It should be compatible with modern versions of ServiceNow.
If there's API breakage or new features implemented, I usually have that fixed/incorporated into pysnow in a week or two.
<a href="https://itcanvass.com/"> servicenow training</a>
PyObject_RichCompareBool(x, y, op) has a (valuable!) shortcut: if x
and y are the same object, then equality comparison returns True and
inequality False. No attempt is made to execute __eq__ or __ne__
methods in those cases.
This has visible consequences all over the place, but they don't
appear to be documented. For example,
>>> import math
>>> ([math.nan] * 5).count(math.nan)
despite that `math.nan == math.nan` is False.
It's usually clear which methods will be called, and when, but not
really here. Any _context_ that calls PyObject_RichCompareBool()
under the covers, for an equality or inequality test, may or may not
invoke __eq__ or __ne__, depending on whether the comparands are the
same object. Also any context that inlines these special cases to
avoid the overhead of calling PyObject_RichCompareBool() at all.
If it's intended that Python-the-language requires this, that needs to
Or if it's implementation-defined, then _that_ needs to be documented.
Which isn't straightforward in either case, in part because
PyObject_RichCompareBool isn't a language-level concept.
This came up recently when someone _noticed_ the list.count(NaN)
behavior, and Victor made a PR to document it:
I'm pushing back, because documenting it _only_ for .count() makes
.count() seem unique in a way it isn't, and doesn't resolve the
fundamental issue: is this language behavior, or implementation
Which I don't want to argue about. But you certainly should ;-)
Go get it here: https://www.python.org/downloads/release/python-390a3/ <https://www.python.org/downloads/release/python-390a3/>
This is an early developer preview of Python 3.9
Python 3.9 is still in development. This releasee, 3.9.0a3 is the third of six planned alpha releases. Alpha releases are intended to make it easier to test the current state of new features and bug fixes and to test the release process. During the alpha phase, features may be added up until the start of the beta phase (2020-05-18) and, if necessary, may be modified or deleted up until the release candidate phase (2020-08-10). Please keep in mind that this is a preview release and its use is not recommended for production environments.
Major new features of the 3.9 series, compared to 3.8
Many new features for Python 3.9 are still being planned and written. Among the new major new features and changes so far:
PEP 602 <https://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0602/>, Python adopts a stable annual release cadence
BPO 38379 <https://bugs.python.org/issue38379>, garbage collection does not block on resurrected objects;
BPO 38692 <https://bugs.python.org/issue38692>, os.pidfd_open added that allows process management without races and signals;
A number of standard library modules (audioop, ast, grp, _hashlib, pwd, _posixsubprocess, random, select, struct, termios, zlib) are now using the stable ABI defined by PEP 384 <https://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0384/>.
(Hey, fellow core developer, if a feature you find important is missing from this list, let Łukasz know <mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org>.)
The next pre-release of Python 3.9 will be 3.9.0a4, currently scheduled for 2020-02-17.
Please note that and we are Transferring payment again to your
Designated bank As advised earlier.
Kindly see attached covering letter with Bank Swift for follow up with
Also see below specification Of payment breakdown.
Please kindly confirm the attached swifts and Send Updated Statement of
Account for our records Purpose.
Head Of Finance
Address: ul. 327 Abdrakhmanova (Bayalinov lane)
+996 312 37 67 70
I have a usecase where I'm comparing a UUID instance with string quite
often. A case where I have to convert the UUID instance to a string
using str(uuid_obj), leading to redundant code:
if str(uuid_obj) == uuid:
# do stuff...
In my experience I can't find a case where you wouldn't want the
implicit conversion to string before comparing a UUID with string. So
I would like to propose improving the __eq__ method of UUID to:
def __eq__(self, other):
if isinstance(other, UUID):
return self.int == other.int
elif isinstance(other, str):
return str(self) == other
Based on my testing and experience I don't think this is a breaking
change and would be a meaningful change to the way UUID works. Of course
please don't hesitate to change my view or point out any flaws in my
If other people support this change I'd start the work of creating an
issue and PR to get this change implemented.
+32 474 066 467
> ints print the same in just about every single programming language that
uses base ten Arabic-Hindu digits 0...9. It's kind of a universal.
Not actually true: C64's Basic V2 printed positive numbers with space in
There appears to be extremely minimal documentation on how floats are
formatted on output. All I really see is that float.__str__() is
float.__repr__(). So that means that float->str->float does not
result in a different value.
It would be nice if the output format for float was documented, to the
extent this is possible. #python suggested that I propose a patch,
but I see no way to write a documentation patch without having any
clue about what Python promises, whether in the CPython implementation
or as part of a specification for Python.
What are the promises Python makes about the str() of a float? Will
it produce 1.0 today and 1.0e0 or +1.0 tomorrow? When is the result
in exponential notation and when not? Does any of this depend on the
underlying OS or hardware or Python implementation? Etc.
I'm guessing that Python is consistent with an IEEE 754
"external character sequence", but don't know what the IEEE
specification says or whether python conforms.
I don't really care whether there's documentation for __str__() or
__repr__() or something else. I'm just thinking that there should be
some way to guarantee a well defined "useful" float output formatting.
By "useful" I mean in exponential notation when non-exponential
notation is over-long.
I am writing a program that sometimes prints python floats and want to
be able to document what is printed. Right now I can't truly
guarantee anything, other than the nan and inf and -inf
representations. (I feel comfortable with nan and the like because I
don't see it likely that their representations will change.) Of
course I could always re-implement Python's float.__repr__() in Python
so as to have full control, but this should be pointless. Python's
output representation is unlikely to change and Python should be able
to make sufficient promises about its existing float representation.
I suppose there are similar issues with integers, but the varieties of
floating point number implementations and the existence of both
exponential and non-exponential representations make float
particularly problematic and representations potentially mercurial.
I also don't know if documentation changes with regard to external
representations would require a PEP.
I have found the following related information:
Use shorter float repr when possible
String conversion and formatting
At the end of the day I don't _really_ care. But having put thought
into the matter I care enough to write this email and ask the
Free Software: "You don't pay back, you pay forward."
-- Robert A. Heinlein