Mailman 3 October 2009 - Python-ideas

One obvious way to do interning [Was: Retrieve an arbitrary element from a set without removing it]
by Alexander Belopolsky Oct. 26, 2009

Oct. 26, 2009

Changing the subject to reflect branched discussion and forwarding to python-ideas where it probably belongs. On Mon, Oct 26, 2009 at 12:02 PM, Terry Reedy <tjreedy(a)udel.edu> wrote: > Alexander Belopolsky wrote: > >> Here is an alternative idea on how storing interned objects in a set >> can be supported. Currently set.add method returns None and has no >> effect when set already has an object equal to the one being added. I >> propose to consider … [View More]

1 0

add a global tick register to the interpreter?
by Sturla Molden Oct. 23, 2009

Oct. 23, 2009

(Please forgive me if this belongs on python-dev.) When measuring the performance of a Python or Python program, it is often required to keep precise count of interpreter tics and periodic checks. There is no way to to this reliably, except modify ceval.c and rebuild Python. I think facilities for performance measures should be available. It should not be neccesary edit ceval.c and rebuild Python just to measure how Python itself or a Python program performs. I am therefore proposing this … [View More]

2 3

Proposal : Python Trusted Computing API
by Abhiram Kasina Oct. 23, 2009

Oct. 23, 2009

Hi all Thank you very much for the response. I have tried to answer all the issues as much as I can. > Hm... Given that most infections these days are JavaScript based and > run in the browser, how does this provide any protection? I'm > presuming you're going to say that it doesn't but that there are other > use cases where it *does* provide protection; but most likely those > use cases are only relevant for Windows (since that's what most > attackers attack anyway). Guido,… [View More] I don't know the exact security model and I am currently going through it. But it has a mechanism in which none of the passwords or anything can be ever given out. So, phishing and pharming could be fought better. I agree that most of the cases of viruses are in Windows, but there are many cases in the past in which they have affected linux machines as well. So, if security is being made better, it should be used. > Since this intefaces with the hardware, doesn't it require some kind > of cooperation from the Linux kernel? And wouldn't it be better if > Python was never allowed access to any of the protected resources in > the first place? There would be a wrapper on top of the drivers running at the kernel level. Lets say there is a Python application which uses some sort of password authentication. If the password is present somehow in the memory, it could be stolen. But if its present inside a completely separate hardware, which doesn't allow it to be retrieved, I think that will be better. > Where/what is Umit? (Google gives several meanings but it's unclear > which you might mean.) By Umit, I meant Umit Project [1]. Its the GUI for nmap and its being built completely in Python. > You'd first have to tell us more about the security model. What is a > "secure application" and what does it protect against? And how? Yes, I will take some time to understand the model and present you the details of the model well when I get some time. > I personally have grave concerns about this technology, independent of > who is advancing it- just reading the links you provide makes it clear > that its primary purpose is to restrict the degree of control a user can > exercise over their own data, programs, and machine. Is it any wonder > that the same people who find DRM abhorrent find the technologies > used to advance it equally distasteful? Geremy, I have read the TPM specifications to some extent and the only thing enabling DRM here is the presence of a system-specific key. And it is heavily impractical to encrypt every music file with that key, when the vendor is selling it. It could be done even now, they want to do it. > If you were suggesting adding a crypto API to python, I'd be all > for it- but you're suggesting adding the ability to have Python > software vendors remotely cripple the code on your machine. > I just can't get behind that, and while you're sure to hear wildly > divergent opinions on this board, I suspect that mine will not > be an uncommon sentiment. I appreciate the opinion and I am not suggesting adding a crypto API. Thanks Abhiram Kasina [1] http://www.umitproject.org/ [View Less]

2 1

a new lambda syntax
by starwing Oct. 23, 2009

Oct. 23, 2009

In ruby, we can add a lambda function into a function call. but it's a little ugly: [1,2,3,4].each { |x| print x } but, it really convenient. current lambda only support single line syntax. it's not very good. maybe we can add a new syntax: call: primary "(" argument-list ")" [ "lambda" parameter-list ":" suite ] the postfix lambda will translate to a single "function" object, and pass to the &arg parameter of function. so the function call will become func(*arg1, **arg2, &arg3) … [View More]

12 35

Re: [Python-ideas] Proposal: Moratorium on Python language changes
by Larry Bugbee Oct. 23, 2009

Oct. 23, 2009

On Wed, Oct 21, 2009 at 12:42 PM, Guido van Rossum wrote: > I propose a moratorium on language changes. This would be a > period of several years during which no changes to Python's > grammar or language semantics will be accepted. I agree with a moratorium. I cannot imagine it doing any harm. I'd even go so far as to say new language syntax and semantics should only come in only at top level version numbers like 2.0, 3.0, 4.0, etc. ...not at 3.2, 3.3, 3.4, etc. And at … [View More]

6 10

nonlocal functions
by Bruce Leban Oct. 22, 2009

Oct. 22, 2009

On Tue, Oct 20, 2009 at 4:04 AM, Nick Coghlan <ncoghlan(a)gmail.com> wrote: > The difference lies in the fact that in C, object references are > non-local by default - you have to declare them explicitly in the > current scope to make them local. > > Accordingly, I find the idea of a new function-like construct where all > non-argument variable references are nonlocal by default to be a > potentially interesting one. > Hmm. That's an interesting idea. I don't … [View More]

9 15

A standard location for Python configuration files.
by Tarek Ziadé Oct. 22, 2009

Oct. 22, 2009

Hello, As discussed in issue #7175 and on irc, I would like to propose the addition of a new function called 'getuserconfig' in site.py. This function will return the path to a directory that will contain configuration files for Python. The name I am suggesting for the path of the folder is: ~/.python with an alternative location for win32 : ~/python This win32 alternative is proposed to avoid the fact that it's not possible in some flavors of windows to manually create a folder that … [View More]

8 14

Re: [Python-ideas] Proposal: Moratorium on Python language changes
by Raymond Hettinger Oct. 22, 2009

Oct. 22, 2009

[Guido van Rossum] > Note, the moratorium would only cover the language itself plus > built-in functions, not the standard library. That makes sense. There may be a few areas that still have some rough edges where you may want to allow changes if needed (tweaks to the nested with-statement syntax, bytes/text interaction, star-args unpacking, or string formatting). These areas probably have not been exercised much and there may still be problems that need to be ironed-out. I don't … [View More]

5 5

Re: [Python-ideas] Proposal: Moratorium on Python language changes
by Larry Bugbee Oct. 22, 2009

Oct. 22, 2009

On Wed, Oct 21, 2009 at 12:42 PM, Guido van Rossum wrote: > I propose a moratorium on language changes. This would be a > period of several years during which no changes to Python's > grammar or language semantics will be accepted. I think a moratorium would be Goodness. I cannot imagine it doing any harm. I'd even go so far as to say new language syntax and semantics should only come in only at top level version numbers like 2.0, 3.0, 4.0, etc. ...not at 3.2, 3.3, 3.4, … [View More]

1 0

Re: [Python-ideas] [Python-Dev] GIL behaviour under Windows
by Sturla Molden Oct. 22, 2009

Oct. 22, 2009

Antoine Pitrou skrev: > Kristján sent me a patch which I applied and is supposed to fix this. > Anyway, thanks for the numbers. The GIL does seem to fare a bit better (zero > latency with the Pi calculation in the background) than under Linux, although it > may be caused by the limited resolution of time.time() under Windows. > > My critisism of the GIL on python-ideas was partly motivated by this: http://blip.tv/file/2232410 However, David Beazley is not talking about … [View More]

1 1