John Ladasky schrieb am 19.09.2017 um 08:54:
> I have come to understand from your other posts that adding something to
> the stdlib imposes significant constraints on the release schedules of
> those modules. I can appreciate the hassle that might cause. Still,
> now I wonder what I might be mis
On 19/09/2017 09:05, Stefan Behnel wrote:
The stdlib is there to provide a base level of functionality. That base
level tends to be much higher up than in most other programming languages,
but from the point of view of Python, it's still just a base level, however
comfortable it might be.
If you
On Tuesday, September 19, 2017 at 1:05:51 AM UTC-7, Stefan Behnel wrote:
> John Ladasky schrieb am 19.09.2017 um 08:54:
> > I have come to understand from your other posts that adding something to
> > the stdlib imposes significant constraints on the release schedules of
> > those modules. I can a
On 20 September 2017 at 17:16, Dennis Lee Bieber wrote:
> On Tue, 19 Sep 2017 11:58:47 -0700 (PDT), John Ladasky
> declaimed the following:
>
>>
>>And of course I have found some other third-party packages: scipy, pandas,
>>matplotlib, and PyQt5 are important for my work. I helped a student of
On 09/20/2017 09:24 AM, Chris Warrick wrote:
On 20 September 2017 at 17:16, Dennis Lee Bieber wrote:
And if wxPython had been part of the stdlib, it would have meant Python
3 would have been delayed years until wxPython had been ported -- or
wxPython would have been pulled from the stdlib and
On Monday, September 18, 2017 at 5:13:58 PM UTC-7, MRAB wrote:
> On 2017-09-18 23:08, b...@g...com wrote:
> > My rationale is simple, the authors of the libraries are not tied into the
> > (c)Python release cycle, the PEP process or anything else, they can just
> > get on with it.
> >
> > Consi
