anatoly techtonik [EMAIL PROTECTED] added the comment:
If lineends are mixed I would like to leave them as is.
___
Python tracker [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://bugs.python.org/issue3359
___
Changes by Amaury Forgeot d'Arc [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Added file: http://bugs.python.org/file10953/localstofast.patch
___
Python tracker [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://bugs.python.org/issue2378
___
Changes by Amaury Forgeot d'Arc [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Removed file: http://bugs.python.org/file10707/localstofast.patch
___
Python tracker [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://bugs.python.org/issue2378
___
Changes by Amaury Forgeot d'Arc [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
--
assignee: - amaury.forgeotdarc
___
Python tracker [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://bugs.python.org/issue2378
___
___
Amaury Forgeot d'Arc [EMAIL PROTECTED] added the comment:
This issue is a duplicate of issue2378; the patch attached there
corrects this problem. I will commit it tonight.
--
nosy: +amaury.forgeotdarc
resolution: - duplicate
status: open - closed
superseder: - UnboundLocalError when
Antoine Pitrou [EMAIL PROTECTED] added the comment:
Selon Martin v. Löwis [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Martin v. Löwis [EMAIL PROTECTED] added the comment:
I don't understand the second loop (where n is given). If n is given,
there should be only a single read operation, using
max(buffer_size,
Amaury Forgeot d'Arc [EMAIL PROTECTED] added the comment:
IMO the struct tok_state should not be part of the API, it contains
too many implementation details. Or maybe as an opaque structure.
--
nosy: +amaury.forgeotdarc
___
Python tracker [EMAIL
Fredrik Lundh [EMAIL PROTECTED] added the comment:
There are a few things in the struct that needs to be public, but that's
nothing that cannot be handled by documentation. No need to complicate
the API just in case.
___
Python tracker [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Marc-Andre Lemburg [EMAIL PROTECTED] added the comment:
The patch looks good to me.
___
Python tracker [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://bugs.python.org/issue2620
___
___
Python-bugs-list
Amaury Forgeot d'Arc [EMAIL PROTECTED] added the comment:
PyCFunctionObject has indeed no way to store annotations. This could be
useful for extension module writers.
The PyMethodDef structure could grow a ml_annotations member. A patch
is welcome!
--
nosy: +amaury.forgeotdarc
Changes by Amaury Forgeot d'Arc [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
--
assignee: - amaury.forgeotdarc
nosy: +amaury.forgeotdarc
___
Python tracker [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://bugs.python.org/issue3387
___
Facundo Batista [EMAIL PROTECTED] added the comment:
I don't understand.
I tried the following:
Python 2.6b2+ (trunk:65167M, Jul 21 2008, 09:51:48)
[GCC 4.1.3 20070929 (prerelease) (Ubuntu 4.1.2-16ubuntu2)] on linux2
Type help, copyright, credits or license for more information.
import
Antoine Pitrou [EMAIL PROTECTED] added the comment:
Selon Facundo Batista [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Then I wrote int. Then I pressed TAB. Nothing happened. I pressed TAB
again, and the following appeared:
int
int( intern(
This is not the point. The problem is when you type int., then press
nirinA raseliarison [EMAIL PROTECTED] added the comment:
and this is the header.
it is stolen from glibc.
Added file: http://bugs.python.org/file10955/math_private.h
___
Python tracker [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://bugs.python.org/issue3366
Changes by Amaury Forgeot d'Arc [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
--
nosy: +amaury.forgeotdarc
___
Python tracker [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://bugs.python.org/issue3373
___
___
Graham Dumpleton [EMAIL PROTECTED] added the comment:
I know the discussions more or less says this, but I want to add some
additional information.
For the record, the reason that mod_python crashes with 'Invalid thread state
for this thread' when Py_DEBUG is defined in part relates to:
Facundo Batista [EMAIL PROTECTED] added the comment:
Ah, sorry, missed that point.
Ok, I included this change and now it works ok.
Also worked a little that code (change the name of the variable
object, used extend() for a list instead of adding to itself, and
removed a comparison from a
Franco DiRosa [EMAIL PROTECTED] added the comment:
Also, that Py_DEBUG check effectively says that if you use simplified
GIL API for a particular thread against the first interpreter, you are
prohibited from creating additional thread states for that thread.
I found that you cannot create
Franco DiRosa [EMAIL PROTECTED] added the comment:
By the way. I switched to using the GIL functions on the main
interpreter and everything works great now. It is a better solution to
use the GIL functions because I also had my own code that prevented
dead lock from occuring when a python
Changes by Amaury Forgeot d'Arc [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
--
assignee: - effbot
nosy: +effbot
___
Python tracker [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://bugs.python.org/issue3409
___
___
Adam Olsen [EMAIL PROTECTED] added the comment:
Graham, I appreciate the history of sub-interpreters and how entrenched
they are. Changing those practises requires a significant investment.
This is an important factor to consider.
The other factor is the continuing maintenance and development
Trent Mick [EMAIL PROTECTED] added the comment:
This bug should be re-opened. The patch to configure.in wasn't quite
right. I'm attaching a slight fix. `autoconf`ing removes one level of
square brackets in the 'sed' command to create $tgt.
(Q about the issue tracker: I'm unable to change the
Georg Brandl [EMAIL PROTECTED] added the comment:
Reopening. Yes, Status is settable only by Developers, but as a
committer, you should certainly have that privilege.
--
nosy: +georg.brandl
status: closed - open
___
Python tracker [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Jesús Cea Avión [EMAIL PROTECTED] added the comment:
Are you using a python pydebug version?. Can you reproduce the issue
with a no pydebug python interpreter?
___
Python tracker [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://bugs.python.org/issue2960
Gregory P. Smith [EMAIL PROTECTED] added the comment:
using a python trunk optimized (non-debug) build and pybsddb r530:
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Berkeley DB 4.7.25: (May 15, 2008)
bsddb.db.version(): (4, 7, 25)
bsddb.db.__version__:
Amaury Forgeot d'Arc [EMAIL PROTECTED] added the comment:
Committed as r65174 and r65175.
(for trunk, I had to change PyBytes_AS_STRING into PyString_AS_STRING)
Thanks!
--
resolution: - fixed
status: open - closed
___
Python tracker [EMAIL
Martin v. Löwis [EMAIL PROTECTED] added the comment:
max(buffer_size, n-avail)
I mimicked the original logic rather than rethink the algorithm. I'm not
totally
sure what motivates the original logic but the purpose seems to be that
non-blocking streams can return at least a few bytes
Mark Dickinson [EMAIL PROTECTED] added the comment:
Thanks for the patch! I probably won't get to this properly until after
2.6 final, but it won't get lost. It seems like there's pretty good
support for adding these functions.
By the way, there's already a setup in Python 2.6 (ad 3.0) for
Mark Dickinson [EMAIL PROTECTED] added the comment:
I still think this is the wrong solution, and should be fixed before 2.6;
long(float('nan')) should raise ValueError. As Alexander points out,
this fits much better with the IEEE 754 standard, and also with the C99
standard. It also just
Amaury Forgeot d'Arc [EMAIL PROTECTED] added the comment:
Committed as r65177.
--
resolution: - fixed
status: open - closed
___
Python tracker [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://bugs.python.org/issue2378
___
Changes by Georg Brandl [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
--
priority: normal - critical
status: closed - open
___
Python tracker [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://bugs.python.org/issue1481296
___
Mark Dickinson [EMAIL PROTECTED] added the comment:
Assigning to me; I'd like to check in the new fix for 2.6/3.0, but I'll
give it a couple of weeks for any objections to surface first.
--
assignee: - marketdickinson
versions: +Python 2.6, Python 3.0 -Python 2.5
Antoine Pitrou [EMAIL PROTECTED] added the comment:
Le lundi 21 juillet 2008 à 21:18 +, Martin v. Löwis a écrit :
IIUC, a read of the full requested size would achieve exactly that: on a
non-blocking stream (IIUC), a read will always return
min(bytes_available, bytes_requested).
Hmm, it
Changes by Amaury Forgeot d'Arc [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
--
assignee: - kbk
___
Python tracker [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://bugs.python.org/issue3344
___
___
Python-bugs-list
Daniel Stutzbach [EMAIL PROTECTED] added the comment:
On Mon, Jul 21, 2008 at 5:34 PM, Raymond Hettinger
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
There are several different approximations to choose from. Each of
them has their own implications for speed and accuracy.
FWIW, the current patch dynamically
New submission from Greg Hazel [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
exec()ing a line which causes a DeprecationWarning causes the warning
to quote the file exec() occurs in instead of the string.
Demonstration of the issue:
http://codepad.org/aMTYQgN5
--
components: None
messages: 70129
nosy: ghazel
Amaury Forgeot d'Arc [EMAIL PROTECTED] added the comment:
Did you look at the io.open() function?
It's a new module in python2.6, but also the builtin open in py3k!
* On input, if newline is None, universal newlines mode is
enabled. Lines in the input can end in '\n', '\r', or
Raymond Hettinger [EMAIL PROTECTED] added the comment:
It would be nice if we knew the error bounds for each of the
approximation methods. Do we know how the coefficients were generated?
When switching from one method to another, it might be nice to have a
range where the results slowly blend
lorph [EMAIL PROTECTED] added the comment:
Is anyone still working on this? It seems like an oddity of python that
has been a stumbling block for me to create a super reload.
I've found that i am able to bypass this problem by creating the
following definition:
class object(object):pass
Michael Hudson [EMAIL PROTECTED] added the comment:
Another 3 and a bit years on wink I still think my comment
http://bugs.python.org/msg14169 is the crux of the issue. It's even
relevant to your class object(object): pass hack!
I'm not at all likely to work on this any time soon myself.
Collin Winter [EMAIL PROTECTED] added the comment:
I think the proper way to address this is via the confidence levels that
Rodrigo Bernardo Pimentel is adding for his Summer of Code project. The
idea is that you'll be able to say let me inspect any changes where the
fixer is less than X%
Martin v. Löwis [EMAIL PROTECTED] added the comment:
We would need the copyright holder of the patch to submit a contributor
form. Would that be possible?
--
nosy: +loewis
___
Python tracker [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://bugs.python.org/issue1767370
Senthil [EMAIL PROTECTED] added the comment:
Sorry for the delay and my miss in further communication on this issue.
I would like to take this issue in two fronts for its closure.
1) Issue with headers .capitalize() vs .title()
2) Documenting the Interface
With respect to point 1), I assume
Gregory P. Smith [EMAIL PROTECTED] added the comment:
Commited to trunk. r65182.
This still needs backporting to release25-maint. (and release24-maint
if anyone is maintaining that)
--
keywords: +patch
versions: +Python 3.0 -Python 2.6
___
Python
44 matches
Mail list logo