On 31/01/2022 5:23 am, Gregory P. Smith wrote:
-cc: python-steering-council
On Fri, Mar 5, 2021 at 4:26 PM Guido van Rossum mailto:gu...@python.org>> wrote:
On Fri, Mar 5, 2021 at 11:11 AM Brett Cannon mailto:br...@python.org>> wrote:
Speaking for myself ...
Ditto ...
-cc: python-steering-council
On Fri, Mar 5, 2021 at 4:26 PM Guido van Rossum wrote:
> 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 impro
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
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
