Re: [Python-Dev] The docs, reloaded
Am Wed, 23 May 2007 08:30:17 +0200 schrieb Georg Brandl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > [...] > Also, try > > http://pydoc.gbrandl.de:3000/os.path.exists > [...] Looks good. But should the source pages really use syntax highlighting? I think if somebody is interested in the source then they should get the real source without any highlighting. If you decide to keep the syntax highlighting then the highlighting of multiline ReST strings should be fixed. For example see the source for splitext(). Thanks for the work, Dennis Benzinger ___ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
Re: [Python-Dev] Subversion branch merging
Am Fri, 13 Jul 2007 12:58:24 -0500 schrieb [EMAIL PROTECTED]: > > Barry> Silly me, the trunk is already available: > > Barry> https://code.launchpad.net/~vcs-imports/python/trunk > > Bazaar keeps this in sync with svn.python.org? > [...] Yes, the branch is update regularly. I think it's done nightly. The last checkin is from Georg Brandl for patch #1675424. Bye, Dennis Benzinger ___ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
Re: [Python-Dev] hg branch gone?
Hi Thomas! Am 03.11.2008 17:54, Thomas Wouters schrieb: > [...] > FWIW, I put one up this weekend, and it seems to be intact and OK. > (bzr+ssh://[EMAIL PROTECTED]/python/2.6/ or > http://code.python.org/python/2.6/ ) > [...] Can you update http://www.python.org/dev/bazaar/ ? For example "Branch details" needs to be updated because the trunk branch is no longer Python 2.6. Thanks, Dennis Benzinger ___ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
Re: [Python-Dev] PEP 372 -- Adding an ordered directory to collections ready for pronouncement
Am 04.03.2009 14:25, Benji York schrieb: > On Wed, Mar 4, 2009 at 3:01 AM, Glenn Linderman wrote: > >> C'mon folks, brainstorm, don't complain about ordereddict if you can't come >> up with some alternatives for discussion!!! (and some reasons why the >> suggestions might be good or bad) Even your bad ideas might trigger a good >> name in someone else's head... > > TemporalDict -- Since the order of insertion is important > SerialDict -- From Websters: of, relating to, consisting of, or > arranged in a series, rank, or row Because the class is designed to only support insertion order and not any other sorting why choose a generic name that could also describe a class that supports a different order? I'd prefer encoding the order in the class name, therefore I suggest (Ins|Insertion)(Order|Ordered)Dict, e.g. InsOrderDict. Abbreviating the first group to simply I probably is too confusing because of the use of I as a prefix for interfaces. Dennis Benzinger ___ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
Re: [Python-Dev] PEP 372 -- Adding an ordered directory to collections ready for pronouncement
Hi Nick! Am 04.03.2009 22:34, Nick Coghlan schrieb: > Dennis Benzinger wrote: >> I'd prefer encoding the order in the class name, therefore I suggest >> (Ins|Insertion)(Order|Ordered)Dict, e.g. InsOrderDict. Abbreviating the >> first group to simply I probably is too confusing because of the use of >> I as a prefix for interfaces. > > Except I just don't see this proliferation of dict types with different > sort orders ever happening. Maybe there's a misunderstanding because I don't see it either. I was trying to suggest four alternative names for the OrderedDict class. I don't prefer encoding every possible sort order into the class name. I just wanted to improve the name of OrderedDict. > The distinction between OrderedDict and dict is that the order of > keys()/values()/items() isn't arbitrary the way it is in a regular dict > - there's a defined order that will always be used. Yes, the insertion order. > That's all the name > tells you - if someone assumes they know what that ordering is without > actually looking at the documentation (and gets it wrong as a result), > then I don't see how that is any different from the fact that someone > might mistakenly assume that list.sort() puts the items in descending > order instead of ascending order. And because that's all the name tells you I suggested to make the name more clear by prepending Ins or Insertion. > For other sort orders, it seems far more likely to me that a > collections.SortedMap type would be added at some point in the future > that accepts a key function like the one accepted by sorted() and > list.sort(). Such a data type would make different trade-offs between > insertion, deletion and lookup speeds than those made in the hash map > based OrderedDict. > [...] Yes. Dennis Benzinger ___ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
