Greg Ewing canterbury.ac.nz> writes:
> I'm wondering whether there should be some kind of
> "code literal" syntax, where you write a Python
> expression and the compiler transforms it as far
> as the AST stage, then makes it available to the
> program as an AST object.
>
> Or would that be too c
Michael P. Soulier wrote:
> On 09/04/06 Bill Janssen said:
>
>> I'm very interested in this, too. There are two things that force me
>> into writing Java code instead of Python code, and they are:
>>
>> 1) The Java plug-in for Web browsers, and
>>
>> 2) The integrated portable fairly capable Sw
Guido van Rossum wrote:
> I'm more concerned about the choice of AST data structure and how it
> affects IronPython, PyPy, Jython and possible other Python
> implementations. I'd like to keep both the AST and the bytecode spec
> out of the language spec,
Well, it wouldn't be any less portable tha
Guido van Rossum wrote:
> I'm not sure how that would help. What would it mean to have a
> capability for accessing e.g. x.__class__?
If you can somehow get a reference to the
__builtin__.classof() function, then you
have that capability, otherwise you don't.
The key idea is that by turning pote
For a rather large application I am writing and will be running for a
commercial service, I ran into the restricted environment problem. I had
looked at the CPython code and concluded it would be a rather large job
to secure it (if I had the time and the intimate understanding). Instead
I opted
On Friday 2006-04-07 20:52, Guido van Rossum wrote:
> On 4/4/06, Gareth McCaughan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > I take no stand on how much not confusing Lispers matters
> > to Python 3k.
>
> But I do: none whatsoever.
I thought as much. :-)
--
g
_
On 4/10/06, Greg Ewing <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Guido van Rossum wrote:
>
> > I'm more concerned about the choice of AST data structure and how it
> > affects IronPython, PyPy, Jython and possible other Python
> > implementations. I'd like to keep both the AST and the bytecode spec
> > out of t
On 4/10/06, Talin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I have a rather odd use case for this. A while back, I decided I wanted to
> write an algebraic solver, similar to what Mathematica does, except that
> I wanted to write it in Python. Not just implement it in Python, but have
> Python be the language i
Folks,
One thing I'd really like to see in Python 3000 is support for first-
class symbols, with literal syntax. Stealing syntax from Ruby would
work for me:
def web_dispatch("/bank-account", :GET, retrieve_account): pass
The lack thereof in Python is a wart I tend to run into in Pyth
On Mon, 2006-04-10 at 12:16 -0400, Kendall Clark wrote:
> I don't know if the Ruby syntax for symbols, :foo, will work in
> Python (though I think visually it's a good thing), but it would be
> really nice to have symbols with *some* syntax in Python 3000.
To be fair, I think Ruby stole the i
Nick Coghlan wrote:
> And once you move to an out-of-process sandbox, then the only Python specific
> issue remaining is improving the support for inter-process communications.
> The
> security issues are then more in the domain of the OS:
>- controlling file access permissions on a per-proc
Every so often Guido talks about adding optional typing to python.
Adaptation may offer the cleanest way to do this.
Turning
def fn(a, b, c="default"): ...
into any of
def fn(Seq a, Index b, Text c="default"): ...
def fn(Seq(a), Index(b), Text(c)="default"): ...
or (wrapped ver
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Apr 10, 2006, at 12:24 PM, Barry Warsaw wrote:
> On Mon, 2006-04-10 at 12:16 -0400, Kendall Clark wrote:
>
>> I don't know if the Ruby syntax for symbols, :foo, will work in
>> Python (though I think visually it's a good thing), but it would be
>>
Kendall Clark wrote:
> PS--I'd also like "?", "!", and "-" to be legal characters in
> function, method, and variable names, but I won't push my luck -- and
> I seem to remember Guido saying that would never happen, at some
> point back in the day. Fair enough. ;>
At least "-" can never be
At 08:39:36 PM 4/10/2006 -0700, "Guido van Rossum" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>On 4/10/06, Talin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > I have a rather odd use case for this. A while back, I decided I wanted to
> > write an algebraic solver, similar to what Mathematica does, except that
> > I wanted to wri
Greg Ewing wrote:
> Robert Brewer wrote:
>> Part of the benefit of the bytecode-hacking is that your expression
>> never has to be in a string.
>
> I'm wondering whether there should be some kind of
> "code literal" syntax, where you write a Python
> expression and the compiler transforms it as f
> And 2 + the JRE and jar files ease distribution of apps, something else that
> Python needs to address.=20
I think we're very close to that with Python 2.5.
Bill
___
Python-3000 mailing list
[email protected]
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listin
On 10/04/06 Bill Janssen said:
> I think we're very close to that with Python 2.5.
Depends. I recently tried to install mechanize, and easytools tried to install
a ton of dependencies, all requiring administrator access to install. --prefix
didn't resolve dependencies, which isn't helpful if you'
Michael P. Soulier wrote:
> On 10/04/06 Bill Janssen said:
>>I think we're very close to that with Python 2.5.
>
>
> Depends. I recently tried to install mechanize, and easytools tried to install
> a ton of dependencies, all requiring administrator access to install. --prefix
> didn't resolve dep
On 4/10/06, Greg Ewing <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Guido van Rossum wrote:
>
> > I'm not sure how that would help. What would it mean to have a
> > capability for accessing e.g. x.__class__?
>
> If you can somehow get a reference to the
> __builtin__.classof() function, then you
> have that capabi
On Sun, 2006-04-09 at 18:06 -0700, Neal Norwitz wrote:
> On 4/9/06, Giovanni Bajo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Neal Norwitz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >>> r.setrlimit(r.RLIMIT_CPU, (5, 5))
> >>> 1000**1000
> Cputime limit exceeded
>
> To defeat this, you can do
On 10/04/06 Ian Bicking said:
> If you have specific problems you should email [email protected]
> (and/or the mechanize maintainer) and describe the problems you are
> having, and what the desired behavior would be.
>
> And maybe try the svn trunk version of setuptools first to see if y
On 4/10/06, Jim Jewett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Every so often Guido talks about adding optional typing to python.
>
> Adaptation may offer the cleanest way to do this.
>
>
> Turning
>
> def fn(a, b, c="default"): ...
>
> into any of
>
> def fn(Seq a, Index b, Text c="default"): ...
>
If you are going this far, why not also support a throws() modifier (or
whatever you might call it).
Right now I do something like:
@throws(IOError)
def foo(...) :
as a way to indicate that foo() can throw a specific exception.
I might suggest
def foo(...) throws(...) :
as a more integrated
On 4/10/06, Guido van Rossum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> The only syntax that is acceptable to me ... would look like
> def fn(a: Seq, b: Index, c: Text = "default"): ...
> where Seq, Index and Text can be expressions (the main problem with
> the syntax you propose is that the type can't be muc
> Greg Ewing wrote:
> > I'm wondering whether there should be some kind of
> > "code literal" syntax, where you write a Python
> > expression and the compiler transforms it as far
> > as the AST stage, then makes it available to the
> > program as an AST object.
On 4/10/06, Ian Bicking <[EMAIL PRO
"Chaz." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> If you are going this far, why not also support a throws() modifier (or
> whatever you might call it).
>
> Right now I do something like:
>
> @throws(IOError)
> def foo(...) :
...
> I might suggest
>
> def foo(...) throws(...) :
>
> as a more integrated ap
Chaz. wrote:
> If you are going this far, why not also support a throws() modifier (or
> whatever you might call it).
>
> Right now I do something like:
>
> @throws(IOError)
> def foo(...) :
>
> as a way to indicate that foo() can throw a specific exception.
>
> I might suggest
>
> def foo(..
On 4/10/06, Chaz. <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> If you are going this far, why not also support a throws() modifier (or
> whatever you might call it).
>
> Right now I do something like:
>
> @throws(IOError)
> def foo(...) :
>
> as a way to indicate that foo() can throw a specific exception.
>
> I mi
Is that what adding some typing to the system will do?
Josiah Carlson wrote:
> "Chaz." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> If you are going this far, why not also support a throws() modifier (or
>> whatever you might call it).
>>
>> Right now I do something like:
>>
>> @throws(IOError)
>> def foo(...)
Personally I don't care what you call it. If you demean it because you
disagree, you might as well fore go the whole issue of typing arguments.
After all why turn Python in Cobol?
C. G.
Georg Brandl wrote:
> Chaz. wrote:
>> If you are going this far, why not also support a throws() modifier (or
On 4/10/06, Jim Jewett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 4/10/06, Guido van Rossum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > A completely separate issue is what kind of objects Seq, Index and
> > Text would be; but that's a discussion we have separate from the
> > syntactic discussion.
>
> What do you mean? Th
Guido van Rossum wrote:
> On 4/10/06, Jim Jewett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>>Every so often Guido talks about adding optional typing to python.
>>
>>Adaptation may offer the cleanest way to do this.
>>
>>
>>Turning
>>
>>def fn(a, b, c="default"): ...
>>
>>into any of
>>
>>def fn(Seq a,
Guido van Rossum wrote:
> On 4/10/06, Jim Jewett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>>On 4/10/06, Guido van Rossum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>>>A completely separate issue is what kind of objects Seq, Index and
>>>Text would be; but that's a discussion we have separate from the
>>>syntactic discussi
On 4/10/06, Guido van Rossum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 4/10/06, Jim Jewett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On 4/10/06, Guido van Rossum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > A completely separate issue is what kind of objects
> > > Seq, Index and Text would be
> > What do you mean? The only ques
[Guido]
> > It should mean neither. As I tried to say, the *only*
> > semantics is that the value of the expression is
> > accessible through the __signature__ attribute of
> > the function. It is then up to the decorator to decide
> > what it means.
[Jim Jewett]
> So type annotation is only for u
I've been intermittently following and skipping the Python-3000 list;
my personal bandwidth just wasn't up to following everything. I know a
few PEPs have been checked in (thanks Georg!).
I know Adam DePrince has four different proto-PEPs up at
http://www.deprince.net/ideas/peps.html but I don't k
On 4/10/06, Guido van Rossum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Are there other proto-PEPs being worked on? I would appreciate if the
> authors would send me a note (or reply here) with the URL and the
> status.
This is the Backwards Incompatibility PEP discussed earlier. I've
submitted it for a PEP nu
"Chaz." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Is that what adding some typing to the system will do?
Not necessarily, but this particular instance isn't necessarily a
typing-system issue. All sane or insane implementations of the @throws
decorator that I can think of (annotation, exception translation,
u
Guido van Rossum wrote:
> Anyway, I'm not sure I consider this a strong use case for needing
> access to Python's AST; the language you need to parse is much smaller
> than Python and a custom parser would probably do just as well.
So maybe this is an argument for having some
kind of simple parsi
Kendall Clark wrote:
> Folks,
>
> One thing I'd really like to see in Python 3000 is support for first-
> class symbols,
>
> def web_dispatch("/bank-account", :GET, retrieve_account): pass
class SymGen:
def __getattr__(self, name):
return intern(name)
sym = SymGen()
web_dispatc
At 07:39 PM 4/10/2006 -0400, Blake Winton wrote:
>Phillip J. Eby wrote:
>>I tried doing something like this when I was writing RuleDispatch, and
>>gave up in disgust because there's no sane way to implement "and" and
>>"or" operations with this approach. The bitwise operators (&, |, and ~)
>>bi
Kendall Clark wrote:
> One thing I'd really like to see in Python 3000 is support for first-
> class symbols, with literal syntax.
Actually I think enumerations would be more useful than
symbols. There's no essential difference between a symbol
and an interned string. The only real disadvantage
Georg Brandl wrote:
>>PS--I'd also like "?", "!", and "-" to be legal characters in
>>function, method, and variable names, but I won't push my luck -- and
>>I seem to remember Guido saying that would never happen, at some
>>point back in the day.
And I hope he never changes his mind! Ident
Phillip J. Eby wrote:
> I tried doing something like this when I was writing RuleDispatch, and gave
> up in disgust because there's no sane way to implement "and" and "or"
> operations with this approach. The bitwise operators (&, |, and ~) bind
> too tightly to be used with comparison expressi
On 4/10/06, Greg Ewing <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Guido van Rossum wrote:
> > Anyway, I'm not sure I consider this a strong use case for needing
> > access to Python's AST; the language you need to parse is much smaller
> > than Python and a custom parser would probably do just as well.
>
> So ma
Phillip J. Eby wrote:
> I tried doing something like this when I was writing RuleDispatch, and gave
> up in disgust because there's no sane way to implement "and" and "or"
> operations with this approach. The bitwise operators (&, |, and ~) bind
> too tightly to be used with comparison express
Adam DePrince wrote:
> Instead of worrying about how to appropriately cripple CPython to
> provide a secure sandbox, perhaps we should be reaching towards PyPy for
> this answer?
This thought might be relevant to another issue
that came to my mind recently. It concerns using
Python as an extens
Greg Ewing wrote:
> So I think this is another, distinct use case for
> wanting a "nested" Python environment. Here the goal
> isn't to protect against a malicious user, since the
> user running the application and the user doing the
> scripting are the same person. Rather, it's just
> to reduce th
Guido van Rossum python.org> writes:
> > So maybe this is an argument for having some
> > kind of simple parsing package in the stdlib,
> > for knocking up little specialised languages
> > like this.
>
> Now I'll *really* try to get pgen in. Unfortunately I can't make the
> April 17 deadline.
H
Greg Ewing canterbury.ac.nz> writes:
> Perhaps you'd like to lend your support to PEP 335, then?-)
>
>http://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0335/
I think that would give me *most* of what I would need for my
solver. What remains is a consise way to specify bound vs. unbound
variables I would p
On Apr 10, 2006, at 8:17 PM, Greg Ewing wrote:
> Georg Brandl wrote:
>
>>> PS--I'd also like "?", "!", and "-" to be legal characters in
>>> function, method, and variable names, but I won't push my luck --
>>> and
>>> I seem to remember Guido saying that would never happen, at some
>>> point b
On Apr 10, 2006, at 8:05 PM, Greg Ewing wrote:
> Kendall Clark wrote:
>> Folks,
>>
>> One thing I'd really like to see in Python 3000 is support for first-
>> class symbols,
>>
>> def web_dispatch("/bank-account", :GET, retrieve_account): pass
>
> class SymGen:
>
>def __getattr__(self, n
On Apr 10, 2006, at 8:11 PM, Greg Ewing wrote:
> Kendall Clark wrote:
>
>> One thing I'd really like to see in Python 3000 is support for first-
>> class symbols, with literal syntax.
>
> Actually I think enumerations would be more useful than
> symbols.
I don't see why we couldn't have both or
On Apr 10, 2006, at 6:19 PM, Guido van Rossum wrote:
> Are there other proto-PEPs being worked on? I would appreciate if the
> authors would send me a note (or reply here) with the URL and the
> status.
I told Barry I'd work on a proto-PEP for adding symbols (global,
immutable things (or, if y
On 4/10/06, Chaz. <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> I have thought the approach would work to make a plug-in for Firefox,
> though lacking the time and the knowledge has stopped me from experimenting.
Knowledge should not be an impediment, many of us would be interested
in helping you learn what you
56 matches
Mail list logo
