[Python-Dev] Negative times behaviour in itertools.repeat for Python maintenance releases (2.7, 3.3 and maybe 3.4)
Vajrasky Kok
sky.kok at speaklikeaking.com
Tue Jan 28 03:00:36 CET 2014
More information about the Python-Dev mailing list
Tue Jan 28 03:00:36 CET 2014
- Previous message: [Python-Dev] Negative times behaviour in itertools.repeat for Python maintenance releases (2.7, 3.3 and maybe 3.4)
- Next message: [Python-Dev] Negative times behaviour in itertools.repeat for Python maintenance releases (2.7, 3.3 and maybe 3.4)
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
On Mon, Jan 27, 2014 at 9:13 PM, Larry Hastings <larry at hastings.org> wrote: > > I apologize for not making myself clear. But that's part of what I meant, > yes: we should preserve the existing behavior of times=-1 when passed in by > position or by keyword. However, we should *also* add a deprecation warning > when passing times=-1 by keyword, suggesting that they use times=None > instead. The idea is that we could eventually remove the PyTuple_Size check > and make times=-1 always behave like times=0. In practice it'd be okay with > me if we never did, or at least not until Python 4. > So we only add deprecation warning to only times=-1 via keyword or for all negative numbers to times via keyword? I mean, what about: >>> from itertools import repeat >>> list(repeat('a', times=-2)) Traceback (most recent call last): File "<stdin>", line 1, in <module> OverflowError: Python int too large to convert to C ssize_t Deprecation warning or not?
- Previous message: [Python-Dev] Negative times behaviour in itertools.repeat for Python maintenance releases (2.7, 3.3 and maybe 3.4)
- Next message: [Python-Dev] Negative times behaviour in itertools.repeat for Python maintenance releases (2.7, 3.3 and maybe 3.4)
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
More information about the Python-Dev mailing list