Re: [Python-3000] Making 2to3 installable

>> When people requested that 2to3 is a library, I think they >> have exactly that use case in mind: programmatically convert >> a source code base at deployment/build time. > > For importability as a library, would it be better > to call it two2three? Not sure whom you are asking. It's currently

Re: [Python-3000] Using *a for packing in lists and other places

Terry Reedy wrote: > The fact that the '*' would be redundant in some contexts and therefore > useless should not necessarily make it syntax error in that context. It does allow a lone *exp to be given a special meaning in some contexts, such as yield *exp. Although I'm still not sure that's a go

Re: [Python-3000] Making 2to3 installable

Martin v. Löwis wrote: > When people requested that 2to3 is a library, I think they > have exactly that use case in mind: programmatically convert > a source code base at deployment/build time. For importability as a library, would it be better to call it two2three? -- Greg _

Re: [Python-3000] Using *a for packing in lists and other places

On Sun, Mar 16, 2008 at 4:33 PM, Greg Ewing <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Thomas Wouters wrote: > > > > [Guido] asked for 'f(*a, b, c)' to be valid, but it only makes sense > > to allow, say, 'f(*a, b, *c)' too, and he hasn't said 'no' to that. > > And then, of course, people are going to want > to

Re: [Python-3000] [Python-Dev] 2.6 and 3.0 project management

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Mar 16, 2008, at 5:02 PM, Martin v. Löwis wrote: >> How about using the "critical" Severity for show stoppers? > > Alternatively, Priority "immediate" could be used. > > The intended use of Severity is that it is assigned by the > submitter, wherea

Re: [Python-3000] [Python-Dev] 2.6 and 3.0 project management

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Mar 16, 2008, at 3:56 PM, Guido van Rossum wrote: > On Sun, Mar 16, 2008 at 12:24 PM, Barry Warsaw <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: >> I mentioned this to Guido and got a positive response, so let me >> state >> my preference for your feedback. I

Re: [Python-3000] Using *a for packing in lists and other places

At 02:49 PM 3/16/2008 -0500, Guido van Rossum wrote: >On Sun, Mar 16, 2008 at 1:31 PM, Phillip J. Eby <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Btw, would you mind pronouncing (or at least commenting) on PEP 365, > > so that I can proceed with the work -- or not. > >Can you point me to past discussions? IST

Re: [Python-3000] Using *a for packing in lists and other places

Thomas Wouters wrote: > > [Guido] asked for 'f(*a, b, c)' to be valid, but it only makes sense > to allow, say, 'f(*a, b, *c)' too, and he hasn't said 'no' to that. And then, of course, people are going to want to have multiple ** arguments, too... -- Greg _

Re: [Python-3000] [Python-Dev] 2.6 and 3.0 project management

> Thinking it over, I actually believe that we should use the highest > priority to indicate show-stoppers that hold up a release. So that is > indeed "immediate". We just decided to eliminate the Severity from the tracker; it wasn't much used and always confused people. It's still in the database

Re: [Python-3000] Making 2to3 installable

On Sun, Mar 16, 2008 at 6:12 PM, Gregory P. Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On 3/16/08, Nick Coghlan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Guido van Rossum wrote: > > > On Sun, Mar 16, 2008 at 4:22 PM, "Martin v. Löwis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: > > > > >> People would try the process on their deve

Re: [Python-3000] Making 2to3 installable

On 3/16/08, Nick Coghlan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Guido van Rossum wrote: > > On Sun, Mar 16, 2008 at 4:22 PM, "Martin v. Löwis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: > > >> People would try the process on their development machines, and change > >> the code until it actually runs under both version

Re: [Python-3000] Making 2to3 installable

Guido van Rossum wrote: > On Sun, Mar 16, 2008 at 4:22 PM, "Martin v. Löwis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> People would try the process on their development machines, and change >> the code until it actually runs under both versions. >> >> I'll be using my sprinting time to find out whether that

Re: [Python-3000] [Python-Dev] 2.6 and 3.0 project management

Benjamin Peterson writes: > It's just depends on how you see the tracker. It's not just to "bug" tracker > anymore, is it? On other projects I've worked with, we had separate areas > for bugs, features, and tasks. (yes, it's SourceForge.) I found it easier to > keep organized. However, if this

Re: [Python-3000] Using *a for packing in lists and other places

"Thomas Wouters" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message news:[EMAIL PROTECTED] | On Sat, Mar 15, 2008 at 2:58 PM, Terry Reedy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: | | > | > | Also, yielding everything from an iterator: | > | | > | >>> def flatten(iterables): | > | ... for it in iterables: | > | ...

Re: [Python-3000] [Python-Dev] 2.6 and 3.0 project management

On Sun, Mar 16, 2008 at 5:02 PM, "Martin v. Löwis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > How about using the "critical" Severity for show stoppers? > > Alternatively, Priority "immediate" could be used. > > The intended use of Severity is that it is assigned by the > submitter, whereas Priority is a

Re: [Python-3000] [Python-Dev] 2.6 and 3.0 project management

> How about using the "critical" Severity for show stoppers? Alternatively, Priority "immediate" could be used. The intended use of Severity is that it is assigned by the submitter, whereas Priority is assigned by triage/developers. We should really decide whether we want to use it that way. R

Re: [Python-3000] Making 2to3 installable

On Sun, Mar 16, 2008 at 4:22 PM, "Martin v. Löwis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> Wrt. invoking it from distutils: Why not? > > > > Because it's far from perfect. I'd expect the success rate of running > > 2to3 over a 2.x package to be close to zero. I think this is one case > > where it's be

Re: [Python-3000] [Python-Dev] 2.6 and 3.0 project management

On 3/16/08, Guido van Rossum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I don't see a lot of objections left against using the bug tracker. I > just talked to Neal and he's going to transfer all tasks from the 2.6 > spreadsheet to the bug tracker. > > I'll also be adding various other tasks., as I think of the

Re: [Python-3000] Making 2to3 installable

>> Wrt. invoking it from distutils: Why not? > > Because it's far from perfect. I'd expect the success rate of running > 2to3 over a 2.x package to be close to zero. I think this is one case > where it's better to let the developer run 2to3 and tweak the app > until it actually works. Ah. I stil

Re: [Python-3000] Making 2to3 installable

On Sun, Mar 16, 2008 at 4:07 PM, "Martin v. Löwis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >>> Cool! Is the next plan to make lib2to3 part of the stdlib in 2.6 and 3.0? > >> Next, I want to have distutils (build_py) to invoke 2to3 as a > >> command-line tool. I think this will already cover most uses > >

Re: [Python-3000] Making 2to3 installable

>>> Cool! Is the next plan to make lib2to3 part of the stdlib in 2.6 and 3.0? >> Next, I want to have distutils (build_py) to invoke 2to3 as a >> command-line tool. I think this will already cover most uses >> that people may have. > > Are you serious? Wrt. invoking it from distutils: Why not?

Re: [Python-3000] [Python-Dev] 2.6 and 3.0 project management

On Sun, Mar 16, 2008 at 12:24 PM, Barry Warsaw <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I mentioned this to Guido and got a positive response, so let me state > my preference for your feedback. I plan on holding up the final > releases until both versions are ready to go. I think this will help > motivat

Re: [Python-3000] [Python-Dev] 2.6 and 3.0 project management

I don't see a lot of objections left against using the bug tracker. I just talked to Neal and he's going to transfer all tasks from the 2.6 spreadsheet to the bug tracker. I'll also be adding various other tasks., as I think of them. We'll have to think about which keywords to use. We'll probably

Re: [Python-3000] Making 2to3 installable

On Sun, Mar 16, 2008 at 3:11 PM, "Martin v. Löwis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Cool! Is the next plan to make lib2to3 part of the stdlib in 2.6 and 3.0? > > Next, I want to have distutils (build_py) to invoke 2to3 as a > command-line tool. I think this will already cover most uses > that peop

Re: [Python-3000] Making 2to3 installable

Martin v. Löwis schrieb: > After talking to Collin, I just committed a change to > 2to3 to make it installable as an executable script > called "2to3". > > To do so, I had to wrap all the top-level modules > into a package, and move the fixes and tests into > that package. Lacking a better name, I

Re: [Python-3000] [Python-Dev] 2.6 and 3.0 tasks

On 3/16/08, Travis Oliphant <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Guido van Rossum wrote: > > Moving this to a new subject to keep the discussion of tasks and the > > discussion of task tracking tools separate. > > > > On Sun, Mar 16, 2008 at 9:42 AM, Christian Heimes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: > >> I

Re: [Python-3000] Making 2to3 installable

> Cool! Is the next plan to make lib2to3 part of the stdlib in 2.6 and 3.0? Next, I want to have distutils (build_py) to invoke 2to3 as a command-line tool. I think this will already cover most uses that people may have. Moving lib2to3 into the standard library would mean that the trunk and 3k c

Re: [Python-3000] [Python-Dev] 2.6 and 3.0 tasks

On Sun, Mar 16, 2008 at 10:17 AM, Christian Heimes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Collin Winter wrote: > > The biggest win in terms of performance would be to reimplement the > > pattern matching engine used by the fixers.: it by far dominates the > > running time, taking 99+% of the runtime when

Re: [Python-3000] [Python-Dev] 2.6 and 3.0 tasks

> > * Replace Windows API calls with wide versions to support unicode > >for file names, environment etc. > > +1. This should be broken into separate tasks for each API. What are we referring to here? Calling the W versions explicitly and using wchar_t for everything, or using the TCHAR/TEX

Re: [Python-3000] Making 2to3 installable

On Sun, Mar 16, 2008 at 12:51 PM, Guido van Rossum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Cool! Is the next plan to make lib2to3 part of the stdlib in 2.6 and 3.0? That would be fine by me. I'll try to work up some better docs than just a README. > On Sun, Mar 16, 2008 at 2:47 PM, "Martin v. Löwis" <[EMAI

Re: [Python-3000] Making 2to3 installable

Cool! Is the next plan to make lib2to3 part of the stdlib in 2.6 and 3.0? On Sun, Mar 16, 2008 at 2:47 PM, "Martin v. Löwis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > After talking to Collin, I just committed a change to > 2to3 to make it installable as an executable script > called "2to3". > > To do so, I

Re: [Python-3000] Using *a for packing in lists and other places

On Sun, Mar 16, 2008 at 1:31 PM, Phillip J. Eby <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Btw, would you mind pronouncing (or at least commenting) on PEP 365, > so that I can proceed with the work -- or not. Can you point me to past discussions? ISTR that this is controversial. -- --Guido van Rossum (home

[Python-3000] Making 2to3 installable

After talking to Collin, I just committed a change to 2to3 to make it installable as an executable script called "2to3". To do so, I had to wrap all the top-level modules into a package, and move the fixes and tests into that package. Lacking a better name, I called the library lib2to3. I also ins

Re: [Python-3000] 2.6 and 3.0 tasks

On Sun, Mar 16, 2008 at 1:04 PM, Christian Heimes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Guido van Rossum wrote: > > So this doesn't address merges at all. Suppose we have some C code > > that's shared between 2.6 and 3.0 and manipulates binary data (e.g. > > the gzip codec). It currently uses PyString o

Re: [Python-3000] Using *a for packing in lists and other places

At 12:55 PM 3/16/2008 -0500, Guido van Rossum wrote: >On Sun, Mar 16, 2008 at 12:48 PM, Phillip J. Eby ><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > At 10:00 AM 3/16/2008 -0500, Guido van Rossum wrote: > > >(a) *if* we're going to do this, it should also be done for function > > >calls (though not for functio

Re: [Python-3000] 2.6 and 3.0 tasks

On Sun, Mar 16, 2008 at 1:01 PM, Benjamin Peterson < [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > On Sun, Mar 16, 2008 at 12:32 PM, Guido van Rossum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: > > > On Sun, Mar 16, 2008 at 11:57 AM, Benjamin Peterson > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > [Guido] > > > > That's a rather long thr

Re: [Python-3000] 2.6 and 3.0 tasks

Guido van Rossum wrote: > So this doesn't address merges at all. Suppose we have some C code > that's shared between 2.6 and 3.0 and manipulates binary data (e.g. > the gzip codec). It currently uses PyString on both branches, so any > changes to the trunk merge smoothly into the py3k branch. But

Re: [Python-3000] 2.6 and 3.0 tasks

On Sun, Mar 16, 2008 at 12:32 PM, Guido van Rossum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Sun, Mar 16, 2008 at 11:57 AM, Benjamin Peterson > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > [Guido] > > > That's a rather long thread. Was any conclusion reached? I'm not sure > > > how introducing a set of aliases will help me

Re: [Python-3000] Using *a for packing in lists and other places

On Sun, Mar 16, 2008 at 12:48 PM, Phillip J. Eby <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > At 10:00 AM 3/16/2008 -0500, Guido van Rossum wrote: > >(a) *if* we're going to do this, it should also be done for function > >calls (though not for function defs). I'd like all of these to be > >legal (and their inte

Re: [Python-3000] Using *a for packing in lists and other places

At 10:00 AM 3/16/2008 -0500, Guido van Rossum wrote: >(a) *if* we're going to do this, it should also be done for function >calls (though not for function defs). I'd like all of these to be >legal (and their interpretation is obvious): > > f(a, b, *x, k=val) > f(a, *x, b, k=val) > f(*x, a, b,

Re: [Python-3000] 2.6 and 3.0 tasks

On Sun, Mar 16, 2008 at 11:57 AM, Benjamin Peterson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: [Guido] > > That's a rather long thread. Was any conclusion reached? I'm not sure > > how introducing a set of aliases will help merging 2.6 code to 3.0. > > Can you or Christian describe the proposed approach in more de

Re: [Python-3000] [Python-Dev] 2.6 and 3.0 project management

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Mar 16, 2008, at 8:51 AM, Guido van Rossum wrote: > However, looking at the calendar, I think we need to do a little more > planning and management than we've typically done for Python releases. > A final release in August means that we should plan

Re: [Python-3000] [Python-Dev] 2.6 and 3.0 project management

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Mar 16, 2008, at 8:51 AM, Guido van Rossum wrote: > Python 3.0 and 2.6 are coming along really nice. I am optimistic that > we can make the projected August date for the final releases of 2.6 > and 3.0. As you may remember, Barry (the new release m

Re: [Python-3000] [Python-Dev] 2.6 and 3.0 tasks

Collin Winter wrote: > The biggest win in terms of performance would be to reimplement the > pattern matching engine used by the fixers.: it by far dominates the > running time, taking 99+% of the runtime when I ran 2to3 over Twisted, > for example. The current design is a heavily-recursive system,

Re: [Python-3000] [Python-Dev] 2.6 and 3.0 project management

On Sun, Mar 16, 2008 at 11:51 AM, Benjamin Peterson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > It's just depends on how you see the tracker. It's not just to "bug" tracker > anymore, is it? On other projects I've worked with, we had separate areas > for bugs, features, and tasks. (yes, it's SourceForge.) I found

Re: [Python-3000] 2.6 and 3.0 tasks

Guido van Rossum wrote: > -1. This will make merging code from 2.6 harder, and causes more work > for porting C extensions. I'm happy to pay the price for the sake of a clean and easy-to-recall C API. The for the C extension problem I already proposed a solution in the thread Benjamin mentioned b

Re: [Python-3000] [Python-Dev] 2.6 and 3.0 tasks

>>> * Replace Windows API calls with wide versions to support unicode >>> for file names, environment etc. >> +1. This should be broken into separate tasks for each API. > > What are we referring to here? Calling the W versions explicitly and > using wchar_t for everything, or using the TCHAR/TE

Re: [Python-3000] xturtle and 3.0

On Sun, Mar 16, 2008 at 10:32 AM, Guido van Rossum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I'm changing the subject to keep this separate from the project > management tools discussion. > > > > Of course I know that xturtle is only a side issue in the current > > development efforts. Unfortunately I'm no

Re: [Python-3000] [Python-Dev] 2.6 and 3.0 project management

> It's just depends on how you see the tracker. It's not just to "bug" > tracker anymore, is it? On other projects I've worked with, we had > separate areas for bugs, features, and tasks. (yes, it's SourceForge.) I > found it easier to keep organized. However, if this is Python's way, I'm > not

Re: [Python-3000] [Python-Dev] 2.6 and 3.0 tasks

On Sun, Mar 16, 2008 at 11:44 AM, Guido van Rossum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Sun, Mar 16, 2008 at 11:26 AM, Benjamin Peterson > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On Sun, Mar 16, 2008 at 10:23 AM, Guido van Rossum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: > > > > PyString -> PyBytes ... > > > > > > -1. This

Re: [Python-3000] Fwd: [Python-Dev] 2.6 and 3.0 project management

> Not quite. Items don't automatically end up on a hot list; they must > explicitly be put on one. I'm not sure how you'd simulate this via > saved searches. Maybe a combination of a custom keyword *and* a saved > search would help. However this doesn't scale so well, because > keywords show u

Re: [Python-3000] [Python-Dev] 2.6 and 3.0 project management

On Sun, Mar 16, 2008 at 11:37 AM, Guido van Rossum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Sun, Mar 16, 2008 at 11:19 AM, Benjamin Peterson > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I don't like the idea of task like items in the main bug tracker. > > Why not? Bugs are also tasks, and need to be managed and triage

Re: [Python-3000] [Python-Dev] 2.6 and 3.0 project management

>> I don't like the idea of task like items in the main bug tracker. Guido> Why not? Bugs are also tasks, and need to be managed and triaged Guido> in the same way. Agreed. Both bugs and tasks would be "issues" in Roundup parlance, along with patches. A further reason to keep this

Re: [Python-3000] [Python-Dev] 2.6 and 3.0 tasks

On Sun, Mar 16, 2008 at 8:23 AM, Guido van Rossum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Sun, Mar 16, 2008 at 9:42 AM, Christian Heimes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: .. > > and add the fixers to 2to3 > > +1. I think quite a few changes have not had a fixer added. Again, I > think we should maintain a

Re: [Python-3000] [Python-Dev] 2.6 and 3.0 project management

> * Stabilize the C API of Python 3.0. I like to rename several prefixes > to reduce the confusing: PyBytes -> PyByteArray, PyString -> PyBytes ... I'd like to bring up PEP 3121 here as well. I have patches, but still need to complete them. Regards Martin

Re: [Python-3000] [Python-Dev] 2.6 and 3.0 tasks

On Sun, Mar 16, 2008 at 11:26 AM, Benjamin Peterson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Sun, Mar 16, 2008 at 10:23 AM, Guido van Rossum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > PyString -> PyBytes ... > > > > -1. This will make merging code from 2.6 harder, and causes more work > > for porting C extensions. >

[Python-3000] Fwd: [Python-Dev] 2.6 and 3.0 project management

Sorry, forgot to CC this to the list. On Sun, Mar 16, 2008 at 9:31 AM, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Guido> It has a much more detailed set of categories, organized as a > Guido> tree. Our project alone probably has 20-30 different bug > Guido> categories. New bugs in those cate

Re: [Python-3000] [Python-Dev] 2.6 and 3.0 project management

On Sun, Mar 16, 2008 at 11:19 AM, Benjamin Peterson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I don't like the idea of task like items in the main bug tracker. Why not? Bugs are also tasks, and need to be managed and triaged in the same way. It might be convenient to have everything in one tracker. What's your

Re: [Python-3000] [Python-Dev] 2.6 and 3.0 tasks

On Sun, Mar 16, 2008 at 10:23 AM, Guido van Rossum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Moving this to a new subject to keep the discussion of tasks and the > discussion of task tracking tools separate. > > On Sun, Mar 16, 2008 at 9:42 AM, Christian Heimes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: > > I did a quick b

Re: [Python-3000] [Python-Dev] 2.6 and 3.0 project management

On Sun, Mar 16, 2008 at 8:51 AM, Guido van Rossum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Python 3.0 and 2.6 are coming along really nice. I am optimistic that > we can make the projected August date for the final releases of 2.6 > and 3.0. As you may remember, Barry (the new release manager for both) > sugg

[Python-3000] xturtle and 3.0

I'm changing the subject to keep this separate from the project management tools discussion. On Sun, Mar 16, 2008 at 10:13 AM, Gregor Lingl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Hi everyone, > > with this posting I refer to a paragraph in PEP 361, which says: > > """Each non-trivial feature listed her

[Python-3000] 2.6 and 3.0 tasks

Moving this to a new subject to keep the discussion of tasks and the discussion of task tracking tools separate. On Sun, Mar 16, 2008 at 9:42 AM, Christian Heimes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I did a quick brainstorming with me, myself and I. I came up with a list > of (IMHO) important tasks. >

Re: [Python-3000] 2.6 and 3.0 project management

Hi everyone, with this posting I refer to a paragraph in PEP 361, which says: """Each non-trivial feature listed here that is not a PEP must be discussed on python-dev. Other enhancements include: - ... - turtle.py replacement or enhancements """ Some time ago I had offered my xturtle.

Re: [Python-3000] Using *a for packing in lists and other places

On Sat, Mar 15, 2008 at 6:01 PM, Thomas Wouters <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Sat, Mar 15, 2008 at 3:21 PM, Guido van Rossum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > This post does point out an inconistency in Thomas's patch: > > > > def f(): > > yield 1, 2, 3 > > > > Yields a single three-tuple. > > > >

Re: [Python-3000] Using *a for packing in lists and other places

On Sat, Mar 15, 2008 at 9:51 PM, Neil Toronto <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Thomas Wouters wrote: > > > > On Sat, Mar 15, 2008 at 2:58 PM, Terry Reedy <[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > wrote: > > > > | Also, yielding everything from an iterator: > > | > > | >>> def flat

Re: [Python-3000] 2.6 and 3.0 project management

Guido van Rossum wrote: > In order to make such a tight release schedule we should try to come > up with a list of tasks that need to be done, and prioritize them. > This should include documentation, and supporting tools like 2to3. It > should include features, backports of features, cleanup, bugs

Re: [Python-3000] Using *a for packing in lists and other places

On Sat, Mar 15, 2008 at 11:26 PM, Greg Ewing <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Thomas Wouters wrote: > > > > On Sat, Mar 15, 2008 at 6:07 PM, Greg Ewing <[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > wrote: > > > > *a, b, c = a, b, *c > > > > +0 on allowing * in other than the last pos

Re: [Python-3000] Using *a for packing in lists and other places

On Sat, Mar 15, 2008 at 6:07 PM, Greg Ewing <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Thomas Wouters wrote: > > >>> a, b = *c > > File "", line 1 > > SyntaxError: can use starred expression only as assignment target > > That error message isn't really accurate, since in > > > >>> a, b = (*c,) > the *c is

Re: [Python-3000] [Python-Dev] 2.6 and 3.0 project management

Guido> It has a much more detailed set of categories, organized as a Guido> tree. Our project alone probably has 20-30 different bug Guido> categories. New bugs in those categories are automatically CC'ed Guido> to our group's mailing list (which isn't the same as Guido> auto-

Re: [Python-3000] [Python-Dev] 2.6 and 3.0 project management

On Sun, Mar 16, 2008 at 9:01 AM, Facundo Batista <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > 2008/3/16, Guido van Rossum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > they are a sufficient tool. In my day job at Google we've started to > > do all task management for our project in the bug tracker (but that > > tracker has some

Re: [Python-3000] [Python-Dev] 2.6 and 3.0 project management

2008/3/16, Guido van Rossum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > they are a sufficient tool. In my day job at Google we've started to > do all task management for our project in the bug tracker (but that > tracker has some features that make it particularly easy). Does anyone Like which? Something that coul

[Python-3000] 2.6 and 3.0 project management

Python 3.0 and 2.6 are coming along really nice. I am optimistic that we can make the projected August date for the final releases of 2.6 and 3.0. As you may remember, Barry (the new release manager for both) suggested that we synchronize releases of 2.6 and 3.0. Not only could this potentially sav

[Python-3000] True Coroutines (was Re: Using *a for packing in lists and other places)

At 06:51 PM 3/15/2008 -0700, Talin wrote: >Now, one final comment: PEP 342 promises that the new yield semantics >can be used to implement true coroutines. But I don't see how to >actually make that work. Has anyone actually done this? http://peak.telecommunity.com/DevCenter/TrellisActivity#co-ope

[Python-3000] getargs.c

(See also Issue 2298) String/Unicode/Bytes handling in getargs.c is in dire need of some love; also the docs need to be made consistent with the implementation w.r.t. where a string/unicode is needed, whether null bytes are allowed, etc. Perhaps something for the PyCon sprint? Georg -- Thus sp

Re: [Python-3000] Using *a for packing in lists and other places

Neil Toronto schrieb: > Besides, as the SmugLispWeenies have noted, Python is becoming more like > Lisp all the time: > > (setq obj '(an ex-parrot)) ; (AN EX-PARROT) > `(I have ,obj) ; (I HAVE (AN EX-PARROT)) > `(I have ,@obj) ; (I HAVE AN EX-PARROT) Onl