On Sun, Jan 09, 2022 at 08:42:14AM -0800, Christopher Barker wrote:
> Perhaps it's worth remembering that this thread spun off one about adding
> syntax to Python because the current syntax isn't capable of easily
> expressing an important type hinting concept (i.e. Callable).
I shall quote the
On Mon, Jan 10, 2022 at 12:05 PM Steven D'Aprano wrote:
>
> On Mon, Jan 10, 2022 at 05:39:42AM +1100, Chris Angelico wrote:
>
> > From my understanding, "x->y" would create a Callable if given two
> > *types*, but its meaning if given two other objects is still
> > undefined.
>
> The PEP requires
On Mon, Jan 10, 2022 at 05:39:42AM +1100, Chris Angelico wrote:
> From my understanding, "x->y" would create a Callable if given two
> *types*, but its meaning if given two other objects is still
> undefined.
The PEP requires parentheses around the argument list, so that would be
a SyntaxError.
Hi everyone,
I would like to start a discussion about a small PEP proposal to allow
parentheses in
assert statements to fix a common gotcha with assert statements.
Link to the PEP: https://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0679/
*Please, redirect all discussions to: *
El dom, 9 ene 2022 a las 10:50, Chris Angelico ()
escribió:
> On Mon, Jan 10, 2022 at 3:49 AM Christopher Barker
> wrote:
> > > If "x->y" is syntactically valid anywhere in Python code, it's not a
> > problem that there are no core data types for which it's meaningful.)
> >
> > Here's where I'm
On 9 Jan 2022 at 02:22:31, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
> On Sat, Jan 08, 2022 at 12:59:38AM +0100, jack.jan...@cwi.nl wrote:
>
> I posted this suggestion earlier in the callable type syntax discussion,
> at which point it was completely ignored. Possibly because it’s a really
> stupid idea, but let
On Mon, Jan 10, 2022 at 3:49 AM Christopher Barker wrote:
> > If "x->y" is syntactically valid anywhere in Python code, it's not a
> problem that there are no core data types for which it's meaningful.)
>
> Here's where I'm not so sure -- this looks a lot like a binary operator, but
> it behaves
Hi,
I would like to remind everybody that Python's support for OpenSSL 3.0
is preliminary [1]. Python compiles with OpenSSL 3.0.0 and simple code
kinda works. However there are known performance regressions, missing
features (e.g. usedforsecurity flag), and potential bugs cause by API
Perhaps it's worth remembering that this thread spun off one about adding
syntax to Python because the current syntax isn't capable of easily
expressing an important type hinting concept (i.e. Callable). So arguing
that Python is completely readable for type hints is a bit off-mark, isn't
it?
The
> Here is the type hint for `len`, taken from the stub file in typeshed:
>
> def len(__obj: Sized) -> int: ...
>
> Putting the mysterious double underscore naming convention aside, I do
> not find it credible that anyone capable of programming Python beyond a
> beginner level can find that
On Sun, Jan 9, 2022 at 7:35 PM Stephen J. Turnbull
wrote:
>
> Chris Angelico writes:
>
> > Not completely, just very minorly. I'm distinguishing between attacks
> > that can be triggered remotely, and those which require the attacker
> > to run specific Python code. For example, using ctypes
>
Chris Angelico writes:
> Not completely, just very minorly. I'm distinguishing between attacks
> that can be triggered remotely, and those which require the attacker
> to run specific Python code. For example, using ctypes
OK. AFAICT that was a red herring introduced to the thread solely to
12 matches
Mail list logo
