On Thu, Feb 16, 2006 at 06:13:53PM +0100, Fredrik Lundh wrote:
> Barry Warsaw wrote:
>
> > We know at least there will never be a 2.10, so I think we still have
> > time.
>
> because there's no way to count to 10 if you only have one digit?
>
> we used to think that back when the gas price was j
On 2/16/06, M.-A. Lemburg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> What will be the explicit way to open a file in bytes mode
> and in text mode (I for one would like to move away from
> open() completely as well) ?
>
> Will we have a single file type with two different modes
> or two different types ?
I'm cu
Talin wrote:
> First off, let me apologize for bringing up a topic that I am sure that
> everyone is sick of: Lambda.
>
> I broached this subject to a couple of members of this list privately,
> and I got wise feedback on my suggestions which basically amounted to
> "don't waste your time."
>
Greg Ewing <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Josiah Carlson wrote:
>
> > They may not be encodings of _unicode_ data,
>
> But if they're not encodings of unicode data, what
> business do they have being available through
> someunicodestring.encode(...)?
I had always presumed that bytes objects ar
I'm seeing spurious test failures in test_timeout, on my own workstation and
on macteagle.python.org (now that it crashes less; Apple sent over some new
memory.) The problem is pretty simple: both macteagle and my workstation
live too closely, network-wise, to www.python.org:
class TimeoutTestCas
Greg Ewing wrote:
> Another thought -- what is going to happen to os.open?
> Will it change to return bytes, or will there be a new
> os.openbytes?
Nit-pickingly: os.open will continue to return integers.
I think it should return OS handles on Windows, instead
of C library handles. (also notice t
On 2/16/06, Adam Olsen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> While we're at it, any chance of renaming str/unicode to text in 3.0?
> It's a MUCH better name, as evidenced by the opentext/openbytes names.
> str is just some odd C-ism.
>
> Obviously it's a form of gratuitous breakage, but I think the long
>
On 2/15/06, Alex Martelli <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I agree, or, MAL's idea of bytes.open() and unicode.open() is also
> good.
No, the bytes and text data types shouldn't have to be tied to the I/O
system. (The latter tends to evolve at a much faster rate so should be
isolated.)
> My fondest d
Adam Olsen wrote:
> While we're at it, any chance of renaming str/unicode to text in 3.0?
> It's a MUCH better name, as evidenced by the opentext/openbytes names.
> str is just some odd C-ism.
>
> Obviously it's a form of gratuitous breakage, but I think the long
> term benefits are enough that w
Guido van Rossum wrote:
> On 2/15/06, Alex Martelli <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> I agree, or, MAL's idea of bytes.open() and unicode.open() is also
>> good.
>
> No, the bytes and text data types shouldn't have to be tied to the I/O
> system. (The latter tends to evolve at a much faster rate so sh
Guido van Rossum wrote:
> The first, required, argument to the
> constructor should be the default value.
I'd like to suggest that this argument be a function
for creating default values, rather than an actual
default value. This would avoid any confusion over
exactly how the default value is copi
Guido van Rossum wrote:
> Over lunch with Alex Martelli, he proposed that a subclass of dict
> with this behavior (but implemented in C) would be a good addition to
> the language. It looks like it wouldn't be hard to implement. It could
> be a builtin named defaultdict. The first, required, argum
On Wed, 15 Feb 2006 21:59:55 -0800, Alex Martelli <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>On Feb 15, 2006, at 9:51 AM, Barry Warsaw wrote:
>
>> On Wed, 2006-02-15 at 09:17 -0800, Guido van Rossum wrote:
>>
>>> Regarding open vs. opentext, I'm still not sure. I don't want to
>>> generalize from the openbytes
A bunch of Googlers were discussing the best way of doing the
following (a common idiom when maintaining a dict of lists of values
relating to a key, sometimes called a multimap):
if key not in d: d[key] = []
d[key].append(value)
An alternative way to spell this uses setdefault(), but it's no
On Thu, 16 Feb 2006 16:29:40 +0100, "M.-A. Lemburg" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Jean-Paul Calderone wrote:
>> On Thu, 16 Feb 2006 11:24:35 +0100, "M.-A. Lemburg" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> wrote:
>>> Neil Schemenauer wrote:
On Thu, Feb 16, 2006 at 02:43:02AM +0100, Thomas Wouters wrote:
> On
Fredrik Lundh wrote:
> http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2005-December/058752.html
>
> "I don't agree with the change. You just broke source compatibility
> between the core package and PyXML."
I'm still unhappy with that change, and still nobody has told me how to
maintain
On 2/15/06, Anthony Baxter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I'm still catching up on the hundreds of python-dev messages from the
> last couple of days, but a quick note first that I'm ok to do release
> management for 2.5
Thanks! While catching up, yuo can ignore the bytes discussion except
for Neil
[Anthony Baxter]
> I'm still catching up on the hundreds of python-dev messages from the
> last couple of days, but a quick note first that I'm ok to do release
> management for 2.5
I, for one, am delighted to see that Australian millionaires don't
give up tech work after winning an Olympic gold m
On 2/16/06, Guido van Rossum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 2/16/06, Nick Coghlan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > The PEP itself requests that a string be returned from get_data(), but
> > doesn't
> > require that the file be opened in text mode. Perhaps the PEP 302 emulation
> > should use binar
On Feb 15, 2006, at 20:06, Greg Ewing wrote:
> Barry Warsaw wrote:
>
>> If we go with two functions, I'd much rather hang them off of the
>> file
>> type object then add two new builtins. I really do think
>> file.bytes()
>> and file.text() (a.k.a. open.bytes() and open.text()) is better tha
Barry Warsaw wrote:
> We know at least there will never be a 2.10, so I think we still have
> time.
because there's no way to count to 10 if you only have one digit?
we used to think that back when the gas price was just below 10 SEK/L,
but they found a way...
__
Jean-Paul Calderone wrote:
> On Thu, 16 Feb 2006 11:24:35 +0100, "M.-A. Lemburg" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Neil Schemenauer wrote:
>>> On Thu, Feb 16, 2006 at 02:43:02AM +0100, Thomas Wouters wrote:
On Wed, Feb 15, 2006 at 05:23:56PM -0800, Guido van Rossum wrote:
>> from __fu
Giovanni Bajo wrote:
> Thomas Wouters <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
from __future__ import unicode_strings
>>> Didn't we have a command-line option to do this? I believe it was
>>> removed because nobody could see the point. (Or am I hallucinating?
>>> After several days of non-stop discus
Smith wrote:
> Everyone knows that fp numbers must be compared with caution, but
> there is a void in the relative-error department for exercising such
> caution, thus the proposal for something like 'areclose'. The problem
> with areclose(), however, is that it only solves one part of the
> proble
Paul Moore wrote:
> > > I definately don't want to start a flame war, although I suspect I already
> > > have :/
> >
> > I think most about everything has already been said wrt lambda already,
> > but I guess we could have a little war on spelling issues ;-)
>
> Agreed, but credit to Talin for act
On Wed, Feb 15, 2006 at 09:40:17PM -0800, Neal Norwitz wrote:
> I'm not sure if anyone here is following the AST discussion on
> python-dev, but it would be great if you had any input. pylint is a
> pretty big consumer of the compiler module and the decisions with
> respect to the AST could impact
> > (is the xmlplus/xmlcore issue still an issue, btw?)
>
> What issue are you talking about?
the changes described here
http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2005-December/058710.html
"I'd like to propose that a new package be created in the standard library:
xmlcore."
which
Paul Moore wrote:
> > I think most about everything has already been said wrt lambda already,
> > but I guess we could have a little war on spelling issues ;-)
>
> Agreed, but credit to Talin for actually implementing his suggestion.
> And it's nice to see that the AST makes this sort of experimen
On 2/16/06, Nick Coghlan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Guido van Rossum wrote:
> > Do you have unit tests for everything? I believe I fixed a bug in the
> > code that reads a bytecode file (it wasn't skipping the timestamp).
[Hey, I thought I sent that just to you. Is python-dev really
interested i
On Thu, 16 Feb 2006 11:24:35 +0100, "M.-A. Lemburg" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Neil Schemenauer wrote:
>> On Thu, Feb 16, 2006 at 02:43:02AM +0100, Thomas Wouters wrote:
>>> On Wed, Feb 15, 2006 at 05:23:56PM -0800, Guido van Rossum wrote:
>>>
> from __future__ import unicode_strings
On 2/16/06, Greg Ewing <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Whereas if there weren't any funky coding style in the
> first place, more potential compiler hackers might be
> encouraged to have a go.
I'm trying to make the code simple. The style of code is different
than other parts of Python, but a compil
Paul Moore wrote:
> On 2/16/06, Fredrik Lundh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Talin wrote:
>>> I definately don't want to start a flame war, although I suspect I already
>>> have :/
>> I think most about everything has already been said wrt lambda already,
>> but I guess we could have a little war on
On Feb 16, 2006, at 2:05 AM, Talin wrote:
>
> Anyway, if anyone wants to play around with the patch, it is rather
> small - a couple of lines in Grammar, and a small new function in
> ast.c,
> plus a few mods to other functions to get them to call it. The context
> diff is less than two printed
On 2/15/06, Guido van Rossum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 2/15/06, M.-A. Lemburg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Barry Warsaw wrote:
> > > On Wed, 2006-02-15 at 18:29 +0100, M.-A. Lemburg wrote:
> > >
> > >> Maybe a weird idea, but why not use static methods on the
> > >> bytes and str type objec
Neal Norwitz wrote:
> On 2/15/06, Alain Poirier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> - isn't the current implementation of itertools.tee (cache of previous
>> generated values) incompatible with the new possibility to feed a
>> generator (PEP 342) ?
>
> I'm not sure what you are referring to.
On 2/15/06, "Martin v. Löwis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Adam Olsen wrote:
> > Making it an error to have 8-bit str literals in 2.x would help
> > educate the user that they will change behavior in 3.0 and not be
> > 8-bit str literals anymore.
>
> You would like to ban string literals from the l
Guido van Rossum wrote:
> On 2/15/06, Nick Coghlan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> PEP 338 is pretty much ready to go, too - just waiting on Guido's review and
>> pronouncement on the specific API used in the latest update (his last PEP
>> parade said he was OK with the general concept, but I only po
Neil Schemenauer wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 16, 2006 at 02:43:02AM +0100, Thomas Wouters wrote:
>> On Wed, Feb 15, 2006 at 05:23:56PM -0800, Guido van Rossum wrote:
>>
from __future__ import unicode_strings
>>> Didn't we have a command-line option to do this? I believe it was
>>> removed because
Brett Cannon wrote:
> If the compiler was hacked on by more people I would agree with this.
> But few people do
This has the potential to be a self-perpetuating situation.
There may be few people hacking on it now, but more people
may want to in the future. Those people may look at the
funky cod
Josiah Carlson wrote:
> They may not be encodings of _unicode_ data,
But if they're not encodings of unicode data, what
business do they have being available through
someunicodestring.encode(...)?
Greg
___
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python.org
Jeremy Hylton wrote:
> I don't think this message is on-topic for python-dev. There are lots
> of great places to discuss the design of the python web site, but the
> list for developers doesn't seem like a good place for it. Do we need
> a different list for people to gripe^H^H^H^H^H discuss the
On 2/16/06, Fredrik Lundh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Talin wrote:
> > I definately don't want to start a flame war, although I suspect I already
> > have :/
>
> I think most about everything has already been said wrt lambda already,
> but I guess we could have a little war on spelling issues ;-)
Talin wrote:
> So the general notion is similar to the various proposals on the Wiki -
> an inline keyword which serves the function of lambda. I chose the
> keyword "given" because it reminds me of math textbooks, e.g. "given x,
> solve for y". And I like the idea of syntactical structures that m
Guido van Rossum wrote:
> We're all volunteers here, and we get a large volume of bugs.
That's obvious (note, I'm not complaining, I'm asking ,,how it works for
python'').
> Unfortunately, bugfixes are reviewed on a voluntary basis.
>
> Are you aware of the standing offer that if you review 5 bu
First off, let me apologize for bringing up a topic that I am sure that
everyone is sick of: Lambda.
I broached this subject to a couple of members of this list privately,
and I got wise feedback on my suggestions which basically amounted to
"don't waste your time."
However, after having thoug
(my mails to python-dev are bouncing; guess that's what you get when
you question the PSF's ability to build web sites... trying again.)
Neal Norwitz wrote:
> > (is the xmlplus/xmlcore issue still an issue, btw?)
>
> What issue are you talking about?
the changes described here
http://mail.
46 matches
Mail list logo
