Three-argument pow() now tries calling rpow() if necessary. Previously it was only called in two-argument pow() and the binary power operator. (Contributed by Serhiy Storchaka in gh-130104.)
that's a nail or wart that has been sticking out since forever
read the beta release notes to find out
no spoilers from me
another interesting thing is optimizing runtime using mypyc. This is how our dev toolchain is so quick.
mypy, flake8, isort, ... these kinda packages
Have never tried using mypyc would appreciate anyone sharing their experience with mypyc or other Python package compilers.
That's what code reviews feel like. Don't take it personally. Sugar coating advice is a skill when working in groups.
Evidently i'm not, so got that code review advice the less than tender way.
Everyone one else was not critical and let these avoidable coding mistakes slide. That doesn't fill me with confidence. Should strive to spend more time testing code bases to eventually be able to see and avoid these kinda coding mistakes.
If anyone feels the need to set me on the road to becoming a lovable teddy bear full of positivity and group comradery, jawboning alone is too kind, feel free to put me in the hot chair by reviewing packages have written and published.
Have ordered the packages according to the value you'd gain by learning them.
logging-strict
wreck
pytest-logging-strict
sphinx-external-toc-strict
drain-swamp and drain-swamp-action
Can see both the pros and cons.
Looking at existing packages we actually use, it's a mixed bag. When helping other projects, have not run into the situation where had to use ruff. Do see some uptake. It's not like a light switch there will be multiple commits before the ruff configuration is right. But i'm sure the configuration is simplier than the rocket science that is: black, flake8, isort, pre-compile, tox configurations.
Overtime expect Rust to bleed into the Python toolchain. The excuse to resist this is there is not enough time in the day for Python let alone other coding languages especially low level languages like Rust and integration of those low level languages and Python. Sounds like a ton of work unless intending to write Rust modules to optimize speed of complex Python apps.
So web scraping speed is at issue? I believe Python has beautifulsoup for web scrapping.
Unless it's for a learning experience, would recommend to not reinvent the wheel. Have been there done that too many times.
I feel like the village idiot cuz not properly learning that lesson.
You picked up an STD from mvirts. That dodgy terminology has been passed on and added to your lexicon.
South Park suggested the cure for this, eat a banana. Life doesn't have to make sense, roll with it.
Quickly taking a shower was oddly never suggested.
My name's not Shirley nor May. Meaning, the process guard has a name and it's not idiom.
... or just trying to identify who will out themselves as Captain Obvious.
went off without a hitch
That was a, sorry not sorry
Having multiple return statements in one function is a mistake. There shall ever be only one, unless that's unworkable due to tons of checks.
Cringe! That's like watching bad movies for the joy of really really bad movie moments. Watch Dead Snow II THEN Dead Snow I. Both are cringe. Former good cringe later really really bad cringe. Do not watch in chronological order.
A return statement within a while loop. Is that good or bad cringe?
Code with multiple return in one function/method screams noob. Especially when its completely unnecessary and avoidable. The return statement in random locations is a close 2nd.
The return statement in a while loop is just eyebrow raising. Like trying to write cringe, but forgot the threadpool, with GIL enabled, within the while on crack cocaine loop.
or avoid the break all together; coverage hates break and continue.
undefined
is_found = False
while(on crack cocaine):
if not is_found:
do something
is_found = True
else: # pragma: no cover
pass
or not introducing another programming language into your toolchain by sticking with black, flake8, isort, and pre-commit
Don't think that's a literal suggestion.
More like a subtle way to portray his frustrations having to look through code example with three while(True) loops?
1 2 3 4
1 2 3 4
1 2 3 4 5
1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 1 2 3
Opps!
What duh eh does standard idiom mean?
In computer programming, a programming idiom, code idiom or simply idiom is a code fragment having a semantic role[1] which recurs frequently across software projects. It often expresses a special feature of a recurring construct in one or more programming languages, frameworks or libraries. This definition is rooted in the linguistic definition of "idiom".
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Programming_idiom
So this term is vague and abstract. Really not a specific term or grouping of related things.
The actual terminology
That standard idiom is called, process guard or simply guard. Learn about this term when doing anything involving multiprocessing.
The if name == "main": guard is important when working with multiprocessing in Python. This prevents the creation of duplicate processes when the module is imported.
https://labex.io/tutorials/python-how-to-pass-arguments-in-python-multiprocessing-430780
So it's totally not for what its being described as. Or that's an oversimplification with a loss of vital details of it's actual purpose.
It could be worse
When don't know the name for something, Call it stuff!. Ya know, when really suack at naming things, be unrepentant! Stuff is as bad of a term i could come up with. Means didn't know how to describe it to accurately relate what it is or does, without being vulgar; out of fear the typos author left an Easter egg which is best left lie.
Used this term once, for a SQLAlchemy non-request based router implementation, the Session (term already taken) i call SessionStuff. Doesn't that just scream competence and authoritative implementation?
What do you do for a job? Urrrh ... stuff?
Regretted immediately and still do. Cuz session seems to have three different contexts / meanings.
Oh shit! Used the term, stuff. That's code prefer to not even read. That's a thing of nightmares that haunts our collective waking moments.
Who are you writing package for?
backend stuff need not run on Windows at all.
type hints are static, not necessarily runtime.
A chaos monkey throws everything at everything to see what breaks.
That won't be caught by perfect type hints, which is merely one tool in the toolbox.
and when things break, often hear WAD, works as designed. Or some other nonsense excuse.
Oh no a stray None! Take cover ...
Robust codebase should never fail from a stray None
Chaos testing is specifically geared towards bullet proofing code against unexpected param types including None.
The only exception is for private support function for type specific checking functions. Where it's obviously only for one type ever.
We live in clownworld, i'm a clown and keep the company of shit throwing monkeys.
Another use case is to reduce maintenance cost
Assuming an equivalent package is produced, what's the maintenance cost (factoring in coder availability) difference between the Python vs faster language implementations?
^^ therein lies the rub
Reminds of the expression, premature optimization is the root of all evil
if not swimming in funding, might be a darwinic move to choose the faster language and have to code everything yourself from scratch
Dependency management
Market research
This post is only about dependency management, not package management, not build backends.
You know about these:
- uv
- poetry
- pipenv
You are probably not familiar with:
- pip-compile-multi(toposort, pip-tools)
You are defintely unfamiliar with:
- wreck(pip-tools, pip-requirements-parser)
pip-compile-multi creates lock files. Has no concept of unlock files.
wreck produces both lock and unlock files. venv aware.
Both sync dependencies across requirement files
Both act only upon requirements files, not venv(s)
Up to speed with wreck
You are familiar with .in and .txt requirements files.
.txt is split out into .lock and .unlock. The later is for packages which are not apps.
Create .in files that are interlinked with -r and -c. No editable builds. No urls.
(If this is a deal breaker feel free to submit a PR)
pins files
pins-*.in are for common constraints. The huge advantage here is to document why?
Feedback on gh profile design
Author of wreck pytest-logging-strict sphinx-external-toc-strict and drain-swamp - msftcangoblowm
Finally got around to creating a gh profile page
The design is to give activity insights on:
- what Issues/PRs working on
- future issues/PRs
- for fun, show off package mascots
All out of ideas. Any suggestions? How did you improve your github profile?
Whats in a Python tarball
From helping other projects have run across a fundamental issue which web searches have not given appropriate answers.
What should go in a tarball and what should not?
Is it only the build files, python code, and package data and nothing else?
Should it include tests/ folder?
Should it include development and configuration files?
Have seven published packages which include almost all the files and folders. Including:
.gitignore,
.gitattributes,
.github folder tree,
docs/,
tests/,
Makefile,
all config files,
all tox files,
pre-commit config file
My thinking is that the tarball should have everything needed to maintain the package, but this belief has been challenged. That the tarball is not appropriate for that.
Thoughts?
PEP 735 does dependency group solve anything?
This PEP specifies a mechanism for storing package requirements in pyproject.toml files such that they are not included in any built distribution of the project.
PEP 735 what is it's goal? Does it solve our dependency hell issue?
A deep dive and out comes this limitation
The mutual compatibility of Dependency Groups is not guaranteed.
-- https://peps.python.org/pep-0735/#lockfile-generation
Huh?! Why not?
mutual compatibility or go pound sand!
undefined
pip install -r requirements/dev.lock pip install -r requirements/kit.lock -r requirements/manage.lock
The above code, purposefully, does not afford pip a fighting chance. If there are incompatibilities, it'll come out when trying randomized combinations.
Without a means to test for and guarantee mutual compatibility, end users will always find themselves in dependency hell.
Any combination of requirement files (or dependency groups), intended for the same venv, MUST always work!
What if this is scaled further, instead of one package, a chain of packages?!
constraint vs requirement. What's the difference?
In a requirements-*.in file, at the top of the file, are lines with -c and -r flags followed by a requirements-*.in file. Uses relative paths (ignoring URLs).
Say have docs/requirements-pip-tools.in
undefined
-r ../requirements/requirements-prod.in -c ../requirements/requirements-pins-base.in -c ../requirements/requirements-pins-cffi.in ...
The intent is compiling this would produce docs/requirements-pip-tool.txt
But there is confusion as to which flag to use. It's non-obvious.
constraint
Subset of requirements features. Intended to restrict package versions. Does not necessarily (might not) install the package!
Does not support:
- editable mode (-e)
- extras (e.g. coverage[toml])
Personal preference
- always organize requirements files in folder(s)
- don't prefix requirements files with
requirements-, just doing it here - DRY principle applies; split out constraints which are shared.