Nicholas Bastin wrote:
>>No. The PEP is only about Subversion. Why should we be looking at Per
>>Force? Only because Python is Open Source?
>
>
> Perforce is a commercial product, but it can be had for free for
> verified Open Source projects, which Python shouldn't have any problem
> with. Ther
> "M" == "M.-A. Lemburg" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
M> Other non-commercial alternatives are Berlios and Savannah, but
M> I'm not sure whether they'd offer Subversion support.
Savannah doesn't offer great reliability or support, at least to judge
by the frequency with which the GNU E
OK, once the cron job comes around and is run,
http://www.python.org/peps/pep-0348.html will not be a 404 but be the
latest version of the PEP.
Differences since my last public version is that it has
BaseException/Exception as the naming hierarchy, Warning inherits from
Exception, UserException is
> "aahz" == aahz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
aahz> I'd rather not rely on licensing of a closed-source system;
aahz> one of the points made during the talk was that the Linux
aahz> project had to scramble when they lost their Bitkeeper
aahz> license
Python is unlikely to thro
On Wed, Aug 03, 2005, Nicholas Bastin wrote:
>
> I'd put $20 on the fact that cvs2svn will *not* work out of the box
> for converting the python repository. Just call it a hunch. In any
> case, the Perforce-supplied cvs2p4 should work at least as well.
Maybe. OTOH, I went to a CVS->SVN talk tod
On 8/3/05, Guido van Rossum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> [Guido van Rossum]
> > > OK, I'm changing my mind again about the names again.
> > >
> > > Exception as the root and StandardError can stay; the only new
> > > proposal would then be to make bare 'except:' call StandardError.
>
> [James Y Kn
> The problem with Raisable
> is that it doesn't contain the word exception; perhaps we can call it
> BaseException?
+1
> A refinement might be to introduce something called Error, which would
> change the last part of the avove hierarchy as follows:
. . .
> This has a nice symmetry between E
[Guido van Rossum]
> > OK, I'm changing my mind again about the names again.
> >
> > Exception as the root and StandardError can stay; the only new
> > proposal would then be to make bare 'except:' call StandardError.
[James Y Knight]
> I don't see how that can work. Any solution that is expected
On 8/3/05, James Y Knight <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Aug 3, 2005, at 3:00 PM, Guido van Rossum wrote:
> > [...brain hums...]
> >
> > OK, I'm changing my mind again about the names again.
> >
> > Exception as the root and StandardError can stay; the only new
> > proposal would then be to make b
On Aug 3, 2005, at 3:00 PM, Guido van Rossum wrote:
> [...brain hums...]
>
> OK, I'm changing my mind again about the names again.
>
> Exception as the root and StandardError can stay; the only new
> proposal would then be to make bare 'except:' call StandardError.
I don't see how that can work. A
On 8/3/05, Russell E. Owen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> Brett Cannon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > New Hierarchy
> > =
> >
> > Exception
[SNIP]
> > +-- StandardError
[SNIP]
> > +-- EnvironmentError
> > +-- OSError
> > +-- IOError
>
> > Because of EIBTI?
>
> Don't know the acronym (and neither does acronymfinder.com).
Sorry. Explicit is Better than Implicit.
--
--Guido van Rossum (home page: http://www.python.org/~guido/)
___
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python.org
http://m
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Brett Cannon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> New Hierarchy
> =
>
> Exception
> +-- CriticalException (new)
> +-- KeyboardInterrupt
> +-- MemoryError
> +-- SystemError
> +-- ControlFlowException (new)
> +-- StopIteration
> +-- Generator
On 8/3/05, Michael Hudson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Guido van Rossum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > So here's a radical proposal (hear the scratching of the finglernail
> > on the blackboard? :-).
> >
> > Start with Brett's latest proposal. Goal: keep bare "except:" but
> > change it to catc
Guido van Rossum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> So here's a radical proposal (hear the scratching of the finglernail
> on the blackboard? :-).
>
> Start with Brett's latest proposal. Goal: keep bare "except:" but
> change it to catch only the part of the hierarchy rooted at
> StandardError.
>
> - C
On 8/3/05, Guido van Rossum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 8/3/05, Brett Cannon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On 8/3/05, Guido van Rossum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > So here's a radical proposal (hear the scratching of the finglernail
> > > on the blackboard? :-).
> > >
> > > Start with Bret
On Wednesday 03 August 2005 15:01, M.-A. Lemburg wrote:
> Other non-commercial alternatives are Berlios and Savannah, but
> I'm not sure whether they'd offer Subversion support.
Berlios does offer Subversion; the docutils project is using the Berlios
Subversion and SourceForge for everything el
M.-A. Lemburg wrote:
>>I haven't received any offers to make a qualified statement. I only
>>know that I would oppose an approach to ask somebody but our
>>volunteers to do it for free, and I also know that I don't want to
>>spend my time researching commercial alternatives (although I
>>wouldn't m
On 8/2/05, "Martin v. Löwis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> George V. Neville-Neil wrote:
> > Since Python is Open Source are you looking at Per Force which you can
> > use for free and seems to be a happy medium between something like CVS
> > and something horrific like Clear Case?
>
> No. The PEP
Martin v. Löwis wrote:
> M.-A. Lemburg wrote:
>
>>True, but if we never ask, we'll never know :-)
>>
>>My question was: Would asking a professional hosting company
>>be a reasonable approach ?
>
> It would be an option, yes, of course. It's not an approach that
> *I* would be willing to implement
On 8/3/05, Brett Cannon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 8/3/05, Guido van Rossum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > So here's a radical proposal (hear the scratching of the finglernail
> > on the blackboard? :-).
> >
> > Start with Brett's latest proposal.
>
> Including renaming (I want to know if you
On 8/3/05, Guido van Rossum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> So here's a radical proposal (hear the scratching of the finglernail
> on the blackboard? :-).
>
> Start with Brett's latest proposal.
Including renaming (I want to know if you support the renamings at
all, if I should make them more of an
On 8/3/05, Phillip J. Eby <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> At 11:10 PM 8/3/2005 +1000, Nick Coghlan wrote:
> > New exceptions:
> > - Raisable (new base)
> > - ControlFlow (inherits from Raisable)
> > - CriticalError (inherits from Raisable)
> > - GeneratorExit (inherits from
On 8/3/05, Nick Coghlan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Phillip J. Eby wrote:
> > +1. The main things that need fixing, IMO, are the need for critical and
> > control flow exceptions to be distinguished from "normal" errors. The rest
> > is mostly too abstract for me to care about in 2.x.
>
> I gue
So here's a radical proposal (hear the scratching of the finglernail
on the blackboard? :-).
Start with Brett's latest proposal. Goal: keep bare "except:" but
change it to catch only the part of the hierarchy rooted at
StandardError.
- Call the root of the hierarchy Raisable.
- Rename CriticalExc
On 8/2/05, Raymond Hettinger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> The Py3.0 PEPs are a bit disconcerting. Without 3.0 actively in
> development, it is difficult to get the participation, interest, and
> seriousness of thought that we apply to the current release. The PEPs
> may have the effect of prematu
Nick Coghlan wrote:
> Phillip J. Eby wrote:
>
>>+1. The main things that need fixing, IMO, are the need for critical and
>>control flow exceptions to be distinguished from "normal" errors. The rest
>>is mostly too abstract for me to care about in 2.x.
>
>
> I guess, before we figure out "whe
At 11:10 PM 8/3/2005 +1000, Nick Coghlan wrote:
> New exceptions:
> - Raisable (new base)
> - ControlFlow (inherits from Raisable)
> - CriticalError (inherits from Raisable)
> - GeneratorExit (inherits from ControlFlow)
> Added inheritance:
> - Exception from R
Phillip J. Eby wrote:
> +1. The main things that need fixing, IMO, are the need for critical and
> control flow exceptions to be distinguished from "normal" errors. The rest
> is mostly too abstract for me to care about in 2.x.
I guess, before we figure out "where would we like to go?", we rea
Brett Cannon wrote:
> On 8/2/05, Phillip J. Eby <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>It seems to me that multiple inheritance is definitely the right idea,
>>though. That way, we can get the hierarchy we really want with only a
>>minimum of boilerplate in pre-3.0 to make it actually work.
>
> Yeah. I th
30 matches
Mail list logo
