[GvR]
I still wish we could go back in time and unify sets and dicts, if only to find out how that experiment would turn out.
I'm curious about the outcome of another experiment along those lines. Is anyone seeing uptake for the set methods on mapping views in Py3.x? I haven't seen any code using it, nor any bug reports or documentation requests, nor any code in the ASPN cookbook, nor mention of it on the newsgroup or python-help. Has anyone here seen any hints about how this is faring in the wild? Raymond
On Mon, Oct 26, 2009 at 3:56 PM, Raymond Hettinger <python@rcn.com> wrote:
[GvR]
I still wish we could go back in time and unify sets and dicts, if only to find out how that experiment would turn out.
I'm curious about the outcome of another experiment along those lines. Is anyone seeing uptake for the set methods on mapping views in Py3.x?
I haven't seen any code using it, nor any bug reports or documentation requests, nor any code in the ASPN cookbook, nor mention of it on the newsgroup or python-help.
Has anyone here seen any hints about how this is faring in the wild?
Raymond
Next version of Graphine will use them heavily for graph merges and set operations on graphs. Geremy Condra
I'm curious about the outcome of another experiment along those lines. Is anyone seeing uptake for the set methods on mapping views in Py3.x?
Next version of Graphine will use them heavily for graph merges and set operations on graphs.
That's great! Thanks for the data point. I look forward to reading the code. Raymond
Raymond Hettinger wrote:
[GvR]
I still wish we could go back in time and unify sets and dicts, if only to find out how that experiment would turn out.
I'm curious about the outcome of another experiment along those lines. Is anyone seeing uptake for the set methods on mapping views in Py3.x?
I haven't seen any code using it, nor any bug reports or documentation requests, nor any code in the ASPN cookbook, nor mention of it on the newsgroup or python-help.
Has anyone here seen any hints about how this is faring in the wild?
If anyone is looking for further explanation as to why Guido's moratorium on core language changes is a good idea, allowing a chance for answers to questions like Raymond's above a chance to evolve naturally is what I see as the most important rationale. Cheers, Nick. -- Nick Coghlan | ncoghlan@gmail.com | Brisbane, Australia ---------------------------------------------------------------
On Tue, 27 Oct 2009 08:54:52 am Nick Coghlan wrote:
Raymond Hettinger wrote:
[GvR]
I still wish we could go back in time and unify sets and dicts, if only to find out how that experiment would turn out.
I'm curious about the outcome of another experiment along those lines. Is anyone seeing uptake for the set methods on mapping views in Py3.x?
I haven't seen any code using it, nor any bug reports or documentation requests, nor any code in the ASPN cookbook, nor mention of it on the newsgroup or python-help.
Has anyone here seen any hints about how this is faring in the wild?
If anyone is looking for further explanation as to why Guido's moratorium on core language changes is a good idea, allowing a chance for answers to questions like Raymond's above a chance to evolve naturally is what I see as the most important rationale.
I don't understand that rationale. Let's take a concrete example. The new `yield from` syntax was accepted but now will be delayed by the moratorium. How would the addition of `yield from` delay or prevent people using set methods on mapping views? If a proposed feature directly competes with a feature in 3.x, then it might delay usage of the 3.x feature -- but if that were the case, the proposal would almost certainly be rejected on the basis that 3.x already has a feature to do that very thing. -- Steven D'Aprano
On Mon, Oct 26, 2009 at 4:06 PM, Antoine Pitrou <solipsis@pitrou.net> wrote:
Steven D'Aprano <steve <at> pearwood.info> writes:
I don't understand that rationale. Let's take a concrete example. The new `yield from` syntax was accepted
Was it?
No. -- --Guido van Rossum PS. My elbow needs a couple more weeks of rest. Limiting myself to ultra-short emails.
On Tue, 27 Oct 2009 10:09:14 am Guido van Rossum wrote:
On Mon, Oct 26, 2009 at 4:06 PM, Antoine Pitrou <solipsis@pitrou.net> wrote:
Steven D'Aprano <steve <at> pearwood.info> writes:
I don't understand that rationale. Let's take a concrete example. The new `yield from` syntax was accepted
Was it?
No.
I thought it had been. My mistake. Serves me right for not checking the PEP first. But my point still stands. -- Steven D'Aprano
Steven D'Aprano wrote:
On Tue, 27 Oct 2009 10:09:14 am Guido van Rossum wrote:
On Mon, Oct 26, 2009 at 4:06 PM, Antoine Pitrou <solipsis@pitrou.net> wrote:
Steven D'Aprano <steve <at> pearwood.info> writes:
I don't understand that rationale. Let's take a concrete example. The new `yield from` syntax was accepted Was it? No.
I thought it had been. My mistake. Serves me right for not checking the PEP first. But my point still stands.
Rather than going through and saying "oh, change X touches on area Y, where we're waiting to see how change Z plays out, so we shouldn't do X yet" it is simpler to declare the core of the language off limits for a release or two. We made a lot of big changes to fairly core parts of the language in a relatively short period. Giving those a chance to settle down before we start fiddling further is unlikely to be detrimental in the long run. Cheers, Nick. -- Nick Coghlan | ncoghlan@gmail.com | Brisbane, Australia ---------------------------------------------------------------
On Mon, Oct 26, 2009 at 15:59, Steven D'Aprano <steve@pearwood.info> wrote:
On Tue, 27 Oct 2009 08:54:52 am Nick Coghlan wrote:
Raymond Hettinger wrote:
[GvR]
I still wish we could go back in time and unify sets and dicts, if only to find out how that experiment would turn out.
I'm curious about the outcome of another experiment along those lines. Is anyone seeing uptake for the set methods on mapping views in Py3.x?
I haven't seen any code using it, nor any bug reports or documentation requests, nor any code in the ASPN cookbook, nor mention of it on the newsgroup or python-help.
Has anyone here seen any hints about how this is faring in the wild?
If anyone is looking for further explanation as to why Guido's moratorium on core language changes is a good idea, allowing a chance for answers to questions like Raymond's above a chance to evolve naturally is what I see as the most important rationale.
I don't understand that rationale. Let's take a concrete example. The new `yield from` syntax was accepted but now will be delayed by the moratorium. How would the addition of `yield from` delay or prevent people using set methods on mapping views?
It doesn't, but the point is we have already added several things to the language in Python 3 that have gone mostly unused from the community thus far. We do not need to continue to pile on the new features when we already have a stack that we need to see if they pan out. -Brett
participants (7)
-
Antoine Pitrou -
Brett Cannon -
geremy condra -
Guido van Rossum -
Nick Coghlan -
Raymond Hettinger -
Steven D'Aprano