On Mon, May 07, 2007 at 11:12:40AM -0700, Guido van Rossum wrote:
> On 5/7/07, Collin Winter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Can I go ahead and mark PEP 3129 as "accepted"?
>
> Almost. I'm ok with it, but I think that to follow the procedure you
> ought to post the full text at least once on python
On Wed, Mar 21, 2007 at 01:38:32PM -0600, Steven Bethard wrote:
> On 3/14/07, BJörn Lindqvist <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > For another example, take the Telnet class in the telnetlib module. It
> > has a method set_option_negotiation_callback() which takes a function
> > that will be called for e
On Wed, Mar 14, 2007 at 12:29:09AM -0700, Talin wrote:
> # The metaclass
> class OrderedClass(type):
>
> # The custom dictionary
> class member_table(dict):
I would move the member_table class out of the OrderedClass namespace so
no one gets any funny ideas that it ha
s, **kwds)
cls = meta.__new__(name, bases, mydict, **kwds)
meta.__init__(cls, name, bases, mydict, **kwds)
A = cls
> On 3/9/07, Jack Diederich <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > I am a very big fan of ordered dicts in classes.
>
> Would you mind showing us some of your u
On Sat, Mar 10, 2007 at 10:26:09AM +0100, Georg Brandl wrote:
> Tony Lownds schrieb:
>
> >>> or fixing the assertion failure currently in CVS.
> >>
> >> Perhaps you should switch to SVN? :-)
> >
> > Heh, clearly I am behind the times. I should switch to Mercurial
> > to get ahead of the curve.
>
On Fri, Mar 09, 2007 at 06:19:49PM -0600, Collin Winter wrote:
> >History and Implementation
> >==
> >
> >Class decorators were originally proposed alongside function decorators
> >in PEP318 [1]_ and were rejected by Guido [2]_ for lack of use cases.
> >Two years later he sa
On Fri, Mar 09, 2007 at 12:44:36PM -0800, Talin wrote:
> I had a conversation with Guido last night at the Python user's group
> meeting, and we hashed out some of the details of how metaclasses should
> work. I've gone ahead and written up a PEP, which I present for your review.
> --
; responses too.
I'm cc'ing [EMAIL PROTECTED] for a number assignment (or can I just
check it in myself?)
PEP: 3XXX
Title: Class Decorators
Version: 1
Last-Modified: 28-Feb-2007
Authors: Jack Diederich
Implementation: SF#1671208
Status: Draft
Type: Standards Track
Created: 26-Feb-2007
Abs
On Fri, Mar 09, 2007 at 01:21:49PM -0800, Brett Cannon wrote:
> On 2/28/07, Collin Winter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >On 2/28/07, Jack Diederich <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >[snip]
> >> History and Implementation
> >>
in their two bits it would be
appreciated.
PEP: 3XXX
Title: Class Decorators
Version: 1
Last-Modified: 28-Feb-2007
Authors: Jack Diederich
Implementation: SF#1671208
Status: Draft
Type: Standards Track
Created: 26-Feb-2007
Abstract
Extending the decorator syntax to allow the
On Fri, Dec 08, 2006 at 11:58:38AM -0800, Brett Cannon wrote:
> On 12/8/06, Talin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> >One other minor brainstorm before I head off to work: I'd like function
> >decorators to work with assignment statements as well as 'def' statements.
> >
> >Use case:
> >
> >class
On Fri, Dec 08, 2006 at 11:58:38AM -0800, Brett Cannon wrote:
> On 12/8/06, Talin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> >One other minor brainstorm before I head off to work: I'd like function
> >decorators to work with assignment statements as well as 'def' statements.
> >
> >Use case:
> >
> >class
On Wed, Nov 22, 2006 at 09:36:09AM +0100, Georg Brandl wrote:
> Terry Reedy schrieb:
> > "Brett Cannon" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >
> > Why can't the fallback usage just pass the return value from __len__ to
> > bool() (forget the C function name) and retu
On Thu, Nov 16, 2006 at 01:06:04AM +0200, tomer filiba wrote:
[tomer filiba wrote stuff]
I was hoping this thread would go unremarked but it looks like
it is picking up some steam. So I'll throw in my two bits:
Please for the love of god abandon this thread. It has been done.
You weren't there
On Sat, Sep 09, 2006 at 12:24:10AM +0200, Antoine Pitrou wrote:
> Le vendredi 08 septembre 2006 ? 15:04 -0400, Jim Jewett a ?crit :
> > > What about seek(), seek_relative() and seek_reverse() ?
> >
> > Why not just borrow the standard symbolic names of cur and end?
> >
> > seek(pos=0)
> >
On Sat, Sep 02, 2006 at 06:36:37PM +0200, Georg Brandl wrote:
> While looking at the changes necessary to implement the exception
> related syntax changes (except ... as ..., raise without type),
> I came across some more substantial things that I think must be discussed.
>
> * How should exceptio
On Wed, Aug 30, 2006 at 08:56:03PM -0700, Bob Ippolito wrote:
> On 8/30/06, Fredrik Lundh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Fredrik Lundh wrote:
> >
> > > not necessarily, but there are lots of issues involved when doing
> > > high-performance XML stuff, and I'm not sure views would help quite as
> >
No need to take it back, as a long time python-* list reader I only took
your initial post as thinking out loud.
List readers can spot similar threads in the future by looking for these
three indicators:
1) Behavioral function arguments are discouraged and mostly on your say-so.
2) You didn't t
On Mon, Aug 28, 2006 at 01:37:59AM +1000, Nick Coghlan wrote:
> Jack Diederich wrote:
> > On Sat, Aug 26, 2006 at 07:51:03PM -0700, Guido van Rossum wrote:
> >> On 8/26/06, Jack Diederich <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >>> After some benchmarking find()
On Sat, Aug 26, 2006 at 07:51:03PM -0700, Guido van Rossum wrote:
> On 8/26/06, Jack Diederich <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > After some benchmarking find() can't go away without really hurting
> > readline()
> > performance.
>
> Can you elaborate? readline(
On Thu, Aug 24, 2006 at 03:48:57PM +0200, Fredrik Lundh wrote:
> Michael Chermside wrote:
>
> >> WOW, I love partition. In all the instances that weren't a simple "in"
> >> test I ended up using [r]partition. In some cases one of the returned
> >> strings gets thrown away but in those cases it i
ns.
-Jack
On Fri, Aug 25, 2006 at 05:35:33PM -0700, Guido van Rossum wrote:
> Sounds like a great 2.6 project. Beware of things that are
> intentionally different between platforms of course!
>
> --Guido
>
> On 8/25/06, Jack Diederich <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
While checking find() uses in the stdlib I noticed that the various
path modules have duplicate code and docstrings for some generic path
manipulations. Delightfully they even have different implementations
and docstrings for identical functions. splitext() is a great bad
example - os2emxpath.spli
On Wed, Aug 23, 2006 at 02:18:59PM -0700, Guido van Rossum wrote:
> Here's the patch (by Hasan Diwan, BTW) for people's perusal. It just
> gets rid of all *uses* of find/rfind from Lib; it doesn't actually
> modify stringobject.c or unicodeobject.c. It doesn't use
> [r]partition()'; someone could l
On Wed, Aug 23, 2006 at 02:18:59PM -0700, Guido van Rossum wrote:
> Here's the patch (by Hasan Diwan, BTW) for people's perusal. It just
> gets rid of all *uses* of find/rfind from Lib; it doesn't actually
> modify stringobject.c or unicodeobject.c. It doesn't use
> [r]partition()'; someone could l
On Tue, Aug 22, 2006 at 06:32:39PM -0700, Guido van Rossum wrote:
> At today's sprint, one of the volunteers completed a patch to rip out
> find() and rfind(), replacing all calls with index()/rindex(). But now
> I'm getting cold feet -- is this really a good idea? (It's been listed
> in PEP 3100 f
On Tue, Aug 01, 2006 at 07:29:51PM -0700, Talin wrote:
> tomer filiba wrote:
> > that's surly anachronism :)
> >
> > o.__class__ is a little more typing and will surely scare newbies.
> > moreover, type(x) and x.__class__ can return different things
> > (you can fool __class__, but not type()).
>
On Mon, Jul 17, 2006 at 02:54:14PM -0700, Guido van Rossum wrote:
> Hm. Your objections seem to be purely from a performance tuning POV. I
> think that if we agree that API-wise this is an improvement (fewer
> things to learn, set literals problem solved, and dicts grow some
> useful new methods) w
On Fri, Apr 28, 2006 at 01:02:44AM -0400, Terry Reedy wrote:
>
> "Brett Cannon" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > I wouldn't want it added without ditching the other two versions as
> > well. Personally I would be fine if string.join() stayed and we
> > considered
On Thu, Apr 27, 2006 at 10:18:23AM -0700, Alex Martelli wrote:
> On 4/27/06, Barry Warsaw <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On Thu, 2006-04-27 at 10:08 -0700, Aahz wrote:
> >
> > > While I hate the way it looks, I never have gotten mixed up about the
> > > order of arguments since switching to ''.join
On Mon, Apr 24, 2006 at 10:53:39AM -0500, Ian Bicking wrote:
> Here's something for the crazy idea bin...
>
> Right now class creation looks like:
>
>class X(base):
>y = 'z'
>
> This gets the things in the () (object), evaluates the body of the class
> in a new scope and captures th
In an old thread ("dictionary tuning", 2003[1]) Raymond H laid out the
typical use cases of dicts and found there were many subclasses of
"typical" and speeding one up hurt the others. The results are in
dist/Object/dictnotes.txt A couple of the particular use cases have
since been satisfied by
On Thu, Apr 13, 2006 at 01:39:43PM -0500, Ian Bicking wrote:
> In another thread ("Module Initialization and finalization") reload()
> has come up, and some suggestions to improve the reloadability of modules.
>
> I would like to ask: is reloading feasible at all? Right now reload()
> works poo
On Thu, Apr 13, 2006 at 10:07:27AM -0600, Steven Bethard wrote:
> This should be pretty similar to the last time I posted it, but now
> it's got an official PEP number. Let me know what you think!
>
> Identifying Problematic Code
>
>
> This PEP proposes to house this
On Thu, Mar 23, 2006 at 05:27:48PM -0800, Guido van Rossum wrote:
> On 3/23/06, Ian Bicking <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Empty iterator or iterator that produced no items -- from the outside
> > it's the same use case.
>
> I see it as an education issue. Because we have generators, the
> iterato
35 matches
Mail list logo
