On Sat, Dec 4, 2021 at 2:34 PM Steven D'Aprano wrote:
>
> On Fri, Dec 03, 2021 at 10:40:42AM +1100, Chris Angelico wrote:
>
> > Here's what you get:
> >
> > >>> def f(lst=>[], n=>len(lst)): ...
> > ...
> > >>> f.__defaults_extra__
> > ('[]', 'len(lst)')
> >
> > String representation, but exactly w
On Sat, Dec 4, 2021 at 2:52 PM Rob Cliffe via Python-ideas
wrote:
>
>
>
> On 04/12/2021 01:06, Chris Angelico wrote:
> > On Sat, Dec 4, 2021 at 11:59 AM Rob Cliffe via Python-ideas
> > wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >> On 03/12/2021 22:38, Chris Angelico wrote:
> >>> On Sat, Dec 4, 2021 at 8:18 AM Rob Cliffe
On 04/12/2021 01:06, Chris Angelico wrote:
On Sat, Dec 4, 2021 at 11:59 AM Rob Cliffe via Python-ideas
wrote:
On 03/12/2021 22:38, Chris Angelico wrote:
On Sat, Dec 4, 2021 at 8:18 AM Rob Cliffe via Python-ideas
wrote:
On 03/12/2021 19:32, Adam Johnson wrote:
The first unwelcome surpri
On Fri, Dec 03, 2021 at 10:40:42AM +1100, Chris Angelico wrote:
> Here's what you get:
>
> >>> def f(lst=>[], n=>len(lst)): ...
> ...
> >>> f.__defaults_extra__
> ('[]', 'len(lst)')
>
> String representation, but exactly what the default is.
Excellent. And you've just proven that we can evaluat
On Thu, Dec 02, 2021 at 11:21:59AM -0800, Brendan Barnwell wrote:
> As has happened often in these threads, it seems different people
> mean different things by "default value".
>
> What you are calling "the default value" is "a thing that is used at
> call time if no value is
On Sat, Dec 4, 2021 at 11:59 AM Rob Cliffe via Python-ideas
wrote:
>
>
>
> On 03/12/2021 22:38, Chris Angelico wrote:
> > On Sat, Dec 4, 2021 at 8:18 AM Rob Cliffe via Python-ideas
> > wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >> On 03/12/2021 19:32, Adam Johnson wrote:
> >>> The first unwelcome surprise was:
> >>>
> >
On 03/12/2021 22:38, Chris Angelico wrote:
On Sat, Dec 4, 2021 at 8:18 AM Rob Cliffe via Python-ideas
wrote:
On 03/12/2021 19:32, Adam Johnson wrote:
The first unwelcome surprise was:
>>> def func(a=>[]):
... return a
...
>>> import inspect
>>> inspect.s
On Sat, Dec 4, 2021 at 6:33 AM Adam Johnson wrote:
> > 5) Do you know how to compile CPython from source, and would you be
> > willing to try this out? Please? :)
>
> I have.
>
> The first unwelcome surprise was:
>
> >>> def func(a=>[]):
> ... return a
> ...
>
> >>> import insp
On Sat, Dec 4, 2021 at 8:18 AM Rob Cliffe via Python-ideas
wrote:
>
>
>
> On 03/12/2021 19:32, Adam Johnson wrote:
> >
> > The first unwelcome surprise was:
> >
> > >>> def func(a=>[]):
> > ... return a
> > ...
> >
> > >>> import inspect
> > >>> inspect.signature(func)
On 03/12/2021 19:32, Adam Johnson wrote:
The first unwelcome surprise was:
>>> def func(a=>[]):
... return a
...
>>> import inspect
>>> inspect.signature(func).parameters['a'].default
Ellipsis
Here the current behaviour of returning `Ellipsis` is very unfor
A woefully incomplete review of default argument evaluation in other
languages. Updates and corrections are welcome.
Out of 22 languages apart from Python:
- 3 use early binding (default is evaluated at compile or function
definition time);
- 12 use late binding (default is evaluated at call
On Wed, 1 Dec 2021 at 06:19, Chris Angelico wrote:
>
> I've just updated PEP 671 https://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0671/
> with some additional information about the reference implementation,
> and some clarifications elsewhere.
>
> *PEP 671: Syntax for late-bound function argument defaults*
>
>
On Sat, Dec 4, 2021 at 4:48 AM Eric V. Smith wrote:
>
> On 12/2/2021 6:36 PM, Chris Angelico wrote:
> > On Fri, Dec 3, 2021 at 7:54 AM Eric V. Smith wrote:
> >>
> >> Say I have a function with an early-bound default. I can inspect it and
> >> I can change it. One reason to inspect it is so that I
On 12/2/2021 6:36 PM, Chris Angelico wrote:
On Fri, Dec 3, 2021 at 7:54 AM Eric V. Smith wrote:
Say I have a function with an early-bound default. I can inspect it and
I can change it. One reason to inspect it is so that I can call the
function with its default values. This is a form of wrappi
On Sat, Dec 4, 2021 at 3:47 AM Andrew Jaffe wrote:
> b) I think another motivation that hasn't been highlighted is teaching
> -- perhaps surprisingly, I think adding this will make some aspects of
> teaching *easier*. Mutable defaults are known to be confusing to Python
> neophytes; I have certain
On 01/12/2021 06:16, Chris Angelico wrote:> I've just updated PEP 671
https://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0671/
> with some additional information about the reference implementation,
> and some clarifications elsewhere.
>
> *PEP 671: Syntax for late-bound function argument defaults*
>
> Questions
Good catch! You can submit a PR or issue to the peps project in the Python
organization on GitHub.
On Fri, Dec 3, 2021 at 00:24 wrote:
> Hi!
> When I read PEP7 and check Cpython source code, I found a deficiency that
> in https://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0007/#code-lay-out.
> In this section,
> On 3 Dec 2021, at 15:23, TobiasHT wrote:
>
> The GIL has been a widely discussed topic in the Python community. It's has
> it's advantages and disadvantages.
> I was suggesting that an official way be placed in the Python threading
> module to release the GIL if one needs to perform some t
"# or if you know what the default is:
c = some_default
if not cond: c = 42
func(a, b, c)"
I would argue that, of the three examples; this one is the most problematic
because it overly couples your code to an implementation detail of the
function and makes it unnecessarily brittle to change.
On t
The GIL has been a widely discussed topic in the Python community. It's has
it's advantages and disadvantages.
I was suggesting that an official way be placed in the Python threading module
to release the GIL if one needs to perform some tasks that don't need the GIL.
It could be something as si
On Tue, 30 Nov 2021 at 04:55, Chris Angelico wrote:
>
> if this:
>
> 1 |> add(2)
>
> is exactly equivalent to this:
>
> add(1, 2)
>
> then neither the iterator nor the consumer needs to be aware of the
> new protocol.
>
Along with such an operator form of functools.partial:
```
x |> f # equiva
Hi!
When I read PEP7 and check Cpython source code, I found a deficiency that in
https://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0007/#code-lay-out.
In this section, document said that
'''
For external functions and variables, we always have a declaration in an
appropriate header file in the "Include" direc
On Fri, Dec 03, 2021 at 04:15:37PM +1100, Chris Angelico wrote:
> So I don't think anyone is truly concerned about the pure "don't pass
> the argument" case. The problem is the "maybe pass the argument" case.
> That ends up looking like this:
>
> c = 42
> if cond: func(a, b)
> else: func(a, b, c)
23 matches
Mail list logo
