On 10/10/07, Gregory P. Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > - remove buffer API from PyUnicode
> >
> > I'll take these two with a goal of having them done by the end of the
> week.
> >
>
> I should've known not to believe the simple description. This one is
> proving difficult by itself. If I
On 10/10/07, Christian Heimes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Guido van Rossum wrote:
> > > The tasks I can think of are:
> [...]
>
> (Resend, the first mail didn't make it and I forgot a point)
>
> While I was working on a patch for the renaming of bytes and str8 I
> found some open issues that need
On 10/10/07, Christian Heimes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Guido van Rossum wrote:
> > > The tasks I can think of are:
> [...]
>
> (Resend, the first mail didn't make it and I forgot a point)
>
> While I was working on a patch for the renaming of bytes and str8 I
> found some open issues that need
On 10/10/07, Alexandre Vassalotti <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 10/10/07, Gregory P. Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > > - remove buffer API from PyUnicode
> > >
> > > I'll take these two with a goal of having them done by the end of the
> > week.
> > >
> >
> > I should've known not to belie
Guido van Rossum wrote:
> > The tasks I can think of are:
[...]
(Resend, the first mail didn't make it and I forgot a point)
While I was working on a patch for the renaming of bytes and str8 I
found some open issues that need to be discussed and addressed:
- Create an iterator view for PyBytes.
Guido van Rossum wrote:
> Definitely not. basestring is for text strings. We could even decide
> to remove it; we should instead have ABCs for this purpose.
I'm going to provide a patch which rips basestring out, k? Somebody has
to write a fixer for 2to3 which replaces code like isinstance(egg,
ba
Christian Heimes schrieb:
>> You mean 'formerly', not 'formally' :-) I prefer to just call these by
>> their C names (PyString) to be precise, as the C names aren't changing
>> (at least not yet ;-).
>
> Oh, formerly ... right. The current state of the names is very
> confusing. It's going to cos
Georg Brandl wrote:
> I agree that this is quite confusing. The PyBytes functions can be changed
> without a thought since they aren't 2.x heritage. Since PyBuffer_* is already
> taken, what about a PyByteBuffer_ prefix? PyString_ could then be renamed
> to PyByteString_. PyUnicode might be allowed
On 10/10/07, Christian Heimes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Georg Brandl wrote:
> > I agree that this is quite confusing. The PyBytes functions can be changed
> > without a thought since they aren't 2.x heritage. Since PyBuffer_* is
> > already
> > taken, what about a PyByteBuffer_ prefix? PyString
On 10/10/07, Christian Heimes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I've a question about one point. The PEP states "They accept anything
> that implements the PEP 3118 buffer API for bytes arguments, and return
> the same type as the object whose method is called ("self")". Which
> types do implement the b
It's all fine to debate new names, but for 3.0a2, the existing C-level
names will be used. Period. I am not going to review a change that
touches every other line of code to do such a big rename.
FWIW, I think the new names should be different from any existing
names, otherwise merges from the tru
Guido van Rossum wrote:
> b"abc".count("b")
>> >> 1
> >
> > This is a bug.
> >
> "abc".count(b"b")
>> >> 1
> >
> > This too.
> >
buffer(b"abc").count("b")
>> >> Traceback (most recent call last):
>> >> File "", line 1, in
>> >> SystemError: can't use str as char buffer
> >
> >
haha wow! your patch was a *lot* less messy than I was expecting things
could get. most of the test suite still seems to pass for me with this
applied. if you haven't already please post it on bugs.python.org.
On 10/10/07, Alexandre Vassalotti <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On 10/10/07, Gregory
13 matches
Mail list logo
