# Meta: Lifetime of an idea. 1, 2 & 3 **URL:** \ **Category:** Discourse Feedback\ **Created:** [May 15, 2024, 12:53am UTC](https://discuss.python.org/t/meta-lifetime-of-an-idea-1-2-3/53344 "2024-05-15T00:53:45Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 1\ **Showing post:** 95
**Author:** ![elis.byberi](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex002/user_avatar/discuss.python.org/elis.byberi/32/35937_2.png) [@elis.byberi](https://discuss.python.org/u/elis.byberi)\ **Post date:** [May 22, 2024, 10:41am UTC](https://discuss.python.org/t/meta-lifetime-of-an-idea-1-2-3/53344/95 "2024-05-22T10:41:54Z")
If you’re looking for previous proposals, #Python Help is a great place to check, as many #Ideas threads have been moved there. Moving Ideas threads to Help is standard practice. I don’t think adding another general/discussion category will make the current situation any easier. Example: [Search results for 'propos #users' - Discussions on Python.org](https://discuss.python.org/search?q=propos%20%23users) Results: > [@Subtract from a string (str -= x) as shortcut for str.replace(x, "")](https://discuss.python.org/t/subtract-from-a-string-str-x-as-shortcut-for-str-replace-x/30439): > > Fun thought. We have string concatenation, so what about the opposite? I was brainstorming how str -= x could work, and considering the purpose of .[l|r]strip(x) which would handle removing characters from any/either side, I think the syntax should equal the same as str.replace(x, ''), as there’s currently no shortcut for it. I would accept either the exact same, or kind of like strip(x) where x is interpreted as a list of characters and not a full match. > [@Tuples with named items/elements](https://discuss.python.org/t/tuples-with-named-items-elements/37084/2): > > Have you considered using a dictionary instead? Also I don’t think you’d ever want to actually call namedtuple inside of a loop, the performance of that will probably be pretty bad. > [@Make MRO topological sorted](https://discuss.python.org/t/make-mro-topological-sorted/32300): > > Python [MRO](https://www.python.org/download/releases/2.3/mro/) is a linear ordering of the base classes that is used to decide the order in which inherited methods are overridden. As mentioned in @guido’s [blog](http://python-history.blogspot.com/2010/06/method-resolution-order.html#:~:text=comes%20into%20play.-,Basically%2C%20the%20idea%20behind%20C3%20is%20that%20if%20you%20write%20down,such%20an%20ordering%20can%20not%20be%20determined%2C%20the%20algorithm%20will%20fail.,-Thus%2C%20in%20Python): Basically, the idea behind C3 is that if you write down all of the ordering rules imposed by inheritance relationships in a complex class hierarchy, the algorithm will determine a monotonic ordering of the classes that satisfies all of them. If such an ordering can not be determined, the algorithm will fail. Unfortunately, sometimes ev… > [@Alternate design for removing the GIL](https://discuss.python.org/t/alternate-design-for-removing-the-gil/28234): > > This is somewhat me thinking out loud of a slightly different way of removing the GIL. Whilst avoiding some of the downsides mentioned for @colesbury 's [PEP703](https://peps.python.org/pep-0703/). I’m trying to propose a design, not an implementation. There are many ways of building something like this. These things are typically complex in reality, and require many hours to get working well. Also worth noting that post this from a random guy rambling on about performance, without any code or numbers backing him up. I somewhat w… > [@Operators with strings](https://discuss.python.org/t/operators-with-strings/25361): > > in Python, “A” + “V” = “AV” but “AV” - “V” produces an error. seems like in a world of NLP, python should have more string operators (-. +, etc) example xyz = “the guy is a turkey” current python = just another immutable string strings like xyz shoud have methods like 'xyz.author" xyz.date xyz.true.opinion etc just my two cents… thank you, James > [@Proposal: Add \`bound\` to \`ParamSpec\`](https://discuss.python.org/t/proposal-add-bound-to-paramspec/39979): > > Hi all, Is it feasible to add a bound parameter to ParamSpec? Sometimes, manually specifying the bound can greatly reduce the difficulty of using ParamSpec. For example, I have a base class defined like this: class IntView: def \_\_init\_\_(self, init\_data: int): ... Then I want to inherit IntView like this: class RangedIntView(IntView): def \_\_init\_\_(self, init\_data: int, min\_value: int, max\_value: int): super().\_\_init\_\_(init\_data) self.\_min\_value = min\_value … --- _[View the full topic](https://discuss.python.org/t/meta-lifetime-of-an-idea-1-2-3/53344)._