Hello all,
I am trying the TaskGroup class in the python 3.11 beta version. And I like it
a lot. It makes asynchronous programming intuitive enough even for the less
experienced like myself. I can see myself teaching this to my colleges when
they run linux parallel subprocesses. I will try to
On Sun, Jun 12, 2022, 16:22 Bluenix wrote:
> I stumbled upon PEP 671 again today, and for what it's worth I fully agree
> with everything said here.
>
> For the same reasons as you listed, I am generally opposed to PEP 671.
> Wrapping functions in one way or another is extremely common and this P
To clarify my statement about readability of the '@' prefix option…
I think that its meaning is less clear if one doesn't already know what the
syntax means. I think the code would be easier to skim, however, using that
option after one does know its meaning.
My favorite options are '@' or '?='
On Mon, 13 Jun 2022 at 18:31, Steve Jorgensen wrote:
>
> Ah and since previous parameters can be referenced, and `self` or `cls` is
> the first argument to any method, that is always available to default value
> expressions. Correct?
Correct!
ChrisA
Ah and since previous parameters can be referenced, and `self` or `cls` is the
first argument to any method, that is always available to default value
expressions. Correct?
___
Python-ideas mailing list -- python-ideas@python.org
To unsubscribe send an
On Mon, 13 Jun 2022 at 17:18, Steve Jorgensen wrote:
>
> One thing was not clear to me from the current PEP 671 text.
>
> When that is used in a method, what is the closure for the expressions?
> Would/should assignments in the class definition be available or only global
> variables in the modu
One thing was not clear to me from the current PEP 671 text.
When that is used in a method, what is the closure for the expressions?
Would/should assignments in the class definition be available or only global
variables in the module and local variables in the function (if applicable) in
which
I couldn't figure out the best place in the reply tree to post this, so
replying to the OP, answering the questions, taking into account other
discussion that has happened.
> 1) If this feature existed in Python 3.11 exactly as described, would
you use it?
Definitely
> 2) Independently: Is the
