On 15 November 2016 at 10:46, Paul Moore wrote:
> If you're proposing a = a + b to introspect at runtime the type of a,
> and produce different bytecode depending on the answer, you're
> proposing a fundamental change to the runtime semantics of Python
> (such that the resulting language is arguab
On 16 November 2016 at 08:51, Mikhail V wrote:
> What semantics it will fundamentally break or so hard to implement?
I'm afraid I don't have time at the moment to fully review your email,
but my first impression is that you are proposing that the name "self"
be treated specially. It's going to be
Hi!
Why am I bringing this up:
Security is hard !
Implementing a standard correctly is not easy.
I know about the later because the last 2 years I’ve been involved in
certifying OpenID Connect Provider instances. Lately I’ve been doing the
same for OpenID Connect Relying Party libraries.
All of
> On 16 Nov 2016, at 11:51, Roland Hedberg wrote:
>
> The bottom line is of course that it would benefit the community to have a
> high quality OAuth2/OIDC implementation within easy reach.
I think the core question you need to answer for this proposal is: why is “pip
install oic” not easy-en
On 16 November 2016 at 22:50, Cory Benfield wrote:
>
>> On 16 Nov 2016, at 11:51, Roland Hedberg wrote:
>>
>> The bottom line is of course that it would benefit the community to have a
>> high quality OAuth2/OIDC implementation within easy reach.
>
> I think the core question you need to answer f
> On 16 Nov 2016, at 14:50, Cory Benfield wrote:
>
>
>> On 16 Nov 2016, at 11:51, Roland Hedberg wrote:
>>
>> The bottom line is of course that it would benefit the community to have a
>> high quality OAuth2/OIDC implementation within easy reach.
>
> I think the core question you need to an
> On 16 Nov 2016, at 15:16, Nick Coghlan wrote:
>
> On 16 November 2016 at 22:50, Cory Benfield wrote:
>>
>>> On 16 Nov 2016, at 11:51, Roland Hedberg wrote:
>>>
>>> The bottom line is of course that it would benefit the community to have a
>>> high quality OAuth2/OIDC implementation within
On 11/12/16, Mark E. Haase wrote:
> 1. It is easier to Google a name. E.g., Google "c# ??" and you'll get
> nothing related to null coalescing in c#". ("C# question marks" does find
> the right content, however.)
python has nice (*) help system and would have help('??')... (where we
could get be
> On 16 Nov 2016, at 13:30, Roland Hedberg wrote:
>
>
>> On 16 Nov 2016, at 14:50, Cory Benfield wrote:
>>
>> I think the core question you need to answer for this proposal is: why is
>> “pip install oic” not easy-enough reach?
>
> Basically, I think it’s a matter of visibility.
> If someon
> On 16 Nov 2016, at 15:55, Cory Benfield wrote:
>
>
>> On 16 Nov 2016, at 13:30, Roland Hedberg wrote:
>>
>>
>>> On 16 Nov 2016, at 14:50, Cory Benfield wrote:
>>>
>>> I think the core question you need to answer for this proposal is: why is
>>> “pip install oic” not easy-enough reach?
>
On 16 November 2016 at 13:55, Cory Benfield wrote:
>> If you have any idea about how we could reach more coders I’m all ears.
>
> Coders who need OIDC will go looking for it and will find their options.
> Ultimately, a huge number of projects haven’t suffered from being outside the
> standard li
On 11/16/2016 03:51 AM, Roland Hedberg wrote:
My question to you is if it would be possible to get an OAuth2/OIDC
implementation like mine
to be part of the Python standard distribution.
I realise that I will have to rewrite parts of pyoidc because presently it uses
modules
(for instance pycr
On 16 November 2016 at 10:27, Paul Moore wrote:
> On 16 November 2016 at 08:51, Mikhail V wrote:
>> What semantics it will fundamentally break or so hard to implement?
>
> I'm afraid I don't have time at the moment to fully review your email,
> but my first impression is that you are proposing th
On Nov 16 2016, Mikhail V
wrote:
> On 16 November 2016 at 10:27, Paul Moore
> wrote:
>> On 16 November 2016 at 08:51, Mikhail V
>> wrote:
>>> What semantics it will fundamentally break or so hard to implement?
>>
>> I'm afraid I don't have time at the moment to fully review your email,
>> but
On 16 November 2016 at 16:48, Mikhail V wrote:
> On 16 November 2016 at 10:27, Paul Moore wrote:
>> On 16 November 2016 at 08:51, Mikhail V wrote:
>>> What semantics it will fundamentally break or so hard to implement?
>>
>> I'm afraid I don't have time at the moment to fully review your email,
On Wed, Nov 16, 2016 at 10:48 AM, Mikhail V wrote:
> On 16 November 2016 at 10:27, Paul Moore wrote:
> > On 16 November 2016 at 08:51, Mikhail V wrote:
> >> What semantics it will fundamentally break or so hard to implement?
> >
> > I'm afraid I don't have time at the moment to fully review you
On 11/16/2016 08:48 AM, Mikhail V wrote:
On 16 November 2016 at 10:27, Paul Moore wrote:
On 16 November 2016 at 08:51, Mikhail V wrote:
What semantics it will fundamentally break or so hard to implement?
I'm afraid I don't have time at the moment to fully review your email,
but my first imp
On Nov 16 2016, Ryan Gonzalez
wrote:
> A = A + 1 ==> A += 1
>
>
> Similar problem: semantics change. If someone decided to be weird and have
> __add__ and __iadd__ do two different things, this would completely break
> that. Granted, that's a stupid idea to begin with, but it's still poor
> jus
>
> Similar problem: semantics change. If someone decided to be weird and have
> __add__ and __iadd__ do two different things, this would completely break
> that. Granted, that's a stupid idea to begin with, but it's still poor
> justification for the code breakage.
>
The most notable example of s
On 16 November 2016 at 17:50, Ryan Gonzalez wrote:
> If someone decided to be weird and have __add__ and __iadd__ do two
> different things, this would completely break that. Granted, that's a stupid
> idea to begin with, but it's still poor justification for the code breakage.
If you think of a
David Mertz wrote:
The most notable example of something that is "weird" and "a stupid
idea" is NumPy... and *everything* in the Scientific Python ecosystem
thereby.
Also the built-in list type. Guido clearly disagrees about
the stupidity level of this idea!
--
Greg
__
I think the best way to remove compound operators would be to go back in
time and hit Dennis Ritchie with a bat at the exact moment when the notion
of them crosses his mind.
In all seriousness, compound operators are in practically every modern
language and aren't going away. While you don't need
Hi all,
Please be mindful when replying, even if some of the lurker know who
some of you are and can figure out that some of the reply to this
thread below this message are sarcastic, not all readers can. Your
messages can also be cited out of context.
Thus many messages in this thread can be misi
On 16 November 2016 at 18:28, Paul Moore wrote:
> No I don't think you're an idiot. I thought you were offering a proposal.
>
>> When I was writing that I just thought, should I make a special note
>> that I am making it only for example, but then thought, oh that would
>> be too pedantic.
>
> Wel
On Wed, Nov 16, 2016 at 11:24:01PM +0100, Mikhail V wrote:
[...]
> My only fault is that I choose wrong name
> for the keyword and naively supposed that it will not cause big
> misunderstanding.
>
> Ok? So lets say I made a typo and lets take other keyword, it is not
> so important in this case,
On Wed, Nov 16, 2016 at 07:36:04PM +, Paul Moore wrote:
> On 16 November 2016 at 17:50, Ryan Gonzalez wrote:
> > If someone decided to be weird and have __add__ and __iadd__ do two
> > different things, this would completely break that. Granted, that's a stupid
> > idea to begin with, but it's
Cory Benfield writes:
> I think the core question you need to answer for this proposal is:
> why is “pip install oic” not easy-enough reach?
My first guess would be "some enterprises use OAuth internally for the
same reason they have draconian approval policies". More
straightforwardly, this i
Matthias Bussoni writes:
> Please be mindful when replying, even if some of the lurker know
> who some of you are and can figure out that some of the reply to
> this thread below this message are sarcastic, not all readers
> can. Your messages can also be cited out of context.
Mikhail has lon
On Wed, Nov 16, 2016 at 6:50 PM, Stephen J. Turnbull
wrote:
> Replying to Paul Moore when
> deprecating "sarcastic" replies is just bad manners; Paul is never
> intentionally sarcastic that I can remember.
Apologies, if my message looked like targetting Paul, and was a reply
to Paul. Paul answe
Nick Timkovich writes:
> I think the best way to remove compound operators would be to go
> back in time and hit Dennis Ritchie with a bat at the exact moment
> when the notion of them crosses his mind.
True enough as a concept, but Python didn't have to implement them for
immutables. It migh
Paul Moore writes:
> PS Note for anyone who wants to take this off on a wild tangent - my
> above comment is *in the context of Python as it has been defined for
> 20+ years*.
Not quite. Augmented assignment operators were added in Python 2.0
according to What's New, and they were quite contr
On 17 November 2016 at 03:50, Stephen J. Turnbull
wrote:
> Matthias Bussoni writes:
>
> > Please be mindful when replying, even if some of the lurker know
> > who some of you are and can figure out that some of the reply to
> > this thread below this message are sarcastic, not all readers
> >
Cory Benfield wrote:
Instead, we should aim
to solve the actual problem: how do we provide tools to allow users to find
the best-in-class solutions to their problems from the third-party Python
ecosystem?
Perhaps there could be a curated area on PyPI, maintained
by core developers or people app
On Thu, Nov 17, 2016 at 8:06 AM, Greg Ewing wrote:
> Cory Benfield wrote:
>>
>> Instead, we should aim
>> to solve the actual problem: how do we provide tools to allow users to
>> find
>> the best-in-class solutions to their problems from the third-party Python
>> ecosystem?
>
>
> Perhaps there co
On 17 November 2016 at 12:42, Stephen J. Turnbull
wrote:
> Cory Benfield writes:
>
> > I think the core question you need to answer for this proposal is:
> > why is “pip install oic” not easy-enough reach?
>
> My first guess would be "some enterprises use OAuth internally for the
> same reason t
35 matches
Mail list logo
