I was curious how and why return annotations use the arrow `->` symbol,
so I went spelunking into the depths of the Python-Ideas and Python-Dev
mailing lists.
Much to my surprise, I couldn't find any discussion or debate about it.
Eventually I tracked the discussion back to a mailing list I did
Whether you have "as" or not, the value of sys.exc_info() (which is what
would be attached as the context to anything you raise in the except block)
is the same. So these are not two different cases -- the only difference is
whether or not you have a local variable set to sys.exc_info().
On Thu, M
On Thu, Mar 4, 2021 at 8:48 PM Sven R. Kunze wrote:
> Hi Irit,
>
> makes sense. So, in case of a *mixed-type ExceptionGroup,* SystemExit
> wins and forces the program to exit.
>
>
> Could you add your reasoning to the PEP?
>
Good idea, I'll add "ExceptionGroup(BaseException)" as a rejected idea
On Thu, Mar 4, 2021 at 11:15 PM Glenn Linderman
wrote:
> I like explicit, and avoiding magic.
>
> And this gives a compatibility story for outer loops that except:
> Exception, and even for others cases that are not recoded for
> ExceptionGroup handling.
>
It could help during the migration/mix
Hi,
Thanks for taking the time to consider the PEP.
Although the PEP was rejected, I still believe that the safety
guarantees in PEP 651 are worth adding to Python in the future.
To do that (maybe for 3.11), I need to understand your concerns better.
Would you clarify a few points for me?
O
On Tue, 2 Mar 2021 at 21:44, Memz wrote:
>
> foo+= 255 # Works the same as
> bytesvariable+=b"ÿ"
foo = b"%b%d" % (foo, 255)
> foo+= a"\x255\x00" # Concatenation with itself
foo = b"%b%b" % (foo, foo)
See PEP461:
Adding % formatting to bytes an
On Fri, 5 Mar 2021 15:03:59 +
Mark Shannon wrote:
>
> There are two issues here. Portability and changes to behaviour.
>
> Regarding portability, I have to admit that PEP is rather vague.
> That's my fault; I should have done more implementation first :(
> FWIW, I have an implementation that
Hi,
Le 05/03/2021 à 14:46, Irit Katriel via Python-Dev a écrit :
>
>
> Whether you have "as" or not, the value of sys.exc_info() (which is what
> would be attached as the context to anything you raise in the except
> block) is the same. So these are not two different cases -- the only
> differen
Dear all,
After several months of absence - my first manual build surprised me by
the addition of the -qalias=noansi.
Before I open an issue - maybe it is not that important - I am trying to
find what brought it in. It looks to be a change in behavior in
configure(.ac) - starting with Python
Hi Antoine,
On 05/03/2021 4:07 pm, Antoine Pitrou wrote:
On Fri, 5 Mar 2021 15:03:59 +
Mark Shannon wrote:
There are two issues here. Portability and changes to behaviour.
Regarding portability, I have to admit that PEP is rather vague.
That's my fault; I should have done more implementa
Hi Mark,
Le 05/03/2021 à 18:06, Mark Shannon a écrit :
Hi Antoine,
On 05/03/2021 4:07 pm, Antoine Pitrou wrote:
On Fri, 5 Mar 2021 15:03:59 +
Mark Shannon wrote:
There are two issues here. Portability and changes to behaviour.
Regarding portability, I have to admit that PEP is rather
ACTIVITY SUMMARY (2021-02-26 - 2021-03-05)
Python tracker at https://bugs.python.org/
To view or respond to any of the issues listed below, click on the issue.
Do NOT respond to this message.
Issues counts and deltas:
open7444 (+14)
closed 47702 (+66)
total 55146 (+80)
Open issues w
Speaking for myself ...
On Fri, Mar 5, 2021 at 7:04 AM Mark Shannon wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Thanks for taking the time to consider the PEP.
>
> Although the PEP was rejected, I still believe that the safety
> guarantees in PEP 651 are worth adding to Python in the future.
>
> To do that (maybe for 3.11
On Fri, Mar 5, 2021 at 11:11 AM Brett Cannon wrote:
> Speaking for myself ...
>
Ditto ...
On Fri, Mar 5, 2021 at 7:04 AM Mark Shannon wrote:
> [...]
>
>> In some cases, the PEP would have improved the situation.
>>
>> For example:
>> sys.setrecursionlimit(5000)
>> def f():
>> f()
>>
>> Cu
Good question. I don't think anyone has ever asked this before... Given the
variants you propose, I'd say that the 3-character ones would be more
effort to type without real benefits, and `=>` would at the time (and
perhaps still :-) be seen as too close to `>=`.
Could it be that there were alread
15 matches
Mail list logo
