[Python-ideas] Re: Universal parsing library in the stdlib to alleviate security issues

On Thu, Jul 18, 2019 at 2:25 PM Nam Nguyen wrote: > If 1ms is a deal breaker, what is a more palatable latency? How much latency > would you trade for security? > Have you proven that this universal parser will solve the security problems? My apologies if you have and I missed it. ChrisA __

[Python-ideas] Re: Universal parsing library in the stdlib to alleviate security issues

On Wed, Jul 17, 2019 at 12:38 AM Barry Scott wrote: > But if your use cases call for performance, it is perfectly fine to > understand the tradeoffs, and opt in to the more appropriate solutions. > And, of course, maybe there is a solution that could satisfy *both*. > > Generally speaking, though

[Python-ideas] Re: Scope painting

On Jul 17, 2019, at 20:23, Andrew Barnert via Python-ideas wrote: > >> On Jul 17, 2019, at 18:41, Yonatan Zunger wrote: >> >> I'm in the middle of developing a fancy heap profiler for Python (for those >> times when tracemalloc isn't enough), and in the process, thought of a small >> change

[Python-ideas] Re: Scope painting

On Jul 17, 2019, at 18:41, Yonatan Zunger wrote: > > > I'm in the middle of developing a fancy heap profiler for Python (for those > times when tracemalloc isn't enough), and in the process, thought of a small > change in the interpreter which could have a lot of uses. I call it "scope > pain

[Python-ideas] Scope painting

Hi everyone, I'm in the middle of developing a fancy heap profiler for Python (for those times when tracemalloc isn't enough), and in the process, thought of a small change in the interpreter which could have a lot of uses. I call it "scope painting" because it lets you paint a label on an interpr

[Python-ideas] Re: Stdlib Module

On Thu, Jul 18, 2019 at 8:53 AM Christopher Barker wrote: > But I've always (which goes back to Python 1.5) thought that putting > platform-specific behaviour in standard modules was a wart. My prime example > is the os module -- it is a wrapper around platform specific modules, and > most of i

[Python-ideas] Re: Stdlib Module

On Tue, Jul 16, 2019 at 3:22 PM Steven D'Aprano wrote: > > > CPython is the reference implementation. It is expected that anything > > > shipped by CPython ought to be shipped by all other implementations, > > > unless there's a very good reason not to. > > > > I agree there, *almost*: I would de

[Python-ideas] Re: Non-standard evaluation for Python

On Jul 17, 2019, at 12:29, Anders Hovmöller wrote: > >>> On 17 Jul 2019, at 21:00, Andrew Barnert wrote: >>> >>> On Jul 17, 2019, at 10:45, Anders Hovmöller wrote: >>> > On 17 Jul 2019, at 19:08, Andrew Barnert wrote: > > On Jul 15, 2019, at 05:25, Anders Hovmöller wrote: >

[Python-ideas] Re: Non-standard evaluation for Python

> On 17 Jul 2019, at 21:00, Andrew Barnert wrote: > >> On Jul 17, 2019, at 10:45, Anders Hovmöller wrote: >> On 17 Jul 2019, at 19:08, Andrew Barnert wrote: On Jul 15, 2019, at 05:25, Anders Hovmöller wrote: >> >> What is positional? > >>> I didn’t come up with the

[Python-ideas] Re: Non-standard evaluation for Python

On Jul 17, 2019, at 10:45, Anders Hovmöller wrote: > >>> On 17 Jul 2019, at 19:08, Andrew Barnert wrote: >>> >>> On Jul 15, 2019, at 05:25, Anders Hovmöller wrote: > > What is positional? >> I didn’t come up with the plot example, so I don’t know the reason it took >> two functions.

[Python-ideas] Re: Non-standard evaluation for Python

> On 17 Jul 2019, at 19:08, Andrew Barnert wrote: > >> On Jul 15, 2019, at 05:25, Anders Hovmöller wrote: >> >> > (The fact that they’re positional, but passed as if they were keyword, > accepted as if they were keyword, and then pulled out by iterating **kw > in order is also

[Python-ideas] Re: Non-standard evaluation for Python

On Jul 15, 2019, at 05:25, Anders Hovmöller wrote: > > (The fact that they’re positional, but passed as if they were keyword, accepted as if they were keyword, and then pulled out by iterating **kw in order is also confusing.) >>> >>> What is positional? >> >> The name-value p

[Python-ideas] Re: Should tempfile.NamedTemporaryFile() not raise FileNotFoundError if the file does not exist at the moment of closing?

I think it's a fine idea. You should probably just file an issue and create a PR. Good luck! On Wed, Jul 17, 2019 at 8:35 AM Andrew Pashkin wrote: > What does everyone think about making "tempfile.NamedTemporaryFile()" not > raising "FileNotFoundError" in case if when it closes and the file is >

[Python-ideas] Should tempfile.NamedTemporaryFile() not raise FileNotFoundError if the file does not exist at the moment of closing?

What does everyone think about making "tempfile.NamedTemporaryFile()" not raising "FileNotFoundError" in case if when it closes and the file is already deleted? ___ Python-ideas mailing list -- python-ideas@python.org To unsubscribe send an email to pyt

[Python-ideas] Re: Universal parsing library in the stdlib to alleviate security issues

On Tue, Jul 16, 2019 at 09:17:07PM -0700, Nam Nguyen wrote: > Generally speaking, though, do you see 1 millisecond spent on parsing a URL > deal breaker? That seems pretty slow for today's PCs, and quite a regression compared to the existing urllib.parse.urlparse function. On my old PC, I can p

[Python-ideas] Re: Universal parsing library in the stdlib to alleviate security issues

> On 17 Jul 2019, at 05:17, Nam Nguyen wrote: > > On Tue, Jul 16, 2019 at 1:18 PM Barry > wrote: > > > > On 16 Jul 2019, at 04:47, Andrew Barnert via Python-ideas > > mailto:python-ideas@python.org>> wrote: > > > > How often do you need to parse a million URL