[Python-3000] PEP Parade (original) (raw)

Guido van Rossum guido at python.org
Tue May 1 21:01:53 CEST 2007

On 5/1/07, Jim Jewett <jimjjewett at gmail.com> wrote:

On 5/1/07, Guido van Rossum <guido at python.org> wrote:

> So the PEP submissions are in, and a few late ones will be submitted > ASAP. Let me write up a capsule review of what we've got. Please let > me know if I missed anything (e.g. a PEP that someone has committed to > write but hasn't submitted yet). (1) The this* PEP was written and posted; I'll revise it slightly tonight.

this? What's that? I must've missed the posting of the pep, sorry. You can mail me the PEP (best as an attachment) and I will assign it a number and check it in.

One benefit would be a minimal-change version of super.

(2) Calvin's and Tim's more complete reworking of super.

Oooh, I missed that too.

(3) final/once/name annotations -- I think this was dropped when case statements were rejected, but I'm not sure.

Unless there's a PEP that was posted before the deadline I don't want to hear about it.

> PEP: Eliminate del (Raymond Hettinger)

> I would be in favor of this or one of the alternative ideas for fixing > the can't-GC-a-cycle-with-del issue if there was a clear recipe > and (if necessary) stdlib support for what to do instead. There are > real use cases for automatic finalization for which the atexit module > isn't the right solution and try/finally or with statements don't cut > it either. Does the alternative need to cover 100% of use cases? If it covers 99%, should the other 1% become impossible, or should we keep del as fallback?

What 1% use case are you thinking of?

-- --Guido van Rossum (home page: http://www.python.org/~guido/)

More information about the Python-3000 mailing list