Le 5/11/21 à 8:39 PM, Guido van Rossum a écrit :

I doubt that anyone has the keys to the python project on sourceforge any more... :-( We've abandoned that platform nearly two decades ago.

That's right… Sourceforge staff mentionned there's the list of current admins here: => https://sourceforge.net/p/python/_members/ so if someone see its login there, you can try logging in and unhide the mailing list, else I'll try to have sourceforge unhide it by hand. -- [Julien Palard](https://mdk.fr)

Sorry, that was me. :-) On Tue, May 25, 2021 at 12:24 PM Brett Cannon <brett@python.org> wrote:

On Fri, May 21, 2021 at 9:25 AM Julien Palard via Python-Dev < python-dev@python.org> wrote:

...

Le 5/11/21 à 8:39 PM, Guido van Rossum a écrit :

...

I doubt that anyone has the keys to the python project on sourceforge any more... :-( We've abandoned that platform nearly two decades ago.

...

That's right…

Sourceforge staff mentionned there's the list of current admins here:

=> https://sourceforge.net/p/python/_members/

1Password to the rescue as I still have my keys! 😉

...

so if someone see its login there, you can try logging in and unhide the mailing list, else I'll try to have sourceforge unhide it by hand.

Is there something to do here? The python-iterators mailing list is already marked as public.

-Brett

...

-- [Julien Palard](https://mdk.fr)

_______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list -- python-dev@python.org To unsubscribe send an email to python-dev-leave@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman3/lists/python-dev.python.org/ Message archived at https://mail.python.org/archives/list/python-dev@python.org/message/DFE7G73N... Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/

_______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list -- python-dev@python.org To unsubscribe send an email to python-dev-leave@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman3/lists/python-dev.python.org/ Message archived at https://mail.python.org/archives/list/python-dev@python.org/message/C66CRKE5... Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/

-- --Guido van Rossum (python.org/~guido) *Pronouns: he/him **(why is my pronoun here?)* <http://feministing.com/2015/02/03/how-using-they-as-a-singular-pronoun-can-c...>

All right, I have changed the status to "hidden" (I'm not sure what that means but I suspect that it's not listed but if you happen to have a link you can see it). It looks like what's left of the archives is largely spam? Feel free to send a PR that unlinks it from the PEP. On Fri, May 28, 2021 at 2:37 PM Julien Palard via Python-Dev < python-dev@python.org> wrote:

Some bad news about python-iterators@lists.sourceforge.net, looks like sourceforge lost a huge part of the mailing list: they have 0 message before Sep. 2001.

So I think I'll soon drop the link(s) refering to it in the PEPs.

-- [Julien Palard](https://mdk.fr)

_______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list -- python-dev@python.org To unsubscribe send an email to python-dev-leave@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman3/lists/python-dev.python.org/ Message archived at https://mail.python.org/archives/list/python-dev@python.org/message/ZF64Y53M... Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/

-- --Guido van Rossum (python.org/~guido) *Pronouns: he/him **(why is my pronoun here?)* <http://feministing.com/2015/02/03/how-using-they-as-a-singular-pronoun-can-c...>

What are you trying to get from the archives? It is *possible* that I have a personal archive saved somewhere. On Sun, May 30, 2021 at 02:39 Julien Palard <julien@palard.fr> wrote:

Le 5/29/21 à 11:14 PM, Guido van Rossum a écrit :

...

It looks like what's left of the archives is largely spam?

Yes.

SourceForge staff has manually hidden most spam on this list a few days ago to help see better, but the interesting discussion is no longer here.

They checked in the mbox file on disk and found no more messages, and they don't have a backup.

Web archive did not captured the mails on sourceforge neither, but sourceforge support found a now disapeared archive of the list were captured by web archive [1], but it contains only subject names, not actual messages.

[1]: https://web.archive.org/web/*/http://www.geocrawler.com/archives/3/9283/* -- [Julien Palard](https://mdk.fr)

-- --Guido (mobile)

On Sun, May 30, 2021 at 9:10 AM Julien Palard <julien@palard.fr> wrote:

...

is the fact some things (like generators) give iterators instead of iterables as a hint they're not "rewindable" was initially thought of and part of the design, or it emerged later.

Hm... I don't think that was a big part of the original design. The true difference between iterable and iterator is that the iterator stores the state needed to iterate over a given iterable with a for-loop. So if you have an array, and you have two loops over them (e.g. nested, like this: for x in a: for y in a: print(x, y, x+y) ) then you need separate iterator objects so that advancing the inner iterator doesn't affect the outer iterator. This is why you can't store the iteration state in the iterable (the array) but must use a separate object. Iterators themselves cannot rewind -- at least, there's no standard API for it, and although nothing stops you from adding such an API to a *specific* iterator type, it's not a common pattern. Returning "self" as the iterator was originally only intended to paper over the case where you want to write it = iter(a) <maybe call next(it) a few times> for x in it: ... -- basically we wanted 'for x in iter(a)' and 'for x in a' to have the same meaning. IIRC iterables returning "self" as the iterator in other cases first came up for files, where we had long been struggling to find the best API to get all the lines of the file while still benefiting from buffering (calling f.readline() in a loop was too slow). The first version of this API was f.readlines(), which returned a list of strings. But we realized this could potentially use up too much memory, so we added an optional "hint" argument so you could say f.readlines(100000) and get a number of lines approximately corresponding to 100000 bytes. This required people to write fairly tedious double loops to loop over all lines efficiently, e.g. while 1: lines = f.readlines(100000) if not lines: break for line in lines: <do the thing per line> Maybe there was an intermediate step (I vaguely recall a special dunder?), but eventually we realized that the best way to write this was just for line in f: <do the thing per line> (the iterator can buffer internally) and we accepted that you can only iterate once over a file -- we just told people "if you double-iterate over a file it doesn't work right". -- --Guido van Rossum (python.org/~guido) *Pronouns: he/him **(why is my pronoun here?)* <http://feministing.com/2015/02/03/how-using-they-as-a-singular-pronoun-can-c...>