Re: Strange range

Path	csiph.com!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!not-for-mail
From	Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com>
Newsgroups	comp.lang.python
Subject	Re: Strange range
Date	Sun, 3 Apr 2016 17:08:21 +1000
Lines	37
Message-ID	<mailman.392.1459667304.28225.python-list@python.org> (permalink)
References	<87y48xjwqq.fsf@elektro.pacujo.net> <56fe76f2$0$22141$c3e8da3$5496439d@news.astraweb.com> <ndlvrt$1hlp$1@gioia.aioe.org> <mailman.311.1459521083.28225.python-list@python.org> <87lh4xjt37.fsf@elektro.pacujo.net> <1671ea2b-09ff-4745-a6e7-d2c57864cba3@googlegroups.com> <87zitbpwpr.fsf@elektro.pacujo.net> <mailman.375.1459631138.28225.python-list@python.org> <87vb3zpu49.fsf@elektro.pacujo.net> <1459665792.195389.567158250.1843796D@webmail.messagingengine.com>
Mime-Version	1.0
Content-Type	text/plain; charset=UTF-8
X-Trace	news.uni-berlin.de S+c0KMucbN68OYGczmX2BgGSJ8GpRXoIndCTwnO0Nw2Q==
Return-Path	<rosuav@gmail.com>
X-Original-To	python-list@python.org
Delivered-To	python-list@mail.python.org
X-Spam-Status	OK 0.025
X-Spam-Evidence	'H': 0.95; 'S': 0.00; 'cc:addr:python-list': 0.09; 'python': 0.10; 'syntax': 0.13; 'django': 0.13; '2016': 0.16; 'codebase': 0.16; 'devs': 0.16; 'elsewhere.': 0.16; 'from:addr:rosuav': 0.16; 'from:name:chris angelico': 0.16; 'keyword.': 0.16; 'received:io': 0.16; 'received:psf.io': 0.16; 'similarly,': 0.16; 'stdlib.': 0.16; 'usage,': 0.16; 'uses,': 0.16; 'wrote:': 0.16; 'app': 0.16; 'exists': 0.18; 'library,': 0.18; 'cc:2**0': 0.20; 'cc:addr:python.org': 0.20; 'proposed': 0.20; "aren't": 0.22; 'stephen': 0.22; 'code,': 0.23; 'references': 0.23; 'this:': 0.23; 'examples': 0.24; 'header:In- Reply-To:1': 0.24; 'all.': 0.24; "doesn't": 0.26; 'example': 0.26; 'developers': 0.26; 'expanding': 0.27; 'not.': 0.27; 'message- id:@mail.gmail.com': 0.27; '[2]': 0.27; 'change,': 0.27; 'this.': 0.28; 'measure': 0.29; 'pep': 0.29; 'url:peps': 0.29; 'code': 0.30; 'standards': 0.30; 'another': 0.32; '[1]': 0.32; 'older': 0.32; 'useful': 0.33; 'source': 0.33; 'url:python': 0.33; 'usually': 0.33; 'ones,': 0.33; 'proposals': 0.33; 'case,': 0.34; 'received:google.com': 0.35; 'attempt': 0.35; 'newer': 0.35; 'url:dev': 0.35; 'but': 0.36; 'should': 0.36; 'there': 0.36; 'url:org': 0.36; 'received:209.85': 0.36; 'pm,': 0.36; 'subject:: ': 0.37; 'two': 0.37; 'being': 0.37; 'say': 0.37; 'received:209.85.213': 0.37; 'received:209': 0.38; 'anything': 0.38; 'mean': 0.38; 'rather': 0.39; 'some': 0.40; 'easy': 0.60; 'body': 0.61; 'provide': 0.61; 'introduction': 0.63; 'more': 0.63; 'necessarily': 0.63; 'times': 0.63; 'benefit': 0.66; 'else.': 0.66; 'analysis': 0.72; 'bastion': 0.84; 'chrisa': 0.84; 'demonstrates': 0.84; 'favouring': 0.84; 'idiomatic': 0.84; 'proposals,': 0.84; 'to:none': 0.91; '359': 0.91; 'that),': 0.91
DKIM-Signature	v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:cc; bh=0fA+ScBIe/snSooY1ByDourAdJ5XLncuh30N3V3Rt9Y=; b=V5oKHdz2LClzPbgit7eVZBFeCvA9g+ObydeM2x8lj9wWfzc6/5O3BQnbXzEQz8zc6A 0NyRA/cmPH82YTUEodnXRsEVKazPHM8ukW3XCu+jesUhO7LdGp0HSF7l3NAEDpiDvjT6 Luoueyg2JIK3h/rVRZK0J90IuUbYB7Xw0cwBa1MIUDvQlsyeBxhM/U4cgMBD/PCvH0l7 C6DL5gRSidJZv439lIzbtZDuGHLpycYg7T464BP0pQ4y+Tiqh7+jfzo+Gc5OlI/LnVAQ YBaFfKvb00h65dkO3be05Vy5HycyL3GMkFmrtvRtWrmGGH+8xRuAwpSRYmv6/mzEIt2w hA9Q==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature	v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date :message-id:subject:from:cc; bh=0fA+ScBIe/snSooY1ByDourAdJ5XLncuh30N3V3Rt9Y=; b=Na8UJ0Le7WfDyRyE3csjMhFo85GDCCWWO43Qw4n67Cdg0zaLTjwIetbheKSdzVDNqW DAD1WK/U03j/+ItFnWaF1VUmT+pDXnvHzp57FYikJeqncUgTF/FPDBShTOTFh3L8KHKU tAUYfVXG6Lq0XSYLI0DNC/bgXHKamf4DHGX3TY47PtKjcTwX1m0RS5qaoJ23O/eiXm5t xfqv/erpggRsYLnxv6eVJ9hab0+rtVF4sEvLQlRc95aR+yQm8sWpepsp/4IsG4aK3ngu yQpvLj7TTSMxaeGQ3LnnTGM3Ljm1hb2/uHXHmoQLS88tA5ru2la7jcm8Ya2B+kr5YM+Z r0gg==
X-Gm-Message-State	AD7BkJKdEXNoXh9nLU6tjFkRGkziRIrOH4ChpRlaPJX3Iie2n6BD1NO3JoR0CRKXgGPfiUgwPgwpxYgNWCGoAg==
X-Received	by 10.107.169.32 with SMTP id s32mr2622835ioe.19.1459667301868; Sun, 03 Apr 2016 00:08:21 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To	<1459665792.195389.567158250.1843796D@webmail.messagingengine.com>
X-BeenThere	python-list@python.org
X-Mailman-Version	2.1.21
Precedence	list
List-Id	General discussion list for the Python programming language <python-list.python.org>
List-Unsubscribe	<https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-list>, <mailto:python-list-request@python.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive	<http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-list/>
List-Post	<mailto:python-list@python.org>
List-Help	<mailto:python-list-request@python.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe	<https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list>, <mailto:python-list-request@python.org?subject=subscribe>
Xref	csiph.com comp.lang.python:106353

Show key headers only | View raw

On Sun, Apr 3, 2016 at 4:43 PM, Stephen Hansen <me+python@ixokai.io> wrote:
> The stdlib exists as a bastion of stability above all else. Its
> standards aren't a reason to make a change (or, not to make a change,
> either). That doesn't mean its not useful to look at the standard
> library, but you should not enshrine it as the example of good or
> idiomatic code to measure decisions against. Most code exists outside
> the stdlib.

Expanding on this: There have been times when the stdlib has been
cited in proposals, such as the introduction of a new keyword. Out of
five plausible words, two have significant use in the stdlib, another
has a couple of uses, and two more have no references at all. Specific
example from PEP 359 [1]; the same line of analysis has also been used
elsewhere. Also, a proposed new syntax can attempt to justify its
benefit by taking examples from the stdlib, not because they will
necessarily be changed, but simply because it's a good-sized codebase
that all Python devs and tinkerers will have easy access to. PEP 463
[2] demonstrates this. Similarly, but in reverse: The stdlib can
provide examples showing how a proposal will _break_ existing code,
and how it should be fixed; PEP 479 [3] has a few examples, some from
the stdlib, some hypothetical. In each case, the stdlib is being
treated as simply "a body of Python code", and one which has a measure
of neutrality (we're not favouring web app developers by looking at
the Django source code, or numeric computational work by looking at
Pandas, or anything like that), and if anything, it's indicative of
older codebases rather than newer ones, which is usually good for
proposals that need to be conservative.

So in the case of range() usage, I would say that stdlib usage showing
"x in range(...)" would be highly significant, but *absence* of such
usage is not.

ChrisA

[1] https://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0359/#keyword
[2] https://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0463/#example-usage
[3] https://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0479/#examples-of-breakage

Thread

Strange range Marko Rauhamaa <marko@pacujo.net> - 2016-04-01 16:15 +0300
  Re: Strange range Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2016-04-02 00:24 +1100
  Re: Strange range Steven D'Aprano <steve@pearwood.info> - 2016-04-02 00:26 +1100
    Re: Strange range Marko Rauhamaa <marko@pacujo.net> - 2016-04-01 17:12 +0300
      Re: Strange range Random832 <random832@fastmail.com> - 2016-04-01 10:39 -0400
    Re: Strange range Fabien <fabien.maussion@gmail.com> - 2016-04-01 16:16 +0200
      Re: Strange range Jussi Piitulainen <jussi.piitulainen@helsinki.fi> - 2016-04-01 17:28 +0300
      Re: Strange range Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2016-04-02 01:31 +1100
        Re: Strange range Marko Rauhamaa <marko@pacujo.net> - 2016-04-01 17:34 +0300
          Re: Strange range Jussi Piitulainen <jussi.piitulainen@helsinki.fi> - 2016-04-01 17:44 +0300
          Re: Strange range Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2016-04-02 01:45 +1100
            Re: Strange range Marko Rauhamaa <marko@pacujo.net> - 2016-04-01 18:43 +0300
          Re: Strange range Erik <python@lucidity.plus.com> - 2016-04-01 20:58 +0100
            Re: Strange range Marko Rauhamaa <marko@pacujo.net> - 2016-04-01 23:14 +0300
              Re: Strange range Rob Gaddi <rgaddi@highlandtechnology.invalid> - 2016-04-01 20:21 +0000
                Re: Strange range Marko Rauhamaa <marko@pacujo.net> - 2016-04-01 23:44 +0300
              Re: Strange range Steven D'Aprano <steve@pearwood.info> - 2016-04-02 21:09 +1100
                Re: Strange range Marko Rauhamaa <marko@pacujo.net> - 2016-04-02 13:48 +0300
          Re: Strange range Ned Batchelder <ned@nedbatchelder.com> - 2016-04-02 12:47 -0700
            Re: Strange range Marko Rauhamaa <marko@pacujo.net> - 2016-04-02 23:44 +0300
              Re: Strange range Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2016-04-03 07:05 +1000
                Re: Strange range Marko Rauhamaa <marko@pacujo.net> - 2016-04-03 00:40 +0300
                Re: Strange range Ned Batchelder <ned@nedbatchelder.com> - 2016-04-02 14:50 -0700
                Re: Strange range Stephen Hansen <me+python@ixokai.io> - 2016-04-02 23:43 -0700
                Re: Strange range Marko Rauhamaa <marko@pacujo.net> - 2016-04-03 09:58 +0300
                Re: Strange range Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2016-04-03 17:10 +1000
                Re: Strange range Ethan Furman <ethan@stoneleaf.us> - 2016-04-03 09:28 -0700
                Re: Strange range Mark Lawrence <breamoreboy@yahoo.co.uk> - 2016-04-04 13:21 +0100
                Re: Strange range Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2016-04-03 17:08 +1000
              Re: Strange range Steven D'Aprano <steve@pearwood.info> - 2016-04-03 14:43 +1000
                Re: Strange range Random832 <random832@fastmail.com> - 2016-04-03 01:20 -0400
                Re: Strange range Steven D'Aprano <steve@pearwood.info> - 2016-04-03 15:28 +1000
      Re: Strange range Marko Rauhamaa <marko@pacujo.net> - 2016-04-01 17:32 +0300
  Re: Strange range Random832 <random832@fastmail.com> - 2016-04-01 10:42 -0400
  Re: Strange range Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2016-04-02 01:50 +1100
  Re: Strange range Ian Kelly <ian.g.kelly@gmail.com> - 2016-04-01 08:52 -0600

csiph-web