On 28/04/2007 0.44, Martin v. Löwis wrote:
> PEP: 3122
> Title: Dropping PyObject_HEAD
> Version: $Revision: 54998 $
> Last-Modified: $Date: 2007-04-27 10:31:58 +0200 (Fr, 27 Apr 2007) $
> Author: Martin v. Löwis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Status: Draft
> Type: Standards Track
> Content-Type: text/x-rs
On 4/26/07, Guido van Rossum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 4/25/07, Jim Jewett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > The current ABC proposal is to use isinstance as the test; Jeffrey
> > Yaskin's numbers PEP highlighted the weakness there with a concrete
> > example.
> >
> > If you need to an abstracti
To facilitate migration, I have a few suggestions:
- add the new access macros to 2.6 (defined appropriately)
- in 3.0, instead of removing PyObject_HEAD and company, redefine them
appropriately, .e.g, #define PyObject_HEAD PyObject obtype;
--
Daniel Stutzbach, Ph.D. President, Stutz
On 4/28/07, Calvin Spealman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 4/26/07, Guido van Rossum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On 4/25/07, Jim Jewett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > The current ABC proposal is to use isinstance as the test; Jeffrey
> > > Yaskin's numbers PEP highlighted the weakness there w
On Sat, 28 Apr 2007 07:54:58 -0700, Guido van Rossum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>On 4/28/07, Calvin Spealman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> On 4/26/07, Guido van Rossum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> > On 4/25/07, Jim Jewett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> > > The current ABC proposal is to use isinsta
On 4/28/07, Jean-Paul Calderone <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Aside from the way in which `x' can already lie:
>
> >>> class X(object):
> ... __class__ = property(lambda self: int)
> ...
> >>> isinstance(X(), int)
> True
> >>>
>
> Is this behavior changed/going to be chan
On 23 Apr 2007, at 05:17, Terry Reedy wrote:
> "Jim Jewett" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in
> message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> |Functions (including methods) often want access to themselves,
> |usually for a private storage location.
>
> Or for true recursion. At present, a function has
Martin v. Löwis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I propose the PEP below for Py3k.
I think it's a good idea. It would be nice if the PEP included
something about forwards compatibility. Ideally, there should be a
way to write a module that works with both 2.x and 3.x (e.g. using
preprocessor macros)
On 4/28/07, Guido van Rossum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 4/28/07, Jean-Paul Calderone <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Aside from the way in which `x' can already lie:
> >
> > >>> class X(object):
> > ... __class__ = property(lambda self: int)
> > ...
> > >>> isinstance(X(), i
On 4/28/07, Calvin Spealman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 4/28/07, Guido van Rossum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On 4/28/07, Jean-Paul Calderone <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > Aside from the way in which `x' can already lie:
> > >
> > > >>> class X(object):
> > > ... __class__ = p
Shouldn't the various *View in abc.py be Iterables (inherit from Iterable) ?
___
Python-3000 mailing list
[email protected]
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-3000
Unsubscribe:
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-3000/archive
On 4/28/07, Samuele Pedroni <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Shouldn't the various *View in abc.py be Iterables (inherit from Iterable) ?
Oops, it looks like this is a mess. There are two classes
_MappingView. Ignore them for the sake of the PEP. I'll clean them up
later. We probably need fewer mappin
Guido van Rossum wrote:
> On 4/28/07, Samuele Pedroni <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Shouldn't the various *View in abc.py be Iterables (inherit from
>> Iterable) ?
>
> Oops, it looks like this is a mess. There are two classes
> _MappingView. Ignore them for the sake of the PEP. I'll clean them up
On 4/28/07, Samuele Pedroni <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Guido van Rossum wrote:
> > On 4/28/07, Samuele Pedroni <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> Shouldn't the various *View in abc.py be Iterables (inherit from
> >> Iterable) ?
> >
> > Oops, it looks like this is a mess. There are two classes
> > _M
Guido van Rossum wrote:
> On 4/28/07, Samuele Pedroni <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Guido van Rossum wrote:
>> > On 4/28/07, Samuele Pedroni <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> >> Shouldn't the various *View in abc.py be Iterables (inherit from
>> >> Iterable) ?
>> >
>> > Oops, it looks like this is a me
At 09:17 AM 4/28/2007 -0700, Guido van Rossum wrote:
>On 4/28/07, Jean-Paul Calderone <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Aside from the way in which `x' can already lie:
> >
> > >>> class X(object):
> > ... __class__ = property(lambda self: int)
> > ...
> > >>> isinstance(X(), int)
On 4/25/07, Jim Jewett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 4/25/07, Jeffrey Yasskin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > class MonoidUnderPlus(Abstract):
>
> Is this useful? Just because two things are both Monoid instances
> doesn't mean I can add them -- they have to be part of the same
> Monoid. By
Bill Janssen a écrit :
>> Jeffrey, is there any way you can drop the top of the tree and going
>> straight from Number to Complex -> Real -> Rational -> Integer? These
>> are the things that everyone with high school math will know.
>
> I think knowledge of the concepts of group, ring, and field i
On 4/27/07, Alan Isaac <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Fri, 27 Apr 2007, Jeffrey Yasskin wrote:
> > Then again, doubles aren't a group either because of this
> > imprecision, and I'm suggesting claiming they're
> > a subclass of that, so maybe there's room in a practical
> > language to make them a
On 4/28/07, Jeffrey Yasskin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 4/25/07, Jim Jewett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On 4/25/07, Jeffrey Yasskin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > class MonoidUnderPlus(Abstract):
> >
> > Is this useful? Just because two things are both Monoid instances
> > doesn't mea
Thanks for the comments!
On 4/26/07, Travis E. Oliphant <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Forgive my ignorance, but I'm not really sure what this PEP is trying to
> do. I don't want to sound negative, I really just don't understand the
> purpose. I've just never encountered a problem this that I ca
Martin v. Löwis wrote:
> I expect access to ob_type is frequent in Foo_Check() macros;
> those need to be rewritten to use Py_Type(op).
Maybe some of this breakage could be repaired by renaming
the real ob_type field and doing something like
#define ob_type ob_base._ob_type
--
Greg
__
Guido van Rossum wrote:
> On 4/28/07, Jean-Paul Calderone <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>>>>> class X(object):
>>... __class__ = property(lambda self: int)
>
> I'm not particularly enamored with it, but I believe it once served a
> purpose for Zope. Does anyone know if it is still need
23 matches
Mail list logo
