was something that would indeed need more
discussion and might get acceptance if discussed once again.
Eloi
From: Brett Cannon
Sent: Tuesday, June 26, 2018 8:53 PM
To: Eloi Gaudry
Cc: encu...@gmail.com; python-ideas@python.org
Subject: Re: [Python-ideas] Allow mutable builtin types (optionally
again)
I feel sorry if that only resulted in looking like I was repeating myself.
Have a good day,
Eloi
From: Guido van Rossum
Sent: Tuesday, June 26, 2018 7:20 PM
To: Eloi Gaudry
Cc: Python-Ideas ; Serhiy Storchaka
Subject: Re: [Python-ideas] Allow mutable builtin types (optionally)
Hey
e able to have their
attributes changed.
but the extension needs is clearly not taken into account.
From: Python-ideas on
behalf of Eloi Gaudry
Sent: Thursday, June 21, 2018 5:26:37 PM
To: python-ideas@python.org; encu...@gmail.com
Subject: Re: [Python-ideas]
t the same constraints and purposes, this
should be reflected on the capabilities the first would have somewhere then.
From: Eloi Gaudry
Sent: Tuesday, June 26, 2018 4:27:18 PM
To: python-ideas@python.org
Subject: Re: [Python-ideas] Allow mutable builtin types (optionally)
some literature:
_TYPE serves other purposes
- extension would benefit for allowing direct access to any of its type
attributes
Petr, what do you think ?
Eloi
From: Python-ideas on
behalf of Eloi Gaudry
Sent: Tuesday, May 8, 2018 9:26:47 AM
To: encu...@gmail.com; python-
The check is made against a boolean value in the C extension, I don't think
that it offers a significant speed-up against the pure python code.
but it offers a simpler (reduced, global) assertion syntax though.
From: Python-ideas on
behalf of Kyle Lahnakoski
S
" ?
Le 05/05/2018 à 10:04, Eloi Gaudry a écrit :
>
> Hi folks,
>
>
> I intend to add a runtime assertion feature in python. Before
> submitting a PEP, I am sending a draft to this mailing list to
> discuss whether it would make sense (above this message). I
On Thu, 2018-05-17 at 03:09 +1000, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
> On Wed, May 16, 2018 at 01:27:50PM +0000, Eloi Gaudry wrote:
> > On Wed, 2018-05-16 at 21:15 +1000, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
> > > On Wed, May 16, 2018 at 08:29:00AM +, Eloi Gaudry wrote:
> > > >
On Wed, 2018-05-16 at 21:15 +1000, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
> On Wed, May 16, 2018 at 08:29:00AM +0000, Eloi Gaudry wrote:
> > Is there some interest in the proposal or should I finally close
> > this
> > thread ?
>
> I'm definitely interested in the c
Is there some interest in the proposal or should I finally close this
thread ?
Thanks for your feedback,
Eloi
> ___
> Python-ideas mailing list
> Python-ideas@python.org
> https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-ideas
> Code of Conduct: http://
e where
control is indeed by the consumer/the extension?
-Original Message-
From: Python-ideas On
Behalf Of Chris Angelico
Sent: Tuesday, May 8, 2018 7:38 PM
To: python-ideas@python.org
Subject: Re: [Python-ideas] Runtime assertion with no overhead when not active
On Wed, May 9,
On Wed, 2018-05-09 at 01:34 +1000, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
> On Tue, May 08, 2018 at 07:37:55AM +0000, Eloi Gaudry wrote:
>
> > * debug assert, for helping developing a new features, used with
> > debug-
> > builds
> > * runtime assert, for ensuring correctne
On Tue, 2018-05-08 at 09:58 -0400, Eric V. Smith wrote:
> I think what's confusing to me (and maybe others) is that we haven't
> seen your vision on how this would look in Python code.
>
> An example that would throw runtime assertions and the same example
> where it wouldn't (after a global swi
On Tue, 2018-05-08 at 07:37 -0700, Guido van Rossum wrote:
> > > In Lisp this would be easy. :-)
> >
> > and he already has a diff ready for review if needed (basically
> > very
> > similar to the current 'assert' implementation :)
>
> That seems premature. There is not even a hint of agreement t
On Tue, 2018-05-08 at 09:35 -0400, Eric V. Smith wrote:
> On 5/8/2018 3:37 AM, Eloi Gaudry wrote:
> > On Mon, 2018-05-07 at 16:56 +, Brett Cannon wrote:
> > >
> > > My question is how is this different to running with -O which
> > > leaves
> > > th
On Mon, 2018-05-07 at 16:56 +, Brett Cannon wrote:
>
> My question is how is this different to running with -O which leaves
> the assert statement out of the bytecode and so you avoid any run-
> time cost of the statement entirely?
Not so much different, except that:
- the switch won't need
On Mon, 2018-05-07 at 15:23 -0400, Petr Viktorin wrote:
> On 05/07/18 11:37, Eloi Gaudry wrote:
> > I mean, to my knowledge, there is no reason why a type should be
> > allocated on the heap (https://docs.python.org/2/c-api/typeobj.html
> > ) to
> > be able to change its
On Mon, 2018-05-07 at 10:52 -0700, Guido van Rossum wrote:
> On Mon, May 7, 2018 at 6:24 AM, Serhiy Storchaka > wrote:
> > I just don't understand why you need a new keyword for writing
> > runtime checks.
>
> Oh, that's pretty clear. The OP wants to be able to turn these checks
> off with some f
Hi,
I'd like to bring back this discussion (from 2005, by Greg):
https://bugs.python.org/issue1229239
Briefly, non-heap types cannot have their
attributes changed by Python code. This makes sense for python builtin
types, but not for the types defined in extension/modules.
As we have been using
On Sun, 2018-05-06 at 01:30 +1000, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
> On Sat, May 05, 2018 at 08:04:45AM +0000, Eloi Gaudry wrote:
>
> > Hi folks,
> > I intend to add a runtime assertion feature in python.
>
> I'm very interested in this idea, but I'm afraid your dra
rtion with no overhead when not active
05.05.18 18:04, Eloi Gaudry пише:
> By 'self-contained', I meant that using the assert keyword and its
> expression is sufficient. An inline assertive expression as the one you
> describe does not fulfill this assert requirement.
Sufficient f
off/on at runtime.
The syntax example I gave illustrated what I meant by syntax aware.
De : Serhiy Storchaka
Envoyé : samedi 5 mai à 15:10
Objet : Re: [Python-ideas] Runtime assertion with no overhead when not active
À : python-ideas@python.org
05.05.18 15:54, Eloi Gaudry пише: > I meant
ntax
-Original Message-
From: Python-ideas On
Behalf Of Serhiy Storchaka
Sent: Saturday, May 5, 2018 2:05 PM
To: python-ideas@python.org
Subject: Re: [Python-ideas] Runtime assertion with no overhead when not active
05.05.18 11:04, Eloi Gaudry пише:
> Briefly, the idea is to ad
Hi folks,
I intend to add a runtime assertion feature in python. Before submitting a PEP,
I am sending a draft to this mailing list to discuss whether it would make
sense (above this message). I have actually been using it for the last 2 years
and it has proven to be robust and has achieved its
24 matches
Mail list logo
