clear() method for lists
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/f3e46/f3e4602943c9dd6ee1b7920ffcc2de4e4bfa271a" alt=""
In the list archives, this thread http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-ideas/2009-April/003897.html discusses adding a clear() method to list objects, to complement those available for sets and dictionaries. Later in the thread: http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-ideas/2009-April/003933.html Christian Heimes provided a patch to do it and R. H. commented that all it would take is Guido's blessing. So, I'm wondering, can we do this? What are the steps needed to ask this work to be blessed? -- Gerald Britton
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/3c3b2/3c3b2a6eec514cc32680936fa4e74059574d2631" alt=""
On Fri, Feb 5, 2010 at 1:09 PM, Raymond Hettinger <raymond.hettinger@gmail.com> wrote:
ISTM, the language moratorium would preclude this change.
Oops, you're right. Scratch the go-ahead. :-( While PEP 3003 allows case-by-case exemptions for adding methods to built-in objects, I think this isn't one of those cases, since the work-around sure is simple enough, and has been in the language for 20 years now. ;-)
Though it's a common-enough special case that it shouldn't need slice manipulations, which are a bit of an acquired taste. I probably would have added this if I'd anticipated dict.clear(), which wasn't always part of the language. --Guido
-- --Guido van Rossum (python.org/~guido)
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/e87f3/e87f3c7c6d92519a9dac18ec14406dd41e3da93d" alt=""
On Fri, Feb 5, 2010 at 13:21, Gerald Britton <gerald.britton@gmail.com>wrote:
Yep. Which reminds me, how do we want to handle ideas that come up during hte moratorium? Do we simply want to force them to be brought up again when 3.3 development opens up, or should we settle them now and require they have a PEP or bug marked for 3.3? The former risks a thundering herd of idea but it does make sure only serious ideas get brought up as someone has to remember to mention it again in at least a year. -Brett
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/3c3b2/3c3b2a6eec514cc32680936fa4e74059574d2631" alt=""
On Fri, Feb 5, 2010 at 1:55 PM, Brett Cannon <brett@python.org> wrote:
I don't think we need to settle on a single process for this. If someone cares enough to write a PEP or file a bug let them do it. If they don't but remember when the moratorium ends, we can't stop them. I suppose a new tracker category for this would be fine to add. If someone actually goes through the efforts of writing a PEP falling in this category we can add a new PEP status too. -- --Guido van Rossum (python.org/~guido)
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/e87f3/e87f3c7c6d92519a9dac18ec14406dd41e3da93d" alt=""
On Fri, Feb 5, 2010 at 13:59, Guido van Rossum <guido@python.org> wrote:
For issues it's probably enough to either mark them against Python 3.3 or add a Moratorium keyword and simply not set their version in case the moratorium goes past 3.3. As for PEPs, we can mark their targeted version as 'Moratorium' or something. -Brett
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/efe4b/efe4bed0c2a0c378057d3a32de1b9bcc193bea5e" alt=""
Am 05.02.2010 23:06, schrieb Brett Cannon:
+1 -- I've created http://bugs.python.org/keyword10 for the eventuality. Georg -- Thus spake the Lord: Thou shalt indent with four spaces. No more, no less. Four shall be the number of spaces thou shalt indent, and the number of thy indenting shall be four. Eight shalt thou not indent, nor either indent thou two, excepting that thou then proceed to four. Tabs are right out.
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/c4c8c/c4c8c9ee578d359a3234c68c5656728c7c864441" alt=""
On 2010-02-05 15:09 PM, Raymond Hettinger wrote:
ISTM, the language moratorium would preclude this change.
""" Case-by-Case Exemptions New methods on built-ins The case for adding a method to a built-in object can be made. """ -- Robert Kern "I have come to believe that the whole world is an enigma, a harmless enigma that is made terrible by our own mad attempt to interpret it as though it had an underlying truth." -- Umberto Eco
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/3c3b2/3c3b2a6eec514cc32680936fa4e74059574d2631" alt=""
On Fri, Feb 5, 2010 at 1:09 PM, Raymond Hettinger <raymond.hettinger@gmail.com> wrote:
ISTM, the language moratorium would preclude this change.
Oops, you're right. Scratch the go-ahead. :-( While PEP 3003 allows case-by-case exemptions for adding methods to built-in objects, I think this isn't one of those cases, since the work-around sure is simple enough, and has been in the language for 20 years now. ;-)
Though it's a common-enough special case that it shouldn't need slice manipulations, which are a bit of an acquired taste. I probably would have added this if I'd anticipated dict.clear(), which wasn't always part of the language. --Guido
-- --Guido van Rossum (python.org/~guido)
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/e87f3/e87f3c7c6d92519a9dac18ec14406dd41e3da93d" alt=""
On Fri, Feb 5, 2010 at 13:21, Gerald Britton <gerald.britton@gmail.com>wrote:
Yep. Which reminds me, how do we want to handle ideas that come up during hte moratorium? Do we simply want to force them to be brought up again when 3.3 development opens up, or should we settle them now and require they have a PEP or bug marked for 3.3? The former risks a thundering herd of idea but it does make sure only serious ideas get brought up as someone has to remember to mention it again in at least a year. -Brett
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/3c3b2/3c3b2a6eec514cc32680936fa4e74059574d2631" alt=""
On Fri, Feb 5, 2010 at 1:55 PM, Brett Cannon <brett@python.org> wrote:
I don't think we need to settle on a single process for this. If someone cares enough to write a PEP or file a bug let them do it. If they don't but remember when the moratorium ends, we can't stop them. I suppose a new tracker category for this would be fine to add. If someone actually goes through the efforts of writing a PEP falling in this category we can add a new PEP status too. -- --Guido van Rossum (python.org/~guido)
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/e87f3/e87f3c7c6d92519a9dac18ec14406dd41e3da93d" alt=""
On Fri, Feb 5, 2010 at 13:59, Guido van Rossum <guido@python.org> wrote:
For issues it's probably enough to either mark them against Python 3.3 or add a Moratorium keyword and simply not set their version in case the moratorium goes past 3.3. As for PEPs, we can mark their targeted version as 'Moratorium' or something. -Brett
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/efe4b/efe4bed0c2a0c378057d3a32de1b9bcc193bea5e" alt=""
Am 05.02.2010 23:06, schrieb Brett Cannon:
+1 -- I've created http://bugs.python.org/keyword10 for the eventuality. Georg -- Thus spake the Lord: Thou shalt indent with four spaces. No more, no less. Four shall be the number of spaces thou shalt indent, and the number of thy indenting shall be four. Eight shalt thou not indent, nor either indent thou two, excepting that thou then proceed to four. Tabs are right out.
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/c4c8c/c4c8c9ee578d359a3234c68c5656728c7c864441" alt=""
On 2010-02-05 15:09 PM, Raymond Hettinger wrote:
ISTM, the language moratorium would preclude this change.
""" Case-by-Case Exemptions New methods on built-ins The case for adding a method to a built-in object can be made. """ -- Robert Kern "I have come to believe that the whole world is an enigma, a harmless enigma that is made terrible by our own mad attempt to interpret it as though it had an underlying truth." -- Umberto Eco
participants (9)
-
average
-
Brett Cannon
-
Christian Heimes
-
Georg Brandl
-
Gerald Britton
-
Guido van Rossum
-
Raymond Hettinger
-
Robert Kern
-
Terry Reedy