Responder: A familiar HTTP Service Framework

Post by mcintyre1994 » Wed, Oct 17, 2018, 1:04 PM UTC

ForHackernews wrote: post #65

paultopia wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, the speed thing with lockfiles is painful. But python dependency management is such a mess anyway that it's probably the best thing out there.

Consider https://github.com/sdispater/poetry as an alternative.

Post by int0x80 » Wed, Oct 17, 2018, 2:01 PM UTC

ryl00 wrote: post #57

paultopia wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I wonder if you have a different definition of "short scripts" than many others. It seems to me that a genuinely short script wouldn't require big refactors, or types---that would be overkill for a short script. Personally, I use Python as a Bash replacement a lot, that's what I think of when I hear "short scripts." Sort of what people used to use Perl for. Pushing strings around, complicated repetitive filesystem ma…

> Sort of what people used to use Perl for. Used to? People still do this (I should know; I'm one of them).

Post by basil-rash » Wed, Oct 17, 2018, 3:10 PM UTC

talltimtom wrote: post #59

basil-rash wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In further reflection, it is perhaps only because I am so used to TS that I try to make as intense of refactorings as I do. A programmer who does not have prior experience working with as well tooled of a language would not be attempting the kinds of transformations I do, and thus may not experience as many issues.

It sounds like you should invest some time in learning to program python in a pythonic way. If you are trying to build stuff using tons of design patterns factory patterns, you are doing it wrong. Most of those where made to work around limitations of type-systems which aren’t there in python, and naturally you end up having issues solving things like that when you don’t have typing. (Which you do still have with myp…

Post by daenz » Wed, Oct 17, 2018, 4:06 PM UTC

Perados wrote: post #93

daenz wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sorry, but invoking the name of someone who has many half-baked projects on their github (and again, that's totally fine), doesn't instill confidence in me to put my business's new product on it. There's nothing groundbreaking here. Innovation has to outweigh the lack of project maturity for serious people to use it in production, and the innovation just isn't here.

You really have no idea who Kenneth Reitz is, do you?

Post by a1369209993 » Wed, Oct 17, 2018, 9:41 PM UTC

basil-rash wrote: post #63

a1369209993 wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Regarding #2, the python code has the arguable advantage that (with appropriate variables in scope) it's valid standard python code[0] that could evaluate to (a representation of) the desired type, whereas the typescript isn't valid javascript code, and I don't think it's a valid (value-level) typescript expression either. 3 and 4 are disappointing though. 0: I'm assuming the extra [ after Callable is a typo.

Is there a utility to having your types and your values in the same namespace? The extra [ is not a typo, the syntax is: `Callable[[Arg1Type, Arg2Type], ReturnType]`. Or, if the arguments don't matter, `Callable[..., ReturnType]`, but this does not mean that the type is not a valid expression. Edit: I was missing a ] actually, separating the arguments from the return value.

  Server = Tuple[Address,ConnectionOptions] # array subscipt might not the best choice here, but it works
  UserId = NewType('UserId',int) # ordinary function call
  Scalar = int | str # could be equivalent to Union[int,str] with appropriate value of Type.__or__

  def intBit(N):
    if N==0: return type(None)
    if N==1: return Bool
    if N>INT_WIDTH: return long
    return int