrote:
> > I just wanted to add another use case: long messages. Consider those
> > lines from idlelib/run.py:133
> >
> > msg = "IDLE's subprocess can't connect to %s:%d. This may be due "\
> > "to your
I wrote (in the summary):
> While there is no interface to the AST yet, one is
> intended for the not-so-distant future.
Simon Burton wrote:
> who is doing this ? I am mad keen to get this happening.
Brett Cannon wrote:
> No one yet. Some ideas have been tossed around (read the thread for
> deta
Barry Warsaw wrote:
> On Fri, 2005-12-09 at 15:38 -0600, Ian Bicking wrote:
> >Also decide whether your attributes should be private or not.
> >The difference between private and non-public is that the former
> >will never be useful for a derived class, while the latter migh
Jim Fulton wrote:
> Can we officially mark __private as a mistake. Perhaps:
>
> - Strongly discourage it in the style guide
+1
> - Mark it in the language reference as a deprecated feature
+1
> - Generate deprecation warnings when it is used?
-0
I don't see that this gains us much. It will c
On 12/11/05, Guido van Rossum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 12/11/05, Nick Coghlan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Keeping it for Py3K would be fine, if the mechanism was changed so that it
> > actually worked right. That is, the mechanics would be such that any two
> > concurrently existing class
On 12/12/05, Guido van Rossum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 12/11/05, Steven Bethard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > class Document(_cdm.Document):
> > ...
> > # add convenience methods here
> > ...
>
> Personally, I find that naming
Mike Brown wrote:
> Catching up on some python-dev email, I was surprised to see that things seem
> to be barrelling ahead with the adding of ElementTree to Python core without
> any discussion on XML-SIG. Sidestepping XML-SIG and the proving grounds of
> PyXML in order to satsify the demand for a
Martin v. Löwis wrote:
> Steven Bethard wrote:
> > I didn't really feel like the proposal was out of the blue. The
> > proposal has been brought up before, both on python-dev[1] and the
> > python-list[2]. ElementTree has a pretty large following - if you
> > lo
On 12/13/05, François Pinard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> [Steven Bethard]
>
> >Ahh. I never run into this because I never import objects directly
> >from modules. So, instead of:
>
> >from elementtree.ElementTree import ElementTree
> >...
>
Here's the summary for the first half of November -- sorry for the bit
of a delay. As always, let me or Tony know if you have any
corrections!
=
Summary Announcements
=
--
Reminder: Python is now on Subversion!
[Raymond]
> Perhaps introduce a single function, base(val, radix=10,
> prefix=''), as a universal base converter that could replace
> bin(), hex(), oct(), etc.
+1 on introducing base()
[Skip]
> Would it (should it) work with floats, decimals, complexes? I presume it
> would work with ints and lo
John J Lee wrote:
> On Thu, 26 Jan 2006, Tony Meyer wrote:
> [...]
> > Well, if you include the much larger discussion on python-list,
> > people (including me) have said that removing __div__ is a good
> > idea. If it's included in the PEP, please at least include a
> > justification and cover th
Raymond Hettinger wrote:
> [Phillip J. Eby]
> > The only case that looks slightly less than optimal is:
> >
> >set((1, 2, 3, 4, 5))
> >
> > But I'm not sure that it warrants a special syntax just to get rid of the
> > extra ().
>
> The PEP records that Tim argued for leaving the extra parenthes
Guido van Rossum wrote:
> After so many attempts to come up with an alternative for lambda,
> perhaps we should admit defeat. I've not had the time to follow the
> most recent rounds, but I propose that we keep lambda, so as to stop
> wasting everybody's talent and time on an impossible quest.
Per
Robert Brewer wrote:
> Community consensus on syntax is a pipe dream.
+1 QOTF
And trust me, it'll be in there, since I'm one of the summary writers. ;-)
STeVe
--
Grammar am for people who can't think for myself.
--- Bucky Katt, Get Fuzzy
___
Py
301 - 320 of 320 matches
Mail list logo
