Dávid Nemeskey added the comment:
@kj Sorry, for some reason, I thought the that issue affected Union as well,
but I have just re-tested it and found that it works.
--
___
Python tracker
<https://bugs.python.org/issue42
Dávid Nemeskey added the comment:
Guys, any chance the fix will land in 3.9? It is affected as well.
--
nosy: +nemeskeyd
___
Python tracker
<https://bugs.python.org/issue42
Change by Dávid Nemeskey :
--
type: -> enhancement
___
Python tracker
<https://bugs.python.org/issue45271>
___
___
Python-bugs-list mailing list
Unsubscrib
New submission from Dávid Nemeskey :
There is an unjustified asymmetry between `str` and `list`, as far as lookup
goes. Both have an `index()` method that returns the first index of a value, or
raises a `ValueError` if it doesn't exist. However, only `str` has the `find`
method, which returns
Dávid Nemeskey added the comment:
+1. When starting out, I always got confused about this message ("too many
values to unpack? Does that mean my function returned too many items, which
could not be unpacked into the expected number? Oh no, the opposite...").
Also, please note that
New submission from Dávid Nemeskey :
There is an inconsistency in how multiprocessing.Pool handles exceptions thrown
in the workers:
- exceptions raised by the mapped function stop execution right away
- exceptions raised in an initializer are ignored and the pool continues
spawning new
Dávid Nemeskey added the comment:
s/to different/two different/
--
___
Python tracker
<https://bugs.python.org/issue42956>
___
___
Python-bugs-list mailin
New submission from Dávid Nemeskey :
It would be nice if there was an easy way to convert a range to a slice and
vice versa. At least superficially the two are almost the same(*), yet if one
wants to convert a slice to a range, he has to go through hoops to avoid
potential errors, ending up
Dávid Nemeskey added the comment:
I ran into the same problem. I know of the set_defaults() method, in fact, that
is what I have always been using. But why was dest added if not to provide a
better solution?
I agree that changing it would _perhaps_ break some code, so I agree
Dávid Nemeskey added the comment:
OK, actually: trying to create a multiprocessing.Value object and sharing it
between a Pool of processes results in "RuntimeError: Synchronized objects
should only be shared between processes through inheritance". So the only way
seems to
Dávid Nemeskey added the comment:
Nothing in the documentation says that multiprocessing.Value and the object
returned by manager.Value() is any different. Nor is it clear why they should
be.
It is perfectly understandable to expect that manager.Value() is actually of
type
Dávid Nemeskey added the comment:
Note that this is not the same as GZipFile.mode, which is 1 or 2 (READ or
WRITE), instead of the more informative "[raw][bt ]".
--
___
Python tracker
<https://bugs.python.o
New submission from Dávid Nemeskey :
TextIOWrapper objects returned by gzip.open() or bz2.open() do not have the
'mode' data member. Those returned by io.open() do. It would be nice if it did.
--
components: Library (Lib)
messages: 337745
nosy: nemeskeyd
priority: normal
severity
Dávid Nemeskey added the comment:
The truth is, I was thinking about going to the list, but according to PEP 42
(https://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0042/), this space was one of the places
new features could be requested:
"""
Note
This PEP has been rejected as obsolete.
New submission from Dávid Nemeskey:
Currently, the "as" keyword in supported in import and with statements to bind
an object to a name. I think it would be nice to have the same functionality in
list/dict/etc. comprehensions as well.
Rationale: as I understand, comprehensions are
15 matches
Mail list logo
