On Dec 6, 2017 21:14, "Guido van Rossum" wrote:
OK, then please just change the PEP's Version: header to 3.8.
Will do. Have a nice vacation! :)
-eric
___
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python.org
OK, then please just change the PEP's Version: header to 3.8.
On Wed, Dec 6, 2017 at 7:57 PM, Eric Snow
wrote:
>
>
> On Dec 6, 2017 20:31, "Guido van Rossum" wrote:
>
> If the point is just to be able to test the existing API better, no PEP is
>
On Dec 6, 2017 20:31, "Guido van Rossum" wrote:
If the point is just to be able to test the existing API better, no PEP is
needed, right? It would be an unsupported, undocumented API.
In the short term that's one major goal. In the long term the
functionality provided by the
If the point is just to be able to test the existing API better, no PEP is
needed, right? It would be an unsupported, undocumented API.
On Wed, Dec 6, 2017 at 7:22 PM, Nick Coghlan wrote:
> On 7 December 2017 at 12:46, Guido van Rossum wrote:
> > So you're
On 7 December 2017 at 12:46, Guido van Rossum wrote:
> So you're okay with putting this off till (at least) 3.8? That sounds good
> to me, given that I'd like to go on vacation soon.
Eric reminded me off-list that we'd like to at least add the lower
level _interpreters API for
So you're okay with putting this off till (at least) 3.8? That sounds good
to me, given that I'd like to go on vacation soon.
On Wed, Dec 6, 2017 at 5:04 PM, Nick Coghlan wrote:
> On 7 December 2017 at 01:50, Guido van Rossum wrote:
> > Sorry to burst your
On 7 December 2017 at 01:50, Guido van Rossum wrote:
> Sorry to burst your bubble, but I have not followed any of the discussion
> and I am actually very worried about this topic. I don't think I will be
> able to make time for this before the 3.7b1 feature freeze.
I think that
Sorry to burst your bubble, but I have not followed any of the discussion
and I am actually very worried about this topic. I don't think I will be
able to make time for this before the 3.7b1 feature freeze.
On Tue, Dec 5, 2017 at 6:51 PM, Eric Snow
wrote:
> Hi all,
On Dec 5, 2017 23:49, "Nick Coghlan" wrote:
Nice updates! I like this version.
Great! :)
My one suggestion here would be to consider a dedicated exception type
like "interpreters.SubinterpreterError", rather than re-using
RuntimeError directly. That way you can put the
On 6 December 2017 at 12:51, Eric Snow wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I've finally updated PEP 554. Feedback would be most welcome. The
> PEP is in a pretty good place now and I hope to we're close to a
> decision to accept it. :)
Nice updates! I like this version.
> In
On 12/06/2017 03:51 AM, Eric Snow wrote:
Hi all,
I've finally updated PEP 554. Feedback would be most welcome. The
PEP is in a pretty good place now and I hope to we're close to a
decision to accept it. :)
[...]
C-extension opt-in/opt-out
--
By using the
Hi all,
I've finally updated PEP 554. Feedback would be most welcome. The
PEP is in a pretty good place now and I hope to we're close to a
decision to accept it. :)
In addition to resolving the open questions, I've also made the
following changes to the PEP:
* put an API summary at the top
12 matches
Mail list logo