Tim Peters wrote:
Back in:
http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2005-March/051856.html
I made a pitch for adding:
sys._current_frames()
to 2.5, which would return a dict mapping each thread's id to that
thread's current (Python) frame. As noted there, an extension
On Sunday 09 July 2006 11:31, Tim Peters wrote:
Back in:
http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2005-March/051856.html
I made a pitch for adding:
sys._current_frames()
to 2.5, which would return a dict mapping each thread's id to that
thread's current (Python) frame. As
On 09/07/2006, at 9:05 AM, Anthony Baxter wrote:
I'm really not keen on this seeming tide of new features wink that
seem to be popping up. We're only a few days away from the second and
final planned beta - it's getting _awfully_ late to be slotting in
new features.
And besides, one person
Richard Jones wrote:
On 09/07/2006, at 9:05 AM, Anthony Baxter wrote:
I'm really not keen on this seeming tide of new features wink that
seem to be popping up. We're only a few days away from the second and
final planned beta - it's getting _awfully_ late to be slotting in
new features.
Ka-Ping Yee [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Client-side web scripting tends to have a callback/continuation-ish
concurrency style because it has to deal with network transactions
(which can stall for long periods of time) in a user interface that
is expected to stay always responsive. The Firefox
[Anthony Baxter]
Hm. Would it be a smaller change to expose head_mutex so that the
external module could use it?
No, in part because `head_mutex` may not exist (depends on the build
type). What an external module would actually need is 3 new public C
API functions, callable workalikes for
On 7/8/06, Talin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Brett Cannon wrote: On 7/7/06, Guido van Rossum [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 7/8/06, Ka-Ping Yee [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote: I'd like the answer to be yes.It sounded for a while like this was not part of Brett's plan, though.Now i'm not so sure.It sounds
On Sun, 9 Jul 2006, Andrew Koenig wrote:
Sounds reasonable to me. If we're talking py3k I'd chuck global as a
keyword though and replace it with something like outer.
I must say that I don't like outer any more than I like global. The
problem is that in both cases we are selecting the
Patch / Bug Summary
___
Patches : 393 open (+15) / 3315 closed (+17) / 3708 total (+32)
Bugs: 908 open (+22) / 5975 closed (+49) / 6883 total (+71)
RFE : 223 open ( -1) / 229 closed ( +2) / 452 total ( +1)
New / Reopened Patches
__
The bug was reported by Armin in SF #1333982:
the literal -2147483648 (i.e. the value of -sys.maxint-1) gives
a long in 2.5, but an int in = 2.4.
I have a fix but I wonder if it's the right thing to do. I suppose
returning a long has the chance of breaking someone code. Here's
the test
I think it ought to be an int, like before.
--Guido
On 7/9/06, Neil Schemenauer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The bug was reported by Armin in SF #1333982:
the literal -2147483648 (i.e. the value of -sys.maxint-1) gives
a long in 2.5, but an int in = 2.4.
I have a fix but I wonder if
[Neil Schemenauer]
The bug was reported by Armin in SF #1333982:
the literal -2147483648 (i.e. the value of -sys.maxint-1) gives
a long in 2.5, but an int in = 2.4.
That actually depends on how far back you go. It was also a long at
the start. IIRC, Fred or I added hackery to make
Do we care about this (after your checkin and with my fix to make
32-63 bit values ints rather than longs):
# 64 bit box
minint = str(-sys.maxint - 1)
minint
'-9223372036854775808'
eval(minint)
-9223372036854775808
eval('-(%s)' % minint[1:])
-9223372036854775808L
n
--
On 7/9/06, Neil
On Sun, Jul 09, 2006 at 03:02:06PM -0700, Neal Norwitz wrote:
Do we care about this (after your checkin and with my fix to make
32-63 bit values ints rather than longs):
# 64 bit box
minint = str(-sys.maxint - 1)
minint
'-9223372036854775808'
eval(minint)
-9223372036854775808
On 7/9/06, Neil Schemenauer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Sun, Jul 09, 2006 at 03:02:06PM -0700, Neal Norwitz wrote:
Do we care about this (after your checkin and with my fix to make
32-63 bit values ints rather than longs):
# 64 bit box
minint = str(-sys.maxint - 1)
minint
Just to make life harder ;-), I should note that code, docs and tests
for sys._current_frames() are done, on the tim-current_frames branch.
All tests pass, and there are no leaks in the new code. It's just a
NEWS blurb away from being just another hectic release memory :-)
Ka-Ping Yee wrote:
On Sun, 9 Jul 2006, Andrew Koenig wrote:
Sounds reasonable to me. If we're talking py3k I'd chuck global as a
keyword though and replace it with something like outer.
I must say that I don't like outer any more than I like global. The
problem is that in both cases we are
Talin wrote:
Some alternatives:
use x
using x
with x -- recycle a keyword?
reuse x
use extant x
share x
common x
same x
borrow x
existing x
Although, to be perfectly honest, the longer this discussion goes on,
the more that I
On 7/9/06, Talin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Talin wrote:
Some alternatives:
use x
using x
with x -- recycle a keyword?
reuse x
use extant x
share x
common x
same x
borrow x
existing x
Of these, I like reuse, share,
http://python.org/sf/1513611
xml.sax.ParseException weirdness in python 2.5b1. The following code
doesn't work:
from xml.sax import make_parser, SAXParseException
parser = make_parser()
try:
parser.parse(StringIO('invalid'))
except SAXParseException:
print 'caught it!'
Any comments?
n
20 matches
Mail list logo
