ACTIVITY SUMMARY (2015-10-16 - 2015-10-23)
Python tracker at http://bugs.python.org/
To view or respond to any of the issues listed below, click on the issue.
Do NOT respond to this message.
Issues counts and deltas:
open5181 (+29)
closed 32043 (+17)
total 37224 (+46)
Open issues wit
Thank you for your confirmation,
I am going to read the devguide.
> On 25 oct. 2015, at 7:50 PM, Raymond Hettinger
> wrote:
>
>
>>> On Oct 25, 2015, at 12:33 PM, Raymond Hettinger
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> On Oct 22, 2015, at 10:02 AM, Brett Cannon wrote:
>>>
>>> So my question is, the byte cod
Hi all,
Just to understand, we have the Parser/Python.asdl and Grammar/Grammar files.
Which one is used for the AST ?
I would like to understand this part of Python, could you help me?
Thank you
Stéphane
--
Stéphane Wirtel - http://wirtel.be - @matrixise
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP di
On 22 October 2015 at 19:51, Guido van Rossum wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 22, 2015 at 2:21 AM, Gregory P. Smith wrote:
>> What would it Foo.__getitem__.__annotations__ contain in this situation?
>> It'd unfortunately be an empty dict if implemented in the most trivial
>> fashion rather than a dict conta
> On Oct 25, 2015, at 12:33 PM, Raymond Hettinger
> wrote:
>
>> On Oct 22, 2015, at 10:02 AM, Brett Cannon wrote:
>>
>> So my question is, the byte code generator removes the unused functions,
>> variables etc…, is it right?
>>
>> Technically the peepholer removes the dead branch, but since
> On Oct 22, 2015, at 10:02 AM, Brett Cannon wrote:
>
> So my question is, the byte code generator removes the unused functions,
> variables etc…, is it right?
>
> Technically the peepholer removes the dead branch, but since the peepholer is
> run on all bytecode you can't avoid it.
IIRC, th
On Fri, Oct 23, 2015 at 8:38 AM, Nick Coghlan wrote:
> On 22 October 2015 at 19:51, Guido van Rossum wrote:
> > On Thu, Oct 22, 2015 at 2:21 AM, Gregory P. Smith
> wrote:
> >> What would it Foo.__getitem__.__annotations__ contain in this situation?
> >> It'd unfortunately be an empty dict if im
I've thought this over and I don't think it's worth it. We need to wait for
a working proposal for multi-dispatch first. Otherwise we'll just end up
having to support this interim syntax *and* whatever the new multi-dispatch
is. Keeping @overload restricted to stub files makes it much more tractabl
All these overloads makes the code hard to read.
The whole idea of 'i have to know which decorator
got called before the other one' is a smell that
you have too many decorators.
This whole idea reeks 'i can be very, very clever here'.
Laura
___
Python-
"Stéphane Wirtel" writes:
> I would like to understand this part of Python, could you help me?
You should also know the Python Language Reference documentation
https://docs.python.org/3/reference/>, especially the Full Grammar
specification https://docs.python.org/3/reference/grammar.html>.
--
On 10/23/2015 4:23 AM, Victor Stinner wrote:
Hi,
2015-10-22 19:02 GMT+02:00 Brett Cannon :
It's not specified anywhere; it's just what the peepholer decides to remove.
The exact code can be found at
https://hg.python.org/cpython/file/default/Python/peephole.c . There has
been talk in the past f
11 matches
Mail list logo
