> S 3121 Module Initialization and finalization von Löwis
>
> I like it. I wish the title were changed to "Extension Module ..." though.
Done!
Martin
___
Python-3000 mailing list
Python-3000@python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/p
Phillip J. Eby wrote:
> At 07:37 PM 5/1/2007 -0700, Guido van Rossum wrote:
>> That's one solution. Another solution would be to use GFs in Pydoc to
>> make it overloadable; I'd say pydoc could use a bit of an overhault at
>> this point.
>
> True enough; until you mentioned that, I'd forgotten th
At 07:37 PM 5/1/2007 -0700, Guido van Rossum wrote:
>On 5/1/07, Phillip J. Eby <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > However, since your objections are more in the nature of general unease
> > than arguments against, it probably doesn't make sense for me to continue
> > quibbling with them point by point,
Guido van Rossum wrote:
> S 3125 Remove Backslash ContinuationJewett
>
> Sounds reasonable. I think we should still support \ inside string
> literals though; the PEP isn't clear on this. I hope this falls within
> the scope of the refactoring tool (sandbox/2to3).
I'm a strong
On 5/1/07, Phillip J. Eby <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> However, since your objections are more in the nature of general unease
> than arguments against, it probably doesn't make sense for me to continue
> quibbling with them point by point, and instead focus on how to move forward.
Thanks for indu
At 05:52 PM 5/1/2007 -0700, Guido van Rossum wrote:
>I rather like the idea that it warns readers who are new to GFs and more
>familiar with how functions behave in Python 2.
Until somebody adds an overload, it *does* behave the same; that was sort
of the point. :)
>Also noting that __code__ i
On 5/1/07, Phillip J. Eby <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> At 02:04 PM 5/1/2007 -0700, Guido van Rossum wrote:
> >On 5/1/07, Phillip J. Eby <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > At 12:14 PM 5/1/2007 -0700, Guido van Rossum wrote:
> > > >Suppose you couldn't assign to __class__ of a function (that's too
> >
At 02:04 PM 5/1/2007 -0700, Guido van Rossum wrote:
>On 5/1/07, Phillip J. Eby <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > At 12:14 PM 5/1/2007 -0700, Guido van Rossum wrote:
> > >Suppose you couldn't assign to __class__ of a function (that's too
> > >messy to deal with in CPython) and you couldn't assign to it
On 5/1/07, Phillip J. Eby <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> At 12:14 PM 5/1/2007 -0700, Guido van Rossum wrote:
> >Suppose you couldn't assign to __class__ of a function (that's too
> >messy to deal with in CPython) and you couldn't assign to its __code__
> >either. What proposed functionality would you
From: "Jim Jewett" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> On 5/1/07, Guido van Rossum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> So the PEP submissions are in, and a few late ones will be submitted
>> ASAP. Let me write up a capsule review of what we've got. Please let
>> me know if I missed anything (e.g. a PEP that someon
For what is worth changing func_code is supported both by PyPy and
Jython. What cannot be done
in Jython is construct a code object out of a string of CPython
bytecode, but it can be extracted from
other functions.
Jython 2.2b1 on java1.5.0_07
Type "copyright", "credits" or "license" for more in
At 12:14 PM 5/1/2007 -0700, Guido van Rossum wrote:
>Suppose you couldn't assign to __class__ of a function (that's too
>messy to deal with in CPython) and you couldn't assign to its __code__
>either. What proposed functionality would you lose?
The ability to overload any function, without having
Suppose you couldn't assign to __class__ of a function (that's too
messy to deal with in CPython) and you couldn't assign to its __code__
either. What proposed functionality would you lose? How would you
ideally implement that functionality if you had the ability to modify
CPython in other ways? (I
At 11:31 AM 5/1/2007 -0700, Guido van Rossum wrote:
>I haven't had the time to read this in detail, but in general I'm
>feeling favorable about this idea. I'd rather see it decoupled from
>sys._getframe() and modifying func_code (actually __code__ nowadays,
>see PEP 3100).
I've figured out how to
On 5/1/07, Jim Jewett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 5/1/07, Guido van Rossum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > So the PEP submissions are in, and a few late ones will be submitted
> > ASAP. Let me write up a capsule review of what we've got. Please let
> > me know if I missed anything (e.g. a PEP
On 5/1/07, Guido van Rossum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> So the PEP submissions are in, and a few late ones will be submitted
> ASAP. Let me write up a capsule review of what we've got. Please let
> me know if I missed anything (e.g. a PEP that someone has committed to
> write but hasn't submitted
On 5/1/07, Guido van Rossum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> PEP: Adding class decorators (???)
>
> I'm in favor of this. I'm just writing for someone to write it up.
I just checked in PEP 3129, "Class Decorators".
Collin Winter
___
Python-3000 mailing list
So the PEP submissions are in, and a few late ones will be submitted
ASAP. Let me write up a capsule review of what we've got. Please let
me know if I missed anything (e.g. a PEP that someone has committed to
write but hasn't submitted yet).
First the PEPs that have numbers as of this writing (I'
18 matches
Mail list logo
