Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.lang.python > #84181 > unrolled thread
| Started by | Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2015-01-22 15:30 +1100 |
| Last post | 2015-01-30 02:11 +0000 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 277 — 34 participants |
Back to article view | Back to comp.lang.python
Python is DOOMED! Again! Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2015-01-22 15:30 +1100
Re: Python is DOOMED! Again! Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2015-01-22 15:43 +1100
Re: Python is DOOMED! Again! Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2015-01-21 21:35 -0800
Re: Python is DOOMED! Again! Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2015-01-21 21:56 -0800
Re: Python is DOOMED! Again! Mark Lawrence <breamoreboy@yahoo.co.uk> - 2015-01-22 06:12 +0000
Re: Python is DOOMED! Again! Nicholas Cole <nicholas.cole@gmail.com> - 2015-01-22 05:50 +0000
Re: Python is DOOMED! Again! Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2015-01-22 16:56 +1100
Re: Python is DOOMED! Again! Ethan Furman <ethan@stoneleaf.us> - 2015-01-21 22:02 -0800
Re: Python is DOOMED! Again! Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2015-01-22 18:23 +1100
Re: Python is DOOMED! Again! Mario Figueiredo <marfig@gmail.com> - 2015-01-22 09:10 +0100
Re: Python is DOOMED! Again! Nicholas Cole <nicholas.cole@gmail.com> - 2015-01-22 09:37 +0000
Re: Python is DOOMED! Again! alex23 <wuwei23@gmail.com> - 2015-01-23 20:10 +1000
Re: Python is DOOMED! Again! Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2015-01-22 21:09 +1100
Re: Python is DOOMED! Again! Mario Figueiredo <marfig@gmail.com> - 2015-01-22 10:37 +0000
Re: Python is DOOMED! Again! Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2015-01-22 21:44 +1100
Re: Python is DOOMED! Again! Mario Figueiredo <marfig@gmail.com> - 2015-01-22 11:06 +0000
Re: Python is DOOMED! Again! Rick Johnson <rantingrickjohnson@gmail.com> - 2015-01-22 12:24 -0800
Re: Python is DOOMED! Again! Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2015-01-23 01:57 +1100
Re: Python is DOOMED! Again! Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2015-01-23 02:13 +1100
Python is DOOMED! Again! Nicholas Cole <nicholas.cole@gmail.com> - 2015-01-22 10:46 +0000
Re: Python is DOOMED! Again! Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2015-01-22 21:50 +1100
Re: Python is DOOMED! Again! Mario Figueiredo <marfig@gmail.com> - 2015-01-22 11:12 +0000
Re: Python is DOOMED! Again! Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2015-01-22 23:14 +1100
Re: Python is DOOMED! Again! Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2015-01-23 01:16 +1100
Re: Python is DOOMED! Again! Jon Ribbens <jon+usenet@unequivocal.co.uk> - 2015-01-22 14:33 +0000
Re: Python is DOOMED! Again! Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2015-01-23 02:11 +1100
Re: Python is DOOMED! Again! Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2015-01-23 21:59 +1100
Re: Python is DOOMED! Again! Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2015-01-23 22:38 +1100
Re: Python is DOOMED! Again! Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2015-01-24 17:35 +1100
Re: Python is DOOMED! Again! Mark Lawrence <breamoreboy@yahoo.co.uk> - 2015-01-24 14:42 +0000
Re: Python is DOOMED! Again! Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2015-01-25 03:00 +1100
Re: Python is DOOMED! Again! Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2015-01-25 03:27 +1100
Re: Python is DOOMED! Again! Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2015-01-25 04:31 +1100
Re: Python is DOOMED! Again! Tim Chase <python.list@tim.thechases.com> - 2015-01-24 12:46 -0600
Re: Python is DOOMED! Again! Rustom Mody <rustompmody@gmail.com> - 2015-01-24 10:59 -0800
Re: Python is DOOMED! Again! Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2015-01-25 13:22 +1100
Re: Python is DOOMED! Again! alister <alister.nospam.ware@ntlworld.com> - 2015-01-24 21:14 +0000
Re: Python is DOOMED! Again! Ian Kelly <ian.g.kelly@gmail.com> - 2015-01-24 14:51 -0700
Re: Python is DOOMED! Again! Mario Figueiredo <marfig@gmail.com> - 2015-01-24 23:30 +0100
Re: Python is DOOMED! Again! BartC <bc@freeuk.com> - 2015-01-26 17:00 +0000
Re: Python is DOOMED! Again! Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2015-01-27 11:22 +1100
Re: Python is DOOMED! Again! Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2015-01-22 11:25 -0800
Re: Python is DOOMED! Again! Mark Lawrence <breamoreboy@yahoo.co.uk> - 2015-01-22 19:56 +0000
Re: Python is DOOMED! Again! Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2015-01-23 12:41 +1100
Re: Python is DOOMED! Again! Ian Kelly <ian.g.kelly@gmail.com> - 2015-01-22 14:24 -0700
Re: Python is DOOMED! Again! Rustom Mody <rustompmody@gmail.com> - 2015-01-22 18:59 -0800
Re: Python is DOOMED! Again! Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2015-01-23 00:11 -0800
Re: Python is DOOMED! Again! Ian Kelly <ian.g.kelly@gmail.com> - 2015-01-23 09:28 -0700
Re: Python is DOOMED! Again! Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2015-01-23 16:37 +1100
Re: Python is DOOMED! Again! Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2015-01-22 11:23 -0800
Re: Python is DOOMED! Again! Rick Johnson <rantingrickjohnson@gmail.com> - 2015-01-22 00:42 -0800
Re: Python is DOOMED! Again! Marko Rauhamaa <marko@pacujo.net> - 2015-01-22 12:05 +0200
Re: Python is DOOMED! Again! Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2015-01-22 21:13 +1100
Re: Python is DOOMED! Again! Sturla Molden <sturla.molden@gmail.com> - 2015-01-22 18:11 +0000
Re: Python is DOOMED! Again! Mario Figueiredo <marfig@gmail.com> - 2015-01-22 10:31 +0000
Re: Python is DOOMED! Again! Rick Johnson <rantingrickjohnson@gmail.com> - 2015-01-22 12:23 -0800
Re: Python is DOOMED! Again! MRAB <python@mrabarnett.plus.com> - 2015-01-22 20:46 +0000
Re: Python is DOOMED! Again! Mario Figueiredo <marfig@gmail.com> - 2015-01-22 22:06 +0100
Re: Python is DOOMED! Again! albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2015-02-08 00:45 +0000
Re: Python is DOOMED! Again! Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2015-02-08 12:01 +1100
Re: Python is DOOMED! Again! Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2015-02-08 18:55 +1100
Re: Python is DOOMED! Again! Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2015-02-08 19:21 +1100
Re: Python is DOOMED! Again! Ian Kelly <ian.g.kelly@gmail.com> - 2015-02-08 01:31 -0700
Re: Python is DOOMED! Again! Marko Rauhamaa <marko@pacujo.net> - 2015-02-08 12:17 +0200
Re: Python is DOOMED! Again! Mark Lawrence <breamoreboy@yahoo.co.uk> - 2015-01-22 06:22 +0000
Re: Python is DOOMED! Again! Rick Johnson <rantingrickjohnson@gmail.com> - 2015-01-21 22:25 -0800
Re: Python is DOOMED! Again! Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2015-01-21 22:48 -0800
Re: Python is DOOMED! Again! Rick Johnson <rantingrickjohnson@gmail.com> - 2015-01-22 00:24 -0800
Re: Python is DOOMED! Again! Mark Lawrence <breamoreboy@yahoo.co.uk> - 2015-01-22 08:40 +0000
Re: Python is DOOMED! Again! Grant Edwards <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2015-01-23 03:40 +0000
Re: Python is DOOMED! Again! Terry Reedy <tjreedy@udel.edu> - 2015-01-22 14:20 -0500
Re: Python is DOOMED! Again! Nicholas Cole <nicholas.cole@gmail.com> - 2015-01-22 07:40 +0000
Re: Python is DOOMED! Again! Mark Lawrence <breamoreboy@yahoo.co.uk> - 2015-01-22 09:10 +0000
Re: Python is DOOMED! Again! Sturla Molden <sturla.molden@gmail.com> - 2015-01-22 18:03 +0000
Re: Python is DOOMED! Again! Marko Rauhamaa <marko@pacujo.net> - 2015-01-22 21:08 +0200
Re: Python is DOOMED! Again! wxjmfauth@gmail.com - 2015-01-23 01:19 -0800
Re: Python is DOOMED! Again! Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2015-01-23 16:34 +1100
Re: Python is DOOMED! Again! Skip Montanaro <skip.montanaro@gmail.com> - 2015-01-22 12:14 -0600
Re: Python is DOOMED! Again! Rick Johnson <rantingrickjohnson@gmail.com> - 2015-01-22 12:38 -0800
Re: Python is DOOMED! Again! Sturla Molden <sturla.molden@gmail.com> - 2015-01-22 18:23 +0000
Re: Python is DOOMED! Again! Mark Lawrence <breamoreboy@yahoo.co.uk> - 2015-01-22 18:28 +0000
Re: Python is DOOMED! Again! Marko Rauhamaa <marko@pacujo.net> - 2015-01-22 21:16 +0200
Re: Python is DOOMED! Again! Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2015-01-22 11:36 -0800
Re: Python is DOOMED! Again! Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2015-01-23 11:16 +1100
Re: Python is DOOMED! Again! Mark Lawrence <breamoreboy@yahoo.co.uk> - 2015-01-23 06:29 +0000
Re: Python is DOOMED! Again! Rick Johnson <rantingrickjohnson@gmail.com> - 2015-01-22 12:44 -0800
Re: Python is DOOMED! Again! Mark Lawrence <breamoreboy@yahoo.co.uk> - 2015-01-22 20:50 +0000
Re: Python is DOOMED! Again! Mario Figueiredo <marfig@gmail.com> - 2015-01-22 23:25 +0100
Re: Python is DOOMED! Again! Rick Johnson <rantingrickjohnson@gmail.com> - 2015-01-22 17:06 -0800
Re: Python is DOOMED! Again! Terry Reedy <tjreedy@udel.edu> - 2015-01-22 22:59 -0500
Re: Python is DOOMED! Again! Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2015-01-23 15:23 +1100
Re: Python is DOOMED! Again! Rick Johnson <rantingrickjohnson@gmail.com> - 2015-01-23 19:00 -0800
Re: Python is DOOMED! Again! Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2015-01-24 18:48 +1100
Re: Python is DOOMED! Again! Mario Figueiredo <marfig@gmail.com> - 2015-01-24 09:30 +0000
Re: Python is DOOMED! Again! Rick Johnson <rantingrickjohnson@gmail.com> - 2015-01-24 15:20 -0800
Re: Python is DOOMED! Again! Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2015-01-25 10:30 +1100
Re: Python is DOOMED! Again! Mario Figueiredo <marfig@gmail.com> - 2015-01-25 00:39 +0100
Re: Python is DOOMED! Again! Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2015-01-25 10:44 +1100
Re: Python is DOOMED! Again! Mark Lawrence <breamoreboy@yahoo.co.uk> - 2015-01-24 23:55 +0000
Re: Python is DOOMED! Again! Rick Johnson <rantingrickjohnson@gmail.com> - 2015-01-24 17:00 -0800
Re: Python is DOOMED! Again! Mark Lawrence <breamoreboy@yahoo.co.uk> - 2015-01-25 02:28 +0000
Re: Python is DOOMED! Again! wxjmfauth@gmail.com - 2015-01-25 10:57 -0800
Re: Python is DOOMED! Again! random832@fastmail.us - 2015-01-26 10:01 -0500
Re: Python is DOOMED! Again! Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2015-01-27 11:11 +1100
Re: Python is DOOMED! Again! Dan Sommers <dan@tombstonezero.net> - 2015-01-27 01:09 +0000
Re: Python is DOOMED! Again! Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2015-01-27 17:36 +1100
Re: Python is DOOMED! Again! Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2015-01-27 18:59 +1100
Re: Python is DOOMED! Again! Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2015-01-27 19:03 +1100
Re: Python is DOOMED! Again! random832@fastmail.us - 2015-01-27 12:26 -0500
Re: Python is DOOMED! Again! Mark Lawrence <breamoreboy@yahoo.co.uk> - 2015-01-27 17:40 +0000
Re: Python is DOOMED! Again! Rick Johnson <rantingrickjohnson@gmail.com> - 2015-01-26 17:10 -0800
Re: Python is DOOMED! Again! Steven D'Aprano <steve@pearwood.info> - 2015-01-27 06:32 +0000
Re: Python is DOOMED! Again! random832@fastmail.us - 2015-01-27 12:35 -0500
Re: Python is DOOMED! Again! random832@fastmail.us - 2015-01-27 12:37 -0500
Re: Python is DOOMED! Again! Mario Figueiredo <marfig@gmail.com> - 2015-01-27 18:59 +0100
Re: Python is DOOMED! Again! Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2015-01-28 07:40 +1100
Re: Python is DOOMED! Again! Mario Figueiredo <marfig@gmail.com> - 2015-01-27 21:58 +0100
Re: Python is DOOMED! Again! Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2015-01-28 08:08 +1100
Re: Python is DOOMED! Again! Mario Figueiredo <marfig@gmail.com> - 2015-01-27 22:19 +0100
Re: Python is DOOMED! Again! Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2015-01-28 08:24 +1100
Re: Python is DOOMED! Again! Mario Figueiredo <marfig@gmail.com> - 2015-01-27 22:35 +0100
Re: Python is DOOMED! Again! Mario Figueiredo <marfig@gmail.com> - 2015-01-27 22:39 +0100
Re: Python is DOOMED! Again! Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2015-01-28 08:53 +1100
Re: Python is DOOMED! Again! Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2015-01-28 13:05 +1100
Re: Python is DOOMED! Again! Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2015-01-28 12:26 +1100
Re: Python is DOOMED! Again! Skip Montanaro <skip.montanaro@gmail.com> - 2015-01-28 08:10 -0600
Re: Python is DOOMED! Again! Mario Figueiredo <marfig@gmail.com> - 2015-01-28 16:04 +0100
Re: Python is DOOMED! Again! wxjmfauth@gmail.com - 2015-01-28 07:40 -0800
Re: Python is DOOMED! Again! Ian Kelly <ian.g.kelly@gmail.com> - 2015-01-28 10:33 -0700
Re: Python is DOOMED! Again! Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2015-01-29 11:37 +1100
Re: Python is DOOMED! Again! Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2015-01-29 11:43 +1100
Re: Python is DOOMED! Again! Mario Figueiredo <marfig@gmail.com> - 2015-01-29 09:34 +0100
Re: Python is DOOMED! Again! Ian Kelly <ian.g.kelly@gmail.com> - 2015-01-29 09:30 -0700
Re: Python is DOOMED! Again! Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2015-01-30 03:41 +1100
Re: Python is DOOMED! Again! Mark Lawrence <breamoreboy@yahoo.co.uk> - 2015-01-28 18:16 +0000
Re: Python is DOOMED! Again! Mario Figueiredo <marfig@gmail.com> - 2015-01-29 09:23 +0100
Re: Python is DOOMED! Again! Mark Lawrence <breamoreboy@yahoo.co.uk> - 2015-01-29 08:49 +0000
Re: Python is DOOMED! Again! Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2015-01-30 03:11 +1100
Re: Python is DOOMED! Again! Rick Johnson <rantingrickjohnson@gmail.com> - 2015-01-29 13:12 -0800
Re: Python is DOOMED! Again! Mario Figueiredo <marfig@gmail.com> - 2015-01-30 19:36 +0100
Re: Python is DOOMED! Again! Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2015-02-01 14:06 +1100
Re: Python is DOOMED! Again! Mario Figueiredo <marfig@gmail.com> - 2015-01-30 19:42 +0100
Re: Python is DOOMED! Again! Ian Kelly <ian.g.kelly@gmail.com> - 2015-01-30 14:50 -0700
Re: Python is DOOMED! Again! Skip Montanaro <skip.montanaro@gmail.com> - 2015-01-28 12:34 -0600
Re: Python is DOOMED! Again! Skip Montanaro <skip.montanaro@gmail.com> - 2015-01-28 12:36 -0600
Re: Python is DOOMED! Again! random832@fastmail.us - 2015-01-29 09:08 -0500
Re: Python is DOOMED! Again! Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2015-01-30 02:56 +1100
Re: Python is DOOMED! Again! random832@fastmail.us - 2015-01-29 13:23 -0500
Re: Python is DOOMED! Again! Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2015-01-31 22:56 +1100
Re: Python is DOOMED! Again! Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2015-02-01 01:53 +1100
Re: Python is DOOMED! Again! Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2015-02-01 14:16 +1100
Re: Python is DOOMED! Again! Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2015-02-01 14:46 +1100
Re: Python is DOOMED! Again! Ethan Furman <ethan@stoneleaf.us> - 2015-01-31 20:31 -0800
dunder-docs (was Python is DOOMED! Again!) Rustom Mody <rustompmody@gmail.com> - 2015-01-31 21:36 -0800
Re: dunder-docs (was Python is DOOMED! Again!) Ethan Furman <ethan@stoneleaf.us> - 2015-02-01 00:12 -0800
Re: dunder-docs (was Python is DOOMED! Again!) Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2015-02-02 03:20 +1100
Re: dunder-docs (was Python is DOOMED! Again!) Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2015-02-02 03:55 +1100
Re: dunder-docs (was Python is DOOMED! Again!) Ian Kelly <ian.g.kelly@gmail.com> - 2015-02-01 10:31 -0700
Re: dunder-docs (was Python is DOOMED! Again!) Rustom Mody <rustompmody@gmail.com> - 2015-02-01 19:52 -0800
Re: dunder-docs (was Python is DOOMED! Again!) Rustom Mody <rustompmody@gmail.com> - 2015-02-01 20:04 -0800
Re: dunder-docs (was Python is DOOMED! Again!) Rustom Mody <rustompmody@gmail.com> - 2015-02-01 20:22 -0800
Re: dunder-docs (was Python is DOOMED! Again!) Gregory Ewing <greg.ewing@canterbury.ac.nz> - 2015-02-02 17:55 +1300
Re: dunder-docs (was Python is DOOMED! Again!) Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2015-02-02 18:15 +1100
Re: dunder-docs (was Python is DOOMED! Again!) Devin Jeanpierre <jeanpierreda@gmail.com> - 2015-02-01 23:41 -0800
Re: dunder-docs (was Python is DOOMED! Again!) Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2015-02-02 23:06 +1100
Re: dunder-docs (was Python is DOOMED! Again!) Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2015-02-02 23:09 +1100
Re: dunder-docs (was Python is DOOMED! Again!) Gregory Ewing <greg.ewing@canterbury.ac.nz> - 2015-02-04 00:58 +1300
Re: dunder-docs (was Python is DOOMED! Again!) Devin Jeanpierre <jeanpierreda@gmail.com> - 2015-02-02 05:00 -0800
Re: dunder-docs (was Python is DOOMED! Again!) Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2015-02-03 01:07 +1100
Re: dunder-docs (was Python is DOOMED! Again!) Devin Jeanpierre <jeanpierreda@gmail.com> - 2015-02-03 01:24 -0800
Re: dunder-docs (was Python is DOOMED! Again!) Marko Rauhamaa <marko@pacujo.net> - 2015-02-03 12:38 +0200
Re: dunder-docs (was Python is DOOMED! Again!) Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2015-02-03 21:49 +1100
Re: dunder-docs (was Python is DOOMED! Again!) Marko Rauhamaa <marko@pacujo.net> - 2015-02-03 13:27 +0200
Re: dunder-docs (was Python is DOOMED! Again!) Gregory Ewing <greg.ewing@canterbury.ac.nz> - 2015-02-04 10:12 +1300
Re: dunder-docs (was Python is DOOMED! Again!) Marko Rauhamaa <marko@pacujo.net> - 2015-02-03 23:28 +0200
Re: dunder-docs (was Python is DOOMED! Again!) Gregory Ewing <greg.ewing@canterbury.ac.nz> - 2015-02-04 11:43 +1300
Re: dunder-docs (was Python is DOOMED! Again!) Marko Rauhamaa <marko@pacujo.net> - 2015-02-04 01:32 +0200
Re: dunder-docs (was Python is DOOMED! Again!) Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2015-02-04 10:39 +1100
Re: dunder-docs (was Python is DOOMED! Again!) Mark Lawrence <breamoreboy@yahoo.co.uk> - 2015-02-03 23:41 +0000
Re: dunder-docs (was Python is DOOMED! Again!) Ethan Furman <ethan@stoneleaf.us> - 2015-02-03 15:55 -0800
Re: dunder-docs (was Python is DOOMED! Again!) Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2015-02-04 13:30 +1100
Re: dunder-docs (was Python is DOOMED! Again!) Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2015-02-04 12:57 +1100
Re: dunder-docs (was Python is DOOMED! Again!) Gregory Ewing <greg.ewing@canterbury.ac.nz> - 2015-02-04 19:04 +1300
Re: dunder-docs (was Python is DOOMED! Again!) Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2015-02-04 04:40 +1100
Re: dunder-docs (was Python is DOOMED! Again!) Gregory Ewing <greg.ewing@canterbury.ac.nz> - 2015-02-04 10:39 +1300
Re: dunder-docs (was Python is DOOMED! Again!) Ian Kelly <ian.g.kelly@gmail.com> - 2015-02-03 15:04 -0700
Re: dunder-docs (was Python is DOOMED! Again!) Rick Johnson <rantingrickjohnson@gmail.com> - 2015-02-03 18:31 -0800
Re: dunder-docs (was Python is DOOMED! Again!) Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2015-02-04 09:19 +1100
Re: dunder-docs (was Python is DOOMED! Again!) Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2015-02-04 13:30 +1100
Re: dunder-docs (was Python is DOOMED! Again!) Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2015-02-04 15:58 +1100
Re: dunder-docs (was Python is DOOMED! Again!) Gregory Ewing <greg.ewing@canterbury.ac.nz> - 2015-02-04 19:22 +1300
Re: dunder-docs (was Python is DOOMED! Again!) Gregory Ewing <greg.ewing@canterbury.ac.nz> - 2015-02-04 19:22 +1300
Re: dunder-docs (was Python is DOOMED! Again!) Devin Jeanpierre <jeanpierreda@gmail.com> - 2015-02-02 05:02 -0800
Re: dunder-docs (was Python is DOOMED! Again!) Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2015-02-03 01:20 +1100
Re: dunder-docs (was Python is DOOMED! Again!) Devin Jeanpierre <jeanpierreda@gmail.com> - 2015-02-03 01:25 -0800
Re: dunder-docs (was Python is DOOMED! Again!) Gregory Ewing <greg.ewing@canterbury.ac.nz> - 2015-02-04 00:32 +1300
Re: dunder-docs (was Python is DOOMED! Again!) Vito De Tullio <vito.detullio@gmail.com> - 2015-02-02 06:26 +0100
Re: dunder-docs (was Python is DOOMED! Again!) Rustom Mody <rustompmody@gmail.com> - 2015-02-02 04:27 -0800
Re: dunder-docs (was Python is DOOMED! Again!) Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2015-02-02 23:43 +1100
Re: dunder-docs (was Python is DOOMED! Again!) Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2015-02-02 07:45 +1100
Re: dunder-docs (was Python is DOOMED! Again!) Emile van Sebille <emile@fenx.com> - 2015-02-01 12:51 -0800
Re: Python is DOOMED! Again! Dennis Lee Bieber <wlfraed@ix.netcom.com> - 2015-02-01 11:35 -0500
Re: Python is DOOMED! Again! Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2015-01-31 22:12 -0800
Re: Python is DOOMED! Again! Devin Jeanpierre <jeanpierreda@gmail.com> - 2015-01-31 22:54 -0800
Re: Python is DOOMED! Again! Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2015-02-02 03:34 +1100
Re: Python is DOOMED! Again! Devin Jeanpierre <jeanpierreda@gmail.com> - 2015-02-01 08:54 -0800
Re: Python is DOOMED! Again! Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2015-02-02 04:09 +1100
Re: Python is DOOMED! Again! Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2015-02-01 14:02 -0800
Re: Python is DOOMED! Again! Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2015-02-01 14:27 -0800
Re: Python is DOOMED! Again! Devin Jeanpierre <jeanpierreda@gmail.com> - 2015-02-01 14:52 -0800
Re: Python is DOOMED! Again! Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2015-02-02 13:03 +1100
Re: Python is DOOMED! Again! Gregory Ewing <greg.ewing@canterbury.ac.nz> - 2015-02-02 18:46 +1300
Re: Python is DOOMED! Again! Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2015-02-02 03:31 +1100
Re: Python is DOOMED! Again! Devin Jeanpierre <jeanpierreda@gmail.com> - 2015-02-01 09:45 -0800
Re: Python is DOOMED! Again! Gregory Ewing <greg.ewing@canterbury.ac.nz> - 2015-02-02 18:19 +1300
Re: Python is DOOMED! Again! Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2015-02-02 16:38 +1100
Re: Python is DOOMED! Again! Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2015-02-01 22:07 -0800
Re: Python is DOOMED! Again! Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2015-02-02 17:16 +1100
Re: Python is DOOMED! Again! Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2015-02-01 22:25 -0800
Re: Python is DOOMED! Again! Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2015-02-02 18:18 +1100
Re: Python is DOOMED! Again! Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2015-02-01 23:43 -0800
Re: Python is DOOMED! Again! Rustom Mody <rustompmody@gmail.com> - 2015-02-02 04:12 -0800
Re: Python is DOOMED! Again! Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2015-02-01 22:12 -0800
Re: Python is DOOMED! Again! wxjmfauth@gmail.com - 2015-01-29 10:53 -0800
Re: Python is DOOMED! Again! Mark Lawrence <breamoreboy@yahoo.co.uk> - 2015-01-29 18:54 +0000
Re: Python is DOOMED! Again! Mario Figueiredo <marfig@gmail.com> - 2015-01-30 19:50 +0100
Re: Python is DOOMED! Again! Skip Montanaro <skip.montanaro@gmail.com> - 2015-01-30 13:00 -0600
Re: Python is DOOMED! Again! Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2015-01-28 12:09 +1100
Re: Python is DOOMED! Again! Terry Reedy <tjreedy@udel.edu> - 2015-01-22 22:57 -0500
Re: Python is DOOMED! Again! Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2015-01-23 05:33 +1100
Re: Python is DOOMED! Again! Marko Rauhamaa <marko@pacujo.net> - 2015-01-22 21:22 +0200
Re: Python is DOOMED! Again! Skip Montanaro <skip.montanaro@gmail.com> - 2015-01-22 13:43 -0600
Re: Python is DOOMED! Again! Sturla Molden <sturla.molden@gmail.com> - 2015-01-22 20:56 +0100
Re: Python is DOOMED! Again! Skip Montanaro <skip.montanaro@gmail.com> - 2015-01-22 14:31 -0600
Re: Python is DOOMED! Again! Skip Montanaro <skip.montanaro@gmail.com> - 2015-01-22 14:32 -0600
Re: Python is DOOMED! Again! Rick Johnson <rantingrickjohnson@gmail.com> - 2015-01-22 13:08 -0800
Re: Python is DOOMED! Again! Marko Rauhamaa <marko@pacujo.net> - 2015-01-22 23:25 +0200
Re: Python is DOOMED! Again! random832@fastmail.us - 2015-01-22 13:41 -0500
Re: Python is DOOMED! Again! Mario Figueiredo <marfig@gmail.com> - 2015-01-22 20:10 +0100
Re: Python is DOOMED! Again! Sturla Molden <sturla.molden@gmail.com> - 2015-01-22 20:53 +0100
Re: Python is DOOMED! Again! Mario Figueiredo <marfig@gmail.com> - 2015-01-22 21:03 +0100
Re: Python is DOOMED! Again! Sturla Molden <sturla.molden@gmail.com> - 2015-01-23 01:40 +0100
Re: Python is DOOMED! Again! Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2015-01-22 17:31 -0800
Re: Python is DOOMED! Again! Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2015-01-23 14:53 +1100
Re: Python is DOOMED! Again! Mark Lawrence <breamoreboy@yahoo.co.uk> - 2015-01-23 06:38 +0000
Re: Python is DOOMED! Again! Sturla Molden <sturla.molden@gmail.com> - 2015-01-24 02:00 +0100
Re: Python is DOOMED! Again! Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2015-01-24 16:51 +1100
Re: Python is DOOMED! Again! Nicholas Cole <nicholas.cole@gmail.com> - 2015-01-24 09:04 +0000
Re: Python is DOOMED! Again! Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2015-01-24 12:15 +1100
Re: Python is DOOMED! Again! Mark Lawrence <breamoreboy@yahoo.co.uk> - 2015-01-24 14:40 +0000
Re: Python is DOOMED! Again! Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2015-01-23 12:00 +1100
Re: Python is DOOMED! Again! Emile van Sebille <emile@fenx.com> - 2015-01-22 17:14 -0800
Re: Python is DOOMED! Again! Terry Reedy <tjreedy@udel.edu> - 2015-01-22 22:34 -0500
Re: Python is DOOMED! Again! Mark Lawrence <breamoreboy@yahoo.co.uk> - 2015-01-22 19:05 +0000
Re: Python is DOOMED! Again! Sturla Molden <sturla.molden@gmail.com> - 2015-01-22 19:07 +0000
Re: Python is DOOMED! Again! Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2015-01-23 15:51 +1100
Re: Python is DOOMED! Again! Sturla Molden <sturla.molden@gmail.com> - 2015-01-22 19:09 +0000
Re: Python is DOOMED! Again! Emile van Sebille <emile@fenx.com> - 2015-01-22 13:56 -0800
Re: Python is DOOMED! Again! Ian Kelly <ian.g.kelly@gmail.com> - 2015-01-22 15:08 -0700
Re: Python is DOOMED! Again! Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2015-01-22 15:24 -0800
Re: Python is DOOMED! Again! Ian Kelly <ian.g.kelly@gmail.com> - 2015-01-22 15:12 -0700
Re: Python is DOOMED! Again! Rustom Mody <rustompmody@gmail.com> - 2015-01-22 19:11 -0800
Re: Python is DOOMED! Again! Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2015-01-23 14:52 +1100
Re: Python is DOOMED! Again! Rustom Mody <rustompmody@gmail.com> - 2015-01-22 21:06 -0800
Re: Python is DOOMED! Again! Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2015-01-23 16:33 +1100
Re: Python is DOOMED! Again! Chris Kaynor <ckaynor@zindagigames.com> - 2015-01-22 14:27 -0800
Re: Python is DOOMED! Again! Ian Kelly <ian.g.kelly@gmail.com> - 2015-01-22 15:47 -0700
Re: Python is DOOMED! Again! Mario Figueiredo <marfig@gmail.com> - 2015-01-22 23:54 +0100
Re: Python is DOOMED! Again! Ben Finney <ben+python@benfinney.id.au> - 2015-01-23 10:22 +1100
Re: Python is DOOMED! Again! Sturla Molden <sturla.molden@gmail.com> - 2015-01-23 01:44 +0100
Re: Python is DOOMED! Again! Mark Lawrence <breamoreboy@yahoo.co.uk> - 2015-01-23 06:33 +0000
Re: Python is DOOMED! Again! wxjmfauth@gmail.com - 2015-01-23 01:07 -0800
Re: Python is DOOMED! Again! Tony the Tiger <tony@tiger.invalid> - 2015-01-23 18:08 +0000
Re: Python is DOOMED! Again! BartC <bc@freeuk.com> - 2015-01-29 22:57 +0000
Re: Python is DOOMED! Again! Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2015-01-30 10:17 +1100
Re: Python is DOOMED! Again! Chris Kaynor <ckaynor@zindagigames.com> - 2015-01-29 15:25 -0800
Re: Python is DOOMED! Again! MRAB <python@mrabarnett.plus.com> - 2015-01-30 02:11 +0000
Page 13 of 14 — ← Prev page 1 … 11 12 [13] 14 Next page →
| From | Mario Figueiredo <marfig@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-01-22 21:03 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <MPG.2f2b75c814639267989686@nntp.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #84262 |
In article <mailman.17990.1421956437.18130.python-list@python.org>, sturla.molden@gmail.com says... > > On 22/01/15 20:10, Mario Figueiredo wrote: > > > Customers don't have access to static analysis output and project > > managers should know better than to demand static analysis without > > properly contextualize it. I just don't see a project manager having no > > idea what static analysis means. > > I don't know how it works in you country, but here projects managers are > selected for having any kind of skill other than technical knowledge. I > know of one who got the job because he was a professional hockey player. > So yes, they can very well be unaware what static analysis means. But > what they will do is pick up "buzzwords" from the kind of journals that > project managers read. And then they want that buzzword implemented. > > Sturla That is fine. But then the problem isn't type hinting, is it? Neither I think you are suggesting we don't introduce language because there are bad project managers out there. The problem is then bad project managers. That has nothing to do with type hinting, or Python for that matter.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Sturla Molden <sturla.molden@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-01-23 01:40 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <mailman.18006.1421973642.18130.python-list@python.org> |
| In reply to | #84265 |
On 22/01/15 21:03, Mario Figueiredo wrote: > That is fine. But then the problem isn't type hinting, is it? Neither I > think you are suggesting we don't introduce language because there are > bad project managers out there. > > The problem is then bad project managers. That has nothing to do with > type hinting, or Python for that matter. It has everything to do with Python if we facilitate them. Type hinting will be mandatory because of bad managers. But then someone is going to ask what benefit Python has to offer: Readabiliy? No ... down the drain. Dynamic typing? No ... down the drain. Speed? No ... still 200x slower than Swift. Why go for Python? There is no benefit to it any longer. Sturla
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-01-22 17:31 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <87sif25llm.fsf@jester.gateway.sonic.net> |
| In reply to | #84292 |
Sturla Molden <sturla.molden@gmail.com> writes: > Type hinting will be mandatory because of bad managers. That's a pretty weird concept: I've worked for good managers and bad ones, but so far never one who imposed any low-level code style decisions without also being involved in writing the code. That was always left to project leads. Upper management (i.e. the CTO) sometimes made high level decisions like "the production apps will be in Java not Python" but that's different. > But then someone is going to ask what benefit Python has to offer: > > Readabiliy? No ... down the drain. The type hints don't impair readability as far as I can tell. Rather, they help it, since they indicate concisely what the function does. > Dynamic typing? No ... down the drain. It's still dynamic in the sense of having a universal type, and the hints can also let the compiler specialize. > Speed? No ... still 200x slower than Swift. I don't think it's anything like 200x now, especially with pypy. The type hints will allow more optimization though the language semantics will always keep it a slower than C/C++ (dunno about Swift). > Why go for Python? There is no benefit to it any longer. The type hints look like an improvement to me. I'd use them if they were available. I wouldn't have any problem with a project lead mandating them, just like they currently mandate use of specific unit test packages, etc. I could imagine mandating them in a project that I was leading. The "bad management" thing only applies when someone mandates coding practices that they themselves don't have to follow. I think you're imagining some terrible scenario that's not close to reality. Erlang has a similar feature that I've already mentioned a few times in this thread. I've used it and it's a good feature. It helps keep the code organized and it doesn't get in the way too much. You don't have to put a signature on every function: it's optional so you can put them in just the important places and let the tool figure out the rest. If you use a seriously typeful language like Haskell, you have to design your whole program around the static types. But with Erlang you can code pretty much the same way you would in Python, add a few signatures here and there, and that's enough for the analysis tool to do some quite useful checks. I remember in one of the endless static-vs-dynamic debates on comp.lang.lisp, someone mentioned a code instrumentation experiment that found that even in dynamic languages, most functions were monomorphic in practice. I think that's mostly because experienced programmers unconsciously follow an ML-like type discipline most of the time, even when the compiler isn't enforcing it. So having some compile-time checking will mostly do good.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-01-23 14:53 +1100 |
| Message-ID | <54c1c5c1$0$13001$c3e8da3$5496439d@news.astraweb.com> |
| In reply to | #84292 |
Sturla Molden wrote: > On 22/01/15 21:03, Mario Figueiredo wrote: > >> That is fine. But then the problem isn't type hinting, is it? Neither I >> think you are suggesting we don't introduce language because there are >> bad project managers out there. >> >> The problem is then bad project managers. That has nothing to do with >> type hinting, or Python for that matter. > > It has everything to do with Python if we facilitate them. > > Type hinting will be mandatory because of bad managers. Oh come on, that's ridiculous. If your manager is so bad, why isn't he insisting that you program in PHP or Java or Algol 68 [insert name of some language you dislike] instead of Python? Is your bad manager forcing you to write Java-style code in Python, or insisting on Hungarian Notation? And how does *your* bad manager force *me* to change my coding style? This is especially ridiculous given how much Python code is open-source and beholden to nobody except the author. > But then someone > is going to ask what benefit Python has to offer: > > Readabiliy? No ... down the drain. A ridiculous overreaction to a minor syntactic change which has been available in Python 3.x for about five years. > Dynamic typing? No ... down the drain. That's just completely untrue. The presence of a type-checker doesn't prevent dynamic typing. If you think it does, I'm afraid you don't understand the difference between static and dynamic typing, you don't understand the proposal for type-hinting as already demonstrated by Mypy, or both. This proposal is not based on a theoretical hope that it will help Python, it has already been working for a number of years. The difference is that now Guido is taken *proven technology* from a third-party implementation, Mypy, and standardising the language so that other implementations, IDEs, text editors, linters and other tools can make use of it. > Speed? No ... still 200x slower than Swift. That would make Swift 20x faster than C. Even PyPy doesn't claim to be ten times faster than C across the board. -- Steven
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Mark Lawrence <breamoreboy@yahoo.co.uk> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-01-23 06:38 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <mailman.18025.1421995205.18130.python-list@python.org> |
| In reply to | #84309 |
On 23/01/2015 03:53, Steven D'Aprano wrote: > > If your manager is so bad, why isn't he insisting that you program in PHP or > Java or Algol 68 [insert name of some language you dislike] instead of > Python? Is your bad manager forcing you to write Java-style code in Python, > or insisting on Hungarian Notation? > Seems like a good excuse to mention CORAL 66 for the first time in years, even if it wasn't *that* bad :) -- My fellow Pythonistas, ask not what our language can do for you, ask what you can do for our language. Mark Lawrence
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Sturla Molden <sturla.molden@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-01-24 02:00 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <mailman.18069.1422061233.18130.python-list@python.org> |
| In reply to | #84309 |
On 23/01/15 04:53, Steven D'Aprano wrote: > If your manager is so bad, why isn't he insisting that you program in PHP or > Java or Algol 68 [insert name of some language you dislike] instead of > Python? Is your bad manager forcing you to write Java-style code in Python, > or insisting on Hungarian Notation? Nobody is forcing me to do anything. But without a thriving community, Python has no value to me. If we add type hinting, then that community will go away, because other languages are better options. Who will win? Julia? Ruby? They are all waiting in line for Python to fail. Then Python will be like Smalltalk. Sturla
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-01-24 16:51 +1100 |
| Message-ID | <54c332ec$0$12993$c3e8da3$5496439d@news.astraweb.com> |
| In reply to | #84423 |
Sturla Molden wrote: > On 23/01/15 04:53, Steven D'Aprano wrote: > >> If your manager is so bad, why isn't he insisting that you program in PHP >> or Java or Algol 68 [insert name of some language you dislike] instead of >> Python? Is your bad manager forcing you to write Java-style code in >> Python, or insisting on Hungarian Notation? > > Nobody is forcing me to do anything. > > But without a thriving community, Python has no value to me. > > If we add type hinting, then that community will go away, because other > languages are better options. > > Who will win? Julia? Ruby? They are all waiting in line for Python to > fail. Then Python will be like Smalltalk. How ironic. Julia *already uses* a type system much like the proposed Python one: http://julia.readthedocs.org/en/latest/manual/types/ and Ruby has an experimental one: http://blog.codeclimate.com/blog/2014/05/06/gradual-type-checking-for-ruby/ Javascript has one available too: https://code.facebook.com/posts/1505962329687926/flow-a-new-static-type-checker-for-javascript/ So does Groovy: http://groovy.codehaus.org/Runtime+vs+Compile+time,+Static+vs+Dynamic And Erlang, Clojure, Racket and many more. Python is falling behind, not racing ahead. -- Steven
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Nicholas Cole <nicholas.cole@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-01-24 09:04 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <mailman.18079.1422090298.18130.python-list@python.org> |
| In reply to | #84439 |
On Sat, Jan 24, 2015 at 5:51 AM, Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> wrote: > and Ruby has an experimental one: > > http://blog.codeclimate.com/blog/2014/05/06/gradual-type-checking-for-ruby/ Interesting. Ruby has avoided the magic comment, and the typing is done in annotations rather than in the function signatures. It's interesting to see them go a different way so that we can compare the two approaches. I rather like it. It's a shame that the rest of Ruby's syntax is inferior to python's..... ;-) N.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-01-24 12:15 +1100 |
| Message-ID | <mailman.18071.1422062147.18130.python-list@python.org> |
| In reply to | #84309 |
On Sat, Jan 24, 2015 at 12:00 PM, Sturla Molden <sturla.molden@gmail.com> wrote: > But without a thriving community, Python has no value to me. > > If we add type hinting, then that community will go away, because other > languages are better options. > > Who will win? Julia? Ruby? They are all waiting in line for Python to fail. > Then Python will be like Smalltalk. The Python community that was already killed by Python 3.0? Funny, it seems to be a bit more resilient than the naysayers would have us believe. ChrisA
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Mark Lawrence <breamoreboy@yahoo.co.uk> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-01-24 14:40 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <mailman.18085.1422110443.18130.python-list@python.org> |
| In reply to | #84309 |
On 24/01/2015 01:15, Chris Angelico wrote: > On Sat, Jan 24, 2015 at 12:00 PM, Sturla Molden <sturla.molden@gmail.com> wrote: >> But without a thriving community, Python has no value to me. >> >> If we add type hinting, then that community will go away, because other >> languages are better options. >> >> Who will win? Julia? Ruby? They are all waiting in line for Python to fail. >> Then Python will be like Smalltalk. > > The Python community that was already killed by Python 3.0? Funny, it > seems to be a bit more resilient than the naysayers would have us > believe. > > ChrisA > That's unfair as there was a distinct fall back position, what with Python 2.8 and RickedPython(3). Is anybody aware of just how far advanced these projects are? -- My fellow Pythonistas, ask not what our language can do for you, ask what you can do for our language. Mark Lawrence
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-01-23 12:00 +1100 |
| Message-ID | <mailman.18008.1421974814.18130.python-list@python.org> |
| In reply to | #84265 |
On Fri, Jan 23, 2015 at 11:40 AM, Sturla Molden <sturla.molden@gmail.com> wrote: > Type hinting will be mandatory because of bad managers. But then someone is > going to ask what benefit Python has to offer: Type hinting will never be mandatory, because bad managers are not in charge. You can't blame the language because you're *choosing* to continue to work for someone who demands the unreasonable. Yes, I understand that there are reasons for not immediately quitting a job when someone insists on something you disagree with (yaknow, reasons like "got bills to pay", little trivialities like that); but it's still your choice. You have to weigh up the value of the job against the value of the philosophy. And Python's philosophy isn't changed by that. ChrisA
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Emile van Sebille <emile@fenx.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-01-22 17:14 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <mailman.18009.1421975705.18130.python-list@python.org> |
| In reply to | #84265 |
On 1/22/2015 5:00 PM, Chris Angelico wrote: > On Fri, Jan 23, 2015 at 11:40 AM, Sturla Molden <sturla.molden@gmail.com> wrote: >> Type hinting will be mandatory because of bad managers. But then someone is >> going to ask what benefit Python has to offer: > > Type hinting will never be mandatory, I'm sure it will be in some places, if only to the extent that PEP8 compliance is enforced. > because bad managers are not in charge. But coding standards may be, and in certain sized shops, should be. So as tools come of age, standards will be updated, and hinting will be added and hence become required. > You can't blame the language because you're *choosing* to >sigh< It's good to have choices. Bottom line is that the decisions being made today about type hinting will live on, so it's good to consider eventualities that are real. Emile
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Terry Reedy <tjreedy@udel.edu> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-01-22 22:34 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <mailman.18013.1421984106.18130.python-list@python.org> |
| In reply to | #84265 |
On 1/22/2015 7:40 PM, Sturla Molden wrote: > On 22/01/15 21:03, Mario Figueiredo wrote: > >> That is fine. But then the problem isn't type hinting, is it? Neither I >> think you are suggesting we don't introduce language because there are >> bad project managers out there. >> >> The problem is then bad project managers. That has nothing to do with >> type hinting, or Python for that matter. > > It has everything to do with Python if we facilitate them. > > Type hinting will be mandatory because of bad managers. But then someone > is going to ask what benefit Python has to offer: > > Readabiliy? No ... down the drain. Type hints can be put in separate stub files and will be put in separate files for the stdlib. If a client want to pay you to write type stubs, and you cannot stand to do it for even for pay, I am sure you will be able to subcontract the work. I am sure someone will write python probrams to make the process easier. Many Pythonistas would be glad to see more work, not bitch about it. Readability? Unchanged (at least for your own code and much of the rest). > Dynamic typing? No ... down the drain. ??? Python objects will still be dynamically typed. For the present, compilation will be completely uneffected. Dynamic typing? unchanged. > Speed? No ... still 200x slower than Swift. Sturla, I *know* you must have heard of numpy? cython? -- Terry Jan Reedy
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Mark Lawrence <breamoreboy@yahoo.co.uk> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-01-22 19:05 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <mailman.17985.1421953534.18130.python-list@python.org> |
| In reply to | #84181 |
On 22/01/2015 18:41, random832@fastmail.us wrote: > On Thu, Jan 22, 2015, at 13:28, Mark Lawrence wrote: >> Evidence in completely the opposite direction if I'm reading this >> correctly https://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0484/#usage-patterns >> >> "The main use case of type hinting is static analysis using an external >> tool without executing the analyzed program. Existing tools used for >> that purpose like pyflakes [pyflakes] or pylint [pylint] might be >> extended to support type checking. New tools, like mypy's mypy -S mode, >> can be adopted specifically for this purpose. > > How is that the opposite direction? It's a short jump from there to > "pylint [or whatever tool] will consider a lack of type hinting to be > something to warn for" and "managers/customers will consider this > warning to mean your program has failed and is unacceptable". > You've snipped the other two paragraphs of the quote that I gave thus completely altering the context. If they're too stupid to know the meaning of the word "hint" that's their problem. -- My fellow Pythonistas, ask not what our language can do for you, ask what you can do for our language. Mark Lawrence
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Sturla Molden <sturla.molden@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-01-22 19:07 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <mailman.17986.1421953669.18130.python-list@python.org> |
| In reply to | #84181 |
Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> wrote: > Uhh... if your managers and customers are stipulating non-Pythonic > coding styles, then it's time to find new managers/customers. If > they're not writing the code, code quality shouldn't be their concern. I am saying the day someone requires me to write a type hint, I will no longer be using Python or recommending it. Python is great, but not that great.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-01-23 15:51 +1100 |
| Message-ID | <54c1d351$0$12990$c3e8da3$5496439d@news.astraweb.com> |
| In reply to | #84251 |
Sturla Molden wrote:
> Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Uhh... if your managers and customers are stipulating non-Pythonic
>> coding styles, then it's time to find new managers/customers. If
>> they're not writing the code, code quality shouldn't be their concern.
>
> I am saying the day someone requires me to write a type hint, I will no
> longer be using Python or recommending it. Python is great, but not that
> great.
You probably already write type checks, only you might do it like this:
def my_func(x, index=0):
if not isinstance(index, int):
raise TypeError("index must be an integer")
do_stuff()
or perhaps like this:
def my_func(x, index=0):
try:
if index == int(index):
do_stuff()
except TypeError:
raise
else:
raise TypeError("index must be an integer, not a float")
And then you write tests to confirm that my_func fails correctly when given
an index which is not an integer. Most of that is monkey-work, so simple
that even the compiler can do it.
How about writing this instead?
def my_func(x, index:int=0):
do_stuff()
Is that really such an unspeakable burden? *Always* a burden? You cannot
imagine any circumstances where you would gain some advantage by having an
automated type-checker identify type-related bugs?
Well okay then. Keep working the way you do right now.
--
Steven
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Sturla Molden <sturla.molden@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-01-22 19:09 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <mailman.17987.1421953806.18130.python-list@python.org> |
| In reply to | #84181 |
Mark Lawrence <breamoreboy@yahoo.co.uk> wrote: > If they're too stupid to know the > meaning of the word "hint" that's their problem. It will also be Python's problem, because people are that stupid.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Emile van Sebille <emile@fenx.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-01-22 13:56 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <mailman.17999.1421963830.18130.python-list@python.org> |
| In reply to | #84181 |
On 1/21/2015 8:30 PM, Steven D'Aprano wrote: <snip> > Here's an example from PEP 484: > > def greeting(name: str) -> str: > return 'Hello ' + name I've been lightly scanning and following the PEP 484 discussion, and one point I don't think I've seen mentioned is how you might hint a function that accepts different types, eg: def adder(a,b): return a+b This is one of the pythonic idioms that help with polymorphic functions. Is there a proposal for providing hinting for these? Thanks, Emile
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Ian Kelly <ian.g.kelly@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-01-22 15:08 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <mailman.18000.1421964545.18130.python-list@python.org> |
| In reply to | #84181 |
On Thu, Jan 22, 2015 at 2:56 PM, Emile van Sebille <emile@fenx.com> wrote:
> I've been lightly scanning and following the PEP 484 discussion, and one
> point I don't think I've seen mentioned is how you might hint a function
> that accepts different types, eg:
>
> def adder(a,b): return a+b
>
> This is one of the pythonic idioms that help with polymorphic functions. Is
> there a proposal for providing hinting for these?
You can use TypeVar for that.
T = TypeVar('T')
def adder(a: T, b: T) -> T:
return a + b
I'm not thrilled about having to actually declare T in this sort of
situation, but I don't have a better proposal.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-01-22 15:24 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <8738727626.fsf@jester.gateway.sonic.net> |
| In reply to | #84280 |
Ian Kelly <ian.g.kelly@gmail.com> writes:
> T = TypeVar('T')
> def adder(a: T, b: T) -> T: ...
> I'm not thrilled about having to actually declare T in this sort of
> situation, but I don't have a better proposal.
Oh man, that's ugly. Maybe a decorator would be a bit less awful:
@-typevar T
def adder(a: T, b: T) -> T: ...
I'm using @- for a hypothetical decorator that receives the AST for the
stuff on the rest of the line, instead of being evaluated as a function.
The above looks sort of like C++, which would say
template <typename T>
T addr (T a, T b) { ... }
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 13 of 14 — ← Prev page 1 … 11 12 [13] 14 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | comp.lang.python
csiph-web