On 3/27/06, Steven Bethard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 3/26/06, Adam DePrince <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > I have a draft PEP and an implementation of mutable iterators for lists
> > and dicts that supports delete only.
> >
> > The PEP (Mutable Iterations) and sample code can be found at:
> >
On 3/28/06, adam deprince <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > I won't go on any more - you probably get the idea...
>
> Agreed, scratch that, I'll rework it in the spriit of views.
Thanks for taking my comments so well! When I wrote them, I was
*really* worried they came across as too negative.
The ke
On 3/29/06, Brett Cannon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Without a direct reason in terms of the language needing a
> standardization of an interface, perhaps we just don't need views. If
> people want their iterator to have a __len__ method, then fine, they
> can add it without breaking anything, ju
On 3/29/06, Adam DePrince <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> There is more than that. Everybody who accesses a database has to jump
> and down to extract their fields. Wouldn't it be nice if you could say
> to your result set from a database:
>
> >>> rs.execute( "select upc, description, price from my_
On 3/31/06, Greg Ewing <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Alex Martelli wrote:
>
> > If the framework consuming X requested adaptation-to-X on all objects
> > it's passed,
>
> This is the part that bothers me, I think. It
> seems like all these adaptation requests would
> be a huge burden on the framewo
On 4/1/06, Tim Hochberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Bah! This is why adapters never get anywhere. My eyes glazed over 10
> lines ago. At their core, adapters seem like a simple enough concept,
> but whenever anyone starts talking about them we get what seems like
> overengineered examples that mak
On 4/2/06, Brett Cannon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I am not suggesting the default be that everything satisfies a
> protocol. I am thinking about situations like our __index__
> situation; will someone have to explicitly somewhere say that a type
> meets the index protocol even if it does implem
On 4/2/06, Nick Coghlan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> This is where I've always come unstuck in thinking about adaptation - actually
> using C++ and VB6 has persuaded me that implicit type conversions are
> generally evil, and there doesn't seem to be anything in adaptation that makes
> it the excep
On 4/2/06, Alex Martelli <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I believe that such "magically appearing" does not depend on
> adaptation, per se, but on the mix of "convenience" approaches to
> adaptation and registration that one chooses to provide alongside it.
Apologies if I didn't explain myself well -
On 4/4/06, Ian Bicking <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Perhaps. The import-for-side-effect requirement sounds like a
> > showstopper though.
>
> There's a bunch of places where this is a problem. This is a problem
> anywhere you want to add functionality to something that doesn't belong
> to you.
On 4/7/06, Eli Stevens (WG.c) <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> It seems to me that now to get a duck-typed list, not only do you have
> to implement all of special methods that define "listy-ness," you also
> have to find the overloaded functions that are specialized for lists,
> and register your own
On 4/13/06, "Martin v. Löwis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Michael Chermside wrote:
> > my_x = my_mpz + my_array
> >
> > THIS then raises an exception because there is no one dominant
> > definition.
>
> Or, to make a long story short: there might not be a single next
> best candidate, but mul
On 4/17/06, Terry Reedy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> "Talin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > The important thing is that the behavior be clear and unambiguous,
> > which I think this is.
>
> Many would also prefer that functions calls not become noticeable slower
On 4/20/06, Guido van Rossum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 4/20/06, Greg Ewing <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Thomas Wouters wrote:
> >
> > > I believe Guido is referring to
> > > http://www.awl.com/cseng/titles/0-201-43305-2
> >
> > Are there any published papers about this, or is that book
> >
On 4/21/06, Guido van Rossum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 4/21/06, Talin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > The variation that I was thinking of was a little shorter, but not
> > necessarily better:
> >
> >def foo( a, b; x=1, y=2 ): ...
>
> That cropped up in my head too long ago. I think I've s
On 4/22/06, Talin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Well the problem is that decorator functions don't have access to the
> machinery
> that binds input arguments for formal parameters. So the wrapper function has
> a
> hard time knowing which input arguments will be bound to which formal params,
> wi
On 4/29/06, Nick Coghlan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> However, I'm now -0 on having a set literal at all, and it's because I believe
> we can solve this problem in a more general fashion that applies to more
> functions than just the set() constructor.
>
> Currently, [] and () can appear both stand
On 5/2/06, Bill Janssen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> A widget toolkit which pre-implements parts of particular applications
> does make it easier to implement those applications, I agree. The
> question in my mind is whether an application can be built even if
> that particular widget is missing.
On 5/2/06, Greg Ewing <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Paul Moore wrote:
>
> > This is, of course, hard, as platforms offer widely differing widget
> > sets. Tough. Nobody said writing a portable GUI layer was going to be
> > easy.
>
> Indeed. I'd say this kind
On 5/7/06, Talin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> As an example, lets take a look at re.sub:
>
>sub(pattern, repl, string[, count])
>
> The documentation says that "repl can be a string or a function" and
> "If repl is a function, it is called for every non-overlapping occurrence
> of pattern. The
On 5/7/06, Greg Wilson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > From: Greg Ewing <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > There is another alternative -- move both Tk and IDLE out of the core
> > into separate downloads.
>
> +1.
If the implication here is that there is *no* GUI in the Python
standard library, I'd be cautiou
On 5/8/06, Greg Ewing <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Paul Moore wrote:
>
> > If the implication here is that there is *no* GUI in the Python
> > standard library, I'd be cautious of this (-0, probably). Things like
> > the pydoc server use a little GUI window.
>
On 5/8/06, Talin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Lets say we outlaw the use of isSequence - how do you propose to
> implement this type of pattern? Or are you saying that this pattern is
> bad style?
Generic (overloadable) functions. See the archives - it's possible the
discussion was before you subs
On 5/10/06, Bill Birch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> A simple test to see where your thinking is at. Consider:
[...]
> The manual for isinstance() says: "return true if classinfo is a type object
> and object is an object of that type". So consider this:
>
> isinstance( D(), I1 )
>
> Is thi
On 5/11/06, Bill Birch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Thu, 11 May 2006 12:38 am, you wrote:
> > On 5/10/06, Bill Birch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > A simple test to see where your thinking is at. Consider:
[...]
> > Clearly False - D() is not an object of type I1.
> >
> > Of course, whether is
On 5/14/06, Giovanni Bajo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> So, are we totally dropping the "special-cased __ method" that worked so fine
> till now? I can "overload" abs() for my point type (to return its modulus)
> just
> by defining a __abs__, and it works fine. In such a world (called Python 2.x),
On 5/18/06, Collin Winter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> In looking through all of Guido's blog posts on the subject -- and all
> the comments on them -- I haven't seen anyone consider the case of
> generators. Assuming that "->" makes assertions only about the
> function's return type, if I were to
On 5/20/06, Talin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Here's a list of use cases that I can think of:
[...]
Interesting. Can you elaborate one of these into a strawman example,
with code, that we can discuss? There are a number of issues I can
see, but it's too easy to be vague without a concrete exampl
On 5/21/06, Phillip J. Eby <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I'm confused as to why nobody seems to have noticed my proposal or
> prototype. So far my speculation is that it's outside of most people's
> ability to perceive, because it moots all the things they're arguing
> about. That is, it makes eve
On 5/31/06, Brett Cannon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Why would a 3rd-party module be installed into the stdlib namespace?
> net.jabber wouldn't exist unless it was in the stdlib or the module's author
> decided to be snarky and inject their module into the stdlib namespace.
Do you really want the
On 8/15/06, Collin Winter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Here's the modified example
>
> @docstring
> @typechecker
> @constrain_values
> def foo(a: {'doc': "Frobnication count",
>'type': Number,
>'constrain_values': range(3, 9)},
>b: {'type': Number,
> # Th
On 8/20/06, Guido van Rossum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I've created a wiki page with some ideas for Python 3000 things we
> could do at the Google sprint (starting Monday). See:
>
> http://wiki.python.org/moin/GoogleSprintPy3k
I notice that one of the items on there is "Work on the new I/O
li
On 8/28/06, Delaney, Timothy (Tim) <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> For when/*if* views ever become considered to be a good thing for
> builtin classes, etc, may I suggest that the following syntax be
> reserved for view creation:
>
> obj{start:stop:step}
>
> mapping to something like:
>
> def
On 9/11/06, Michael Chermside <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Paul Prescod writes:
> [... Pre-PEP proposal ...]
>
> Quick thoughts:
My quick thoughts on this whole subject:
* Yes, it should be "open". Anything else feels like gratuitous breakage.
* There should be a default encoding, and it sho
On 9/14/06, Talin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I've been reading this thread (and the ones that spawned it), and
> there's something about it that's been nagging at me for a while, which
> I am going to attempt to articulate.
[...]
> Any given Python program that I write is going to know *something
On 9/14/06, Josiah Carlson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> So don't save it with a BOM and add a Python coding: directive to the
> second line. Python and bash comments just happen to have the same #
> delimiter, and if your editor doesn't suck, then it should understand
> such a directive.
However,
On 10/9/06, Marcin 'Qrczak' Kowalczyk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> There are a few sane choices for the semantics of 'var':
>
> 1. The variable is visible from 'var' to the end of the scope.
>If 'var' doesn't specify an initial value, accessing the variable
>before it gets assigned to is an
On 10/17/06, Greg Ewing <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> How do you pronounce PyPI, btw? Is it "pie-pie" or
> "pie-pee-eye"? (And don't tell me it's actually
> pronounced "pippy" -- acronyms with non-obvious
> pronunciations are a minor peeve of mine. People
> are going to pronounce it the way they thi
On 11/2/06, Mike Orr <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Given the widely-diverging views on what, if anything, should be done
> to os.path, how about we make a PEP and a standalone implementation of
> (1) for now, and leave (2) and everything else for a later PEP.
Why write a PEP at this stage? Just rel
On 11/1/06, Mike Orr <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> [...] especially since both Mac and
> Windows do the right thing with "/", "..", and "." now.
Not always:
D:\Data>dir C:/
Invalid switch - "".
Paul.
___
Python-3000 mailing list
[email protected]
h
On 11/8/06, Talin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> What I want to avoid is a situation where I have to edit my config file
> to switch all the path separators from '/' to '\' when I move my
> application from OS X to Win32.
This requirement conflicts with that of a user who only uses one
platform, an
On 11/9/06, Talin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Bill Janssen wrote:
> > Greg Ewing writes:
> >> If the standard format were designed so as to be
> >> unambiguously distinguishable from all native
> >> formats, ...
> >
> > All native formats both past and future.
>
> That's not difficult.
>
> I use '
On 11/10/06, Talin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> What I am arguing against is an overly strict and pedantic
> interpretation of the differences in path representation across
> platforms. True, in theory, you can't compare a windows path with a
> posix path, but in practice it generally "just works".
On 11/17/06, Talin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> # Create a callback timer
> alarm = Timer()
> alarm.SetDuration( 100, Timer.Milliseconds )
>
> upon alarm:
>print "It's time to get up, silly-head!"
>
> print "Alarm has been set!"
Why invent a new special case syntax - t
On 11/22/06, Phillip J. Eby <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> At 08:57 PM 11/21/2006 -0800, Guido van Rossum wrote:
> >Phillip, please shorten your posts. You're hogging all the bandwidth I
> >have for thinking about this. Please!
>
> Er, that *was* the shortened version; I actually spent about an hour
On 11/23/06, Guido van Rossum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 11/22/06, Calvin Spealman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > This whole thing seems a bit off from start to finish. A seperate
> > definition syntax with a special name/expression weirdo thingy, etc.
>
> I have the same gut feelings but find
On 11/23/06, Phillip J. Eby <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> So, the generic function 'as_string' here functions as an "interface" or
> "ability". Of course, instead of being called 'as_string', it could live
> as an attribute of the 'str' type, e.g. 'str.cast':
OK, I think I just "clicked" with what
On 11/23/06, Guido van Rossum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I'm reposting this under a different subject because the other subject
> seems to have gone off on a tangent. The rest are Phillip's words.
[...]
OK, I've read and tried to digest this. It looks good. The one thing
I'm still not getting, a
On 11/23/06, Phillip J. Eby <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> At 05:55 PM 11/23/2006 +0000, Paul Moore wrote:
> >On 11/23/06, Guido van Rossum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > I'm reposting this under a different subject because the other subject
> > > seems
On 11/26/06, Jim Jewett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 11/26/06, Mike Orr <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On 11/26/06, Jim Jewett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > C: without a slash is effectively a mount point into
> > > the current directory.
>
> > That's what I always thought "C:foo" is. But G
On 11/30/06, Bill Janssen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > so no offense in advance.
>
> Sure, no offense taken. I've seen comments like this before on this
> list (recently :-). I think both approaches (interface types and duck
> typing) are complicated in different ways.
Instinctively, I agree w
On 12/1/06, tomer filiba <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> i would still like to understand how object proxying (e.g., weakrefs, RPyC),
> could work when all/most frameworks/libraries would be based on ABCs.
I don't think that's what is being proposed, if I understand Guido's
response to my post. There
On 12/4/06, Jim Jewett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 12/3/06, Bill Janssen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
[Skillped Jim's point that I'm 100% in agreement with, about what
people will end up doing in practice...]
> > What I'd like to see as documentation is more along the lines of
>
> > foo (type
On 12/19/06, Brett Cannon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED] anyone?
>
> Quaint. I can live with that.
While I'm not against it, python-ideas may be a better name, simply
because it doesn't have a connotation that any conclusions reached on
the list are unlikely to be implemented :-
On 05/01/2008, Michele Simionato <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I would like to know if docutils has been ported to Python 3.0 and if
> yes where I can download the code.
That would be a question for the docutils development list -
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Paul.
___
On 06/01/2008, Georg Brandl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> hashcollision schrieb:
> > I request the addition of prod():
> It would have to be called product(), and I believe it has been proposed
> multiple times and been rejected under the "not every 3-line function
> has to be builtin" rule.
Please
On 06/01/2008, Georg Brandl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Paul Moore schrieb:
> > On 06/01/2008, Georg Brandl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> hashcollision schrieb:
> >> > I request the addition of prod():
> >> It would have to be called product(
On 07/01/2008, Barry Warsaw <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> On Jan 6, 2008, at 1:35 PM, Jim Fulton wrote:
>
> > Really, I'd like to see a much smaller standard library. IMO, pickle
> > isn't essential enough to be part of the standard library and I'
On 08/01/2008, Fred Drake <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Jan 8, 2008, at 7:54 AM, J. Clifford Dyer wrote:
> > Aside from the concerns of a few developers wanting simpler release
> > cycles, this is definitely not the way to go.
>
> I don't mean that "political" (in this case, "business") reasons a
Whoops, that was meant to go to the list. Sorry.
On 03/02/2008, Brett Cannon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> But we need a solution, not a start. While the stdlib is bloated, it
> is being trimmed down in Py3K already. If you want to trim more then
> push for stuff to be removed on a module-to-module
On 06/02/2008, Christian Heimes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Nice, it's an elegant and easy solution to the problem. I like to get a
> quite similar solution into the core but I propose a slightly different
> path.
>
> Like your launcher.c, spam.exe looks for spam.py. It additionally looks
> for sp
On 07/02/2008, Phillip J. Eby <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> At 09:52 AM 2/8/2008 +1300, Greg Ewing wrote:
> >Would it be feasible for it to always start up as a gui
> >app, and then create its own console window (a fake one
> >if necessary) if it decides it needs one?
>
> No, because that would make
On 10/02/2008, Raymond Hettinger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Now, we have one and only one chance to slim-down the mapping API, leaving
> the copy()
> function as the one, universal, preferred way to do it. I don't think this
> chance will come
> again.
This discussion confused me (largely bec
On 16/02/2008, Christian Heimes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> In the last months Amaury, Martin von Löwis and I have done most of the
> Windows work. Any help from an experienced Windows developer is greatly
> appreciated! We *need* an additional Windows developer.
Is there a list anywhere of tasks
On 16/02/2008, Giovanni Bajo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Sat, 16 Feb 2008 12:40:52 -0500, Phillip J. Eby wrote:
>
> >>BTW: is there a long-time plan to make the Python core *not* link
> >>against msvcrt dll anymore but only rely on Windows APIs (or maybe also
> >>the static C runtime, I don't r
On 16/02/2008, "Martin v. Löwis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > If you avoided the static CRT, and only used Windows APIs, that would
> > avoid this issue, but that means reimplementing everything -
> > malloc/free, FILE*, stdin/stdout/stderr, etc etc. I don't think anyone
> > is contemplating that
On 01/03/2008, "Martin v. Löwis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > As of 4:50 PM EST, the links to Windows installers give 404 File Not
> > Found.
> >
> > I gather that they are still in process,
> > and notice that there is no public c.l.p. announcement.
>
>
> I just fixed that. The files were t
On 05/03/2008, Martijn Faassen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> This is quick feedback given my experiences installing Python 3 for the
> first time. Take it as that, please.
[...]
> A quick search on the topic found a discussion about this in '05
> without a conclusion, and the following text in PEP
On 15/03/2008, Guido van Rossum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Thomas Wouters suggests some new syntax:
>
> http://bugs.python.org/issue2292
[...]
> What do people think?
I like it. It's on the border of being too obscure (the examples are
logical, but I need to think to apply the logic - if you s
This is something that I've been pondering over for a while now, but I
haven't been able to come to any strong conclusions. I'd appreciate
some comment, and possibly a bit of clarification in the documentation
for migrating to 3.0.
I'm basically an end user of Python. I don't write libraries or
fr
On 18/03/2008, "Martin v. Löwis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > This is something that I've been pondering over for a while now, but I
> > haven't been able to come to any strong conclusions. I'd appreciate
> > some comment, and possibly a bit of clarification in the documentation
> > for migrating
On 21/03/2008, Brett Cannon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Just to head this off, this is not a specific vote of confidence for
> Bazaar. The Bazaar developers were at PyCon and both Barry and Thomas
> were willing to put the time and effort to get the mirror up and going
> while the Bazaar team w
On 21/03/2008, Benjamin Peterson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I tend to make a repository and make a working copy for each patch in it.
> The history is saved in the repository so it's efficient.
OK, so just lots of copies, fair enough. Presumably just use bzr diff
to create patches? Much like Sub
On 26/03/2008, Thomas Heller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> What I would like to see is a way to disable certain tests on certain
> machines;
> maybe by setting environment variables?
Could this be done by something like the following (completely
untested no time at the moment) change to regrte
On 01/04/2008, "Martin v. Löwis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > What really bugs me about this state of affairs is that I consider the
> > python 2 dict.items() to be safe and free of surprises, but I no
> > longer feel the same way about it in 3; this is really about the fact
> > that when you
On 04/04/2008, Zaur Shibzoukhov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Certainly! It don't intent to replace this way of defining/modifining
> properties. First, it is an example of "with" statement application.
> Second, suggested approach allow to write your example in the
> following way:
>
> class C
On 15/04/2008, Terry Reedy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> "Guido van Rossum" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> | So it sounds like we're doomed if we do, and damned if we don't. Or do
> | I misunderstand you? Do you have a practical suggestion?
>
> You understood the same as me.
That's how
On 29/04/2008, Alex Martelli <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 29, 2008 at 5:10 AM, Nick Coghlan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> ...
> > Perhaps sched/mutex could be dumped in the Demo directory? Or perhaps we
> > should just get rid of them entirely and see if anyone with a real use case
>
On 15/05/2008, Guido van Rossum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Consider code that gets an encoding passed in as a
> variable e. It knows it has a bytes instance b. To encode b from bytes
> to str (unicode), it can use s = b.decode(e).
To encode, you use .decode? It's nice to know it's not just me wh
On 15/05/2008, Atsuo Ishimoto <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I would like to call it "improve", not break :)
Please can you help me understand the impact here. I am running
Windows XP (UK English - console code page 850, which is some variety
of Latin 1). Currently, printing non-latin1 characters gi
On 15/05/2008, Paul Moore <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> My apologies if I misunderstood your proposal - I have almost no
> Unicode experience, and that probably shows :-)
One point I forgot to clarify is that I'm fully aware that
print(arbitrary_string) may display garbage, if th
On 28/05/2008, M.-A. Lemburg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I'm beginning to wonder whether I'm the only one who cares about
> the Python 2.x branch not getting cluttered up with artifacts caused
> by a broken forward merge strategy.
I care, but I struggle to understand the implications and/or what
On 19/06/2008, Barry Warsaw <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> On behalf of the Python development team and the Python community, I am
> happy to announce the first beta releases of Python 2.6 and Python 3.0.
Any ETA for Windows builds? The web pages s
2008/9/4 Brett Cannon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> On Wed, Sep 3, 2008 at 7:33 PM, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> All but dbm.dumb require some pre-existing library to exist to compile
> against. So any platform that has the proper libraries installed will
> be able to use ndbm or gnu, but as for which pl
2008/9/4 Jesus Cea <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> PS: If you mistype the method name, you get an error. If you mistype the
> attribute assignment, the bug goes unnoticed.
I'm neutral over the threading change, but this is a good point to
consider in general as part of the "method vs property" question whe
2008/9/8 wesley chun <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> the goal is admirable, but unless there are paying sponsors that
> require this deadline be met, i'd suggest that we can push the
> releases until they're ready. the changes that 2.6 and 3.0 bring are
> too major to be released before they are ready for
2008/12/4 "Martin v. Löwis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Any objections?
The timing is right, go for it.
Paul
___
Python-3000 mailing list
[email protected]
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-3000
Unsubscribe:
http://mail.python.org/mailman/o
On 1/3/07, Barry Warsaw <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> On Jan 2, 2007, at 6:47 PM, Brett Cannon wrote:
>
> > Are you at least okay with base64, quopri, and uu going? You are just
> > arguing for the saving of binascii, right?
> >
> > Does anyone el
On 20/02/07, Steven Bethard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 2/20/07, Raymond Hettinger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > My recommendation is to take a more conservative route. Let's make dicts as
> > simple as possible and then introduce a new collections module entry with
> > the
> > views bells a
On 26/02/07, Mike Verdone <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Daniel Stutzbach and I have prepared a draft PEP for the new IO system
> for Python 3000. This document is, hopefully, true to the info that
> Guido wrote on the whiteboards here at PyCon. This is still a draft
> and there's quite a few decisio
On 27/02/07, Guido van Rossum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 2/27/07, Paul Moore <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> [...]
> > Documenting the revised open() factory in this PEP would be useful. It
> > needs to address encoding issues, so it's not a simple copy of the
On 14/03/07, Josiah Carlson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> "Patrick Maupin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Thanks for the feedback. For some reason, my post hasn't garnered
> > that much attention yet. Do I need to post it on python-dev or
> > c.l.p., or are people just really busy with other thi
On 16/03/07, Nick Coghlan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> There aren't many people that write UR"WTF?" either, but odd
> capitalisation is still legal syntax that can't be ignored completely
> when making changes.
>
> Compare:
>
> 0t755 0T755
> 0o755 0O755
> 0c755 0C755
>
> 0c755 is looking like
On 23/04/07, Phillip J. Eby <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> (It occurs to me that I should mention that, just like the relationship
> between 'type' and 'object' rarely matters unless you delve into
> metaclasses or other wizardry, so too am I referring here only to the
> wizard-level aspects of a gen
On 23/04/07, Phillip J. Eby <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Here you go:
[...]
> Any questions? :)
No :-)
I really do think that putting this in a PEP as it is, would be a good start.
> That's pretty much it, for the generic function part. The interface part
> looks like the "recombinable interfa
On 25/04/07, Greg Ewing <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Do we really need to have B&D-ish enforcement of abstract
> method implementation? It doesn't seem pythonic to me.
> I might want to leave some methods of an ABC unimplemented
> because I'm not intending to use them. I'd be annoyed if
> I were pr
On 25/04/07, Emin.shopper Martinian.shopper <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I disagree. I think that B&D-ish enforcement of ABCs is the most important
> feature of an ABC (with the option of being able to turn off enforcement on
> a per-class basis).
OK. We can agree to disagree. My point was that as
On 30/04/07, Bill Janssen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > 6) that doesn't freeze all of the key APIs in concrete
>
> After 15 years of experience with the key APIs, we could perhaps freeze some
> of
> them?
After 15 years not being able to clearly state what "file-like" or
"mapping-like" means to
> - Implement TimSort for BLists, so that best-case sorting is O(n)
> instead of O(log n).
Is that a typo? Why would you want to make best-case sorting worse?
Paul.
___
Python-3000 mailing list
[email protected]
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listi
On 08/05/07, Jim Jewett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I will be unhappy if 2to3 produces code that I can't run in (at least)
> 2.6, because then I would need to convert more than once.
IIUC, the idea is that you should be able to write valid Python 2.6
code which 2to3 can convert automatically. The
1 - 100 of 156 matches
Mail list logo
