For me, the personal benefit of getting a patch applied
would be so that I didn't have to keep re-applying it
to new versions of Python, and that I could distribute
code relying on the patch to others without requiring
*them* to use a patched version of Python as well.
What you describe is pro
Miguel Lobo wrote:
> In fact I'm probably the person the
> patch will benefit least, because I have already run into the problem
> and know how to solve it.
For me, the personal benefit of getting a patch applied
would be so that I didn't have to keep re-applying it
to new versions of Python, an
Miguel Lobo schrieb:
> Perhaps one example would help to clarify what I mean. I see that there
> is an xml.parsers.expat module, with the following content:
>
>
>
> """Interface to the Expat non-validating XML parser."""
> __version__ = '$Revision: 17640 $'
>
> from pyexpat import *
>
>
Normally, the builtin modules are the ones that are shipped in Python
core. I know you can get a bigger builtins list through freeze, or
through a custom Setup.local, but it is fairly uncommon to do that.
Also, having extension modules in a namespace is something that I
would normally not do. I
Miguel Lobo schrieb:
> It won't benefit the Python core either, because we just don't use
> builtin submodules. In fact, I find the notion of builtin submodules
> somewhat strange.
>
>
> Please excuse my curiosity, but why do you find it strange?
Normally, the builtin modules are the
On 3/6/07, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 10:22 pm, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
[snip]
> >I'm hoping Collin will continue his excellent work on 2to3. Hopefully
> >he'll get help from others in writing docs aimed at teaching the
> >c.l.py crowd how to use it and what to expect.
>
> I
Hi Collin,
On Mon, Mar 12, 2007 at 11:19:26AM -0500, Collin Winter wrote:
> iter() is part of every syntactic construction that takes an iterator
> argument (for, listcomps, gencomps, ...). Should it go in operator as
> well?
Historically, things that have a slot go in 'operator'. So that would
Yes.
On 3/12/07, Collin Winter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 3/11/07, Armin Rigo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Hi Collin,
> >
> > On Wed, Mar 07, 2007 at 11:53:45PM -0600, Collin Winter wrote:
> > > bool() and abs() aren't syntax, so I would never look in operator.
> >
> > abs() is not syntax b
It won't benefit the Python core either, because we just don't use
builtin submodules. In fact, I find the notion of builtin submodules
somewhat strange.
Please excuse my curiosity, but why do you find it strange?
P.S. Thanks to all for the considerate responses.
Regards,
Miguel
___
IMHO yes, for all occurences in the core code.
Guido van Rossum schrieb:
> what's the situation for Py3k? Should it always use absolute import there?
>
> On 3/10/07, Georg Brandl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Currently, all C code that needs to import a module uses
>> PyImport_ImportModule which
Miguel Lobo schrieb:
> I need to integrate the extra test file into a project file (probably
> pythoncore).
>
>
> The change to pythoncore.vcproj is already in the patch I posted.
> Otherwise I wouldn't have been able to run my test under Windows.
Ah, ok, I misremembered. It is the UNI
On 3/12/07, Miguel Lobo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Yet, the same can be said for most other patches: they are all for the
> > benefit of users running into the same respective problems.
>
> Agreed. What I mean is that this fasttrack system where the submitter has
> to do some extra work seem
Absolutely right. I'll withdraw the lightweight version. It's done
enough damage.
On 3/11/07, Andrew McNamara <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >I wrote two versions of the dict views refactoring. One that turns
> >d.keys() into list(d.keys()) and d.iterkeys() into iter(d.keys()).
> >This one is pretty
On Mon, Mar 12, 2007 at 07:20:56PM +0100, Miguel Lobo wrote:
>I'm not complaining or anything, and no offence meant to anyone, just
>explaining my point of view. I might still try to do the 5 patch
>review thing, depending on how long it takes me. But if I choose not
>to do so, le
I need to integrate the extra test file into a project file (probably
pythoncore).
The change to pythoncore.vcproj is already in the patch I posted. Otherwise
I wouldn't have been able to run my test under Windows.
Yet, the same can be said for most other patches: they are all for the
benef
what's the situation for Py3k? Should it always use absolute import there?
On 3/10/07, Georg Brandl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Currently, all C code that needs to import a module uses
> PyImport_ImportModule which
> (1) calls __builtin__.__import__
> (2) attempts relative imports
>
> Most of the
Miguel Lobo schrieb:
> My own patch does not include documentation. I assume documentation
> would only be needed for patches that add new functionality (as opposed
> to fixing problems)?
Typically, yes. If the bug fix would also change the behavior of
existing programs, that change should be d
On 3/11/07, Armin Rigo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi Collin,
>
> On Wed, Mar 07, 2007 at 11:53:45PM -0600, Collin Winter wrote:
> > bool() and abs() aren't syntax, so I would never look in operator.
>
> abs() is not syntax but bool() is part of every syntactic construction
> that takes a truth va
This patch was posted by "koder_ua".
I think that Request must have a "request type" parameters, so people
can send "HEAD" requests easily.
But it seems to me that keeping a request history in the module is bad,
because it can easily grow up to thousands and explode (a.k.a. consume
too much memor
Miguel Lobo schrieb:
> Personally, I can't apply it as-is right now, since a) I would have to
> check that the test case conditionalization works fine, and b) I would
> have to come up with a patch for the Windows build process.
>
>
> Sorry, I couldn't understand the second point. Wh
This is how we suck you in... ;)
I see :-). Funny I didn't see this procedure mentioned in the patch
submission guidelines ;-)
You don't have to be an expert to review patches. The following
procedure would qualify you:
1. Find a patch that it appears no one has ever touched (0 comments
On 3/12/07, Miguel Lobo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Anyway, I'm intrigued about this "review 5 other patches" procedure you
> suggest. What exactly would be involved in such a review? Please note that
> I hadn't touched CPython code before I wrote my patch and I haven't been
> following CPython
Personally, I can't apply it as-is right now, since a) I would have to
check that the test case conditionalization works fine, and b) I would
have to come up with a patch for the Windows build process.
Sorry, I couldn't understand the second point. Why would you have to patch
the Windows buil
Miguel Lobo schrieb:
> Also, seeing that there are almost 400 open patches in the patch
> tracker, I'm concerned that this patch will be forgotten and left to
> rot, which would be a pity IMO.
Of course, the submitters of the 300 other patches say the same. It is
just too difficult to catch up,
No; basically, you just need to be patient now. Do you have an urgent
need to get this patch included?
Well, not personally, but I suspect that it is quite possible that other
people will waste time trying to figure out why their imports don't work.
Also, seeing that there are almost 400 open
> Sorry for the repetition, but since nobody has commented on patch
> 1644818 for about a week I thought perhaps I should ask again.
>
> Is there anything I need to do before the patch is ready for inclusion?
No; basically, you just need to be patient now. Do you have an urgent
need to get this
Hi list,
Sorry for the repetition, but since nobody has commented on patch 1644818
for about a week I thought perhaps I should ask again.
Is there anything I need to do before the patch is ready for inclusion?
As a remainder, this patch (which can be seen at
https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?fun
Rajstennaj Barrabas schrieb:
> I have an application which runs on 2.4.4 and is known not to run on 2.4.1 or
> 2.5, and I'm trying to install 2.4.4 from the website.
>
> Whenever I download and compile the 2.4.4 sources, the executable shows up as
> 2.4.1 which will not work for my application.
>
[EMAIL PROTECTED] schrieb:
> This does raise an interesting question, though, since I'm about to get
> into PEP authorship myself. Have I missed an official way to propose
> alternatives or resurrect a languishing PEP?
See PEP 1. The PEP champion is obliged to integrate feedback into the
PEP,
Patrick Maupin schrieb:
> Although it is often quite easy to find and download a module for use
> with a prior version of Python, it would be really convenient if all
> of these modules were bundled up together and available as a single
> download, especially when it comes to Windows users and exte
30 matches
Mail list logo
