I think it also strengthens the neural pathway so that <speculation>when the next time you face the many options, the weight would be just slightly higher</>.
(I am assuming human brain works similar to how neural net works. I can be wrong here. )
Well, it is generally more likely to be tuned to AWS, containing right drivers and tools installed than a default distro you would download from the website, but the images that are available on AWS would likely also tuned similarly. If there are some issues where other image is noticeable worse they would look into AmazonLinux and apply the changes from it.
I would say that AmazonLinux is likely to have less issues with latest instance types (if they change something "hardware" wise, for example when AWS started exposing EBS using NVMe drivers there were some issues originally).
Fun story: four years ago, I hired Adrian to move a second-hand piano into our house. We lived on a very steep area with a narrow elbow driveway. Adrian has this incredible spatial memory and fine motor control that I still find it hard to believe how he did it.
He loaded the piano in his trailer and basically backed his BMW all the way up with half meter at most on each side, slowly through that elbow bend and parked the trailer's door right on where we planned to unload the piano. Maybe 2cm away from where he intended to land it.
The problem with rants is it stings and it divides.
When it comes to constructive criticism, I think Amber did a good job with her criticism but can do better at the constructive front. Her problem statement was spot on and I agree that the direction she proposed is a good one.
However, to separate the standard library from the core is probably even more dramatic than the Python 2 to 3 migration. Is that what the community can afford at the moment? What's needed to make the transition? What's the opportunity costs? i.e. what other developments we can do for a bigger impact? What are the pros and cons?
Is "embrace PyPI and move things like asyncio there" not a constructive suggestion, or is she sort of being penalized because the most reasonable solution to the problem can be described in less than half a sentence so it's seems like there's more complaint than solution?
Yup. Totally agree with you on that. And yes this one is a constructive proposal.
My problem is on the like part.
Where shall we draw the line and how do we decide? To me this is a far more interesting discussion. (Maybe it has happened. I don’t go to many conferences these days so I might be missing something here. )
She mentioned http.client vs requests, datetime vs. moments etc, which are also quite correct to me. How about the cgilibs? Or pickle? Or the collections? Or unittest? Stay or go?
Lastly, the title of the talk can be tempered a bit. No? We all know what a leaking battery mean right? Toxic.
> Where shall we draw the line and how do we decide?
Why does there need to be a line? As long as the package manager is part of the core distribution (even if it is itself an upgradable package) why not moving everything into packages, even if some are maintained by the core team and have the stable version at time of distribution release included with the core distribution—but perhaps installed only on demand?
Lastly, the title of the talk can be tempered a bit. No? We all know what a leaking battery mean right? Toxic.
Come on. Python has had the 'batteries' metaphor for decades and this is a straightforward and obvious play on it. You're bringing 'toxic' into this which I suppose is technically and biochemically correct (both, surely, the best kinds of correct) but has far, far more negative connotations than the title warrants. You're having to work really hard to make a generic thing sound dreadful.
> To be honest, I think she might be biased here given that she maintains a competing package.
I hope that you take time to reconsider this view.
We're not talking about competition in the same sense as in a capitalist system, between two companies.
Prior to asyncio, Twisted maintained the only viable flow control for serious asynchrony in python. Put another way, python had no standard flow control for serious asynchronous abstractions in the standard language (and standard library) before asyncio (and `await/async def`, etc) landed.
Nobody is saying that the syntactical changes to python belong in a separate package on PyPI (cue Gary Bernhardt's Pretzel Colon). These things are fine.
But `asyncio.Future`? Yeah, I see a very reasonable argument for that stuff (ie, the asyncio namespace) being in a separate package.
But OK - looking again at the "competing package" narrative: now that these things have landed, Twisted has done an amazing job of using them alongside all the other tooling that Twisted also provides, most notably its test infrastructure.
Amber doesn't stand to personally benefit from asyncio failing. To the contrary, having the flow control taken care of so that Twisted doesn't have to be its sole brainparent gives her much less free work to feel obligated to do.
Not GP, but Gary Bernhardt is the guy who gave the classic "Wat" [0] and "Birth and Death of JavaScript" [1] talks, and some searching turns up "pretzel colon" as the "&:" operator in Ruby [2]. I assume he's mentioned it in a screencast or something, but I wasn't able to find it.
As mentioned in the article, this has already been explored with the "ensurepip" approach.
And it wasn't the only thing at the language summit that proposed expanding that approach: there was a discussion of carrying time zone updates in the same way, by shipping something with the interpreter that works but allowing updates from PyPI. http://pyfound.blogspot.com/2019/05/paul-ganssle-time-zones-...
So I think the development community / target audience at the language summit already understands the pros and cons of the suggested approach and the technical route to get there. (For an end user, my guess is the experience will be that anything in the Python 3.x standard library today will still be in the Python 3.x standard library, but you'll have to `pip install` a newer version if you want more features, and you get the benefit of being able to `pip install` something from the standard library where you previously couldn't.)
I find it interesting that nobody has asked this question: what is your life situation?
Do you have a family? House/mortgage? Health insurance? You mentioned that CoCalc hires some engineers, some hat’s the burn rate? What do you need to keep working on it?
If you have got your baseline covered, William, i’d say go for it. Your heart is clearly on this path.
I think it also strengthens the neural pathway so that <speculation>when the next time you face the many options, the weight would be just slightly higher</>.
(I am assuming human brain works similar to how neural net works. I can be wrong here. )
reply