Show More
@@ -346,7 +346,7 b' SPEC 0 and SPEC 4' | |||
|
346 | 346 | You've heard about the NEPs, (NumPy enhancement Proposal), having a NEP for something non-numpy specific was sometime confusing. |
|
347 | 347 | Long live the `SPECs <https://scientific-python.org/specs/>`_. |
|
348 | 348 | |
|
349 |
We are now trying to follow SPEC 0 (aka old NEP 29) for |
|
|
349 | We are now trying to follow SPEC 0 (aka old NEP 29) for support of upstream libraries. | |
|
350 | 350 | |
|
351 | 351 | We also now try to follow SPEC 4 (test and publish nightly on a centralized nightly repository). |
|
352 | 352 | We encourage you to do so as well in order to report breakage, and contribute to the SPEC process ! |
@@ -356,7 +356,7 b' Python 3.12 compatibility ?' | |||
|
356 | 356 | ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ |
|
357 | 357 | |
|
358 | 358 | Python 3.12 changed its tokenizer to have better support for f-strings and allow arbitrary expression. |
|
359 |
This is a great new feature and performance improvement in |
|
|
359 | This is a great new feature and performance improvement in Python 3.12. | |
|
360 | 360 | |
|
361 | 361 | Unfortunately this means the new tokenizer does not support incomplete or invalid Python which will |
|
362 | 362 | break many features of IPython. Thus compatibility of IPython with Python 3.12 is not guarantied. |
General Comments 0
You need to be logged in to leave comments.
Login now