Trent Nelson schrieb:
> On Fri, Mar 20, 2009 at 08:00:46PM +0100, Thomas Heller wrote:
>> Since I do not have a machine with so much memory: Does one
>> of the buildbots allow to run tests for this feature, or
>> do I have to wait for the snakebite farm?
>
> Will you be at PyCon? The wait mig
Terry Reedy writes:
> If Windows (or other OSes) (to be investigated) does not reliably
> come with a full unicode font (at least current BMP), is there a
> public domain or open license font that we can include?
The GNU Unifont at Unifoundry http://unifoundry.com/> is designed
for this purpose.
Hi Daniel,
That would be great. It occurs to me that if we wanted to use "Stage"
settings, it would be easy to search for issues which are not closed by
literally searching for 'not closed' rather than 'open'. I think it's also
unclear whether the 'pending' stage means 'suspended pending additiona
In preparation for Pycon and the sprints I quickly pulled together a doc
explaining how people can help out with Python's development:
http://www.python.org/dev/contributing/ .
-Brett
P.S.: Just so people know, I will be taking a month or two off from Python
development (i.e. heavy coding) after
On approximately 3/22/2009 8:48 PM, came the following characters from
the keyboard of Terry Reedy:
One of the disappointments of CPython 3.0 on Windows is that the switch
to unicode for text (str), coupled with the continued use of a
unicode-oblivious (obtuse) user interface (MS 'Command Prompt
One of the disappointments of CPython 3.0 on Windows is that the switch
to unicode for text (str), coupled with the continued use of a
unicode-oblivious (obtuse) user interface (MS 'Command Prompt'), means
that print can no longer print all str strings, or all legal Python code
(as in a traceba
Christian Heimes wrote:
> Martin v. Löwis schrieb:
>>> According to the user's experience multiprocessing should not compile
>>> and run correctly unless this patch is applied.
>> Can this please be more qualified? I can confirm Scott's observation:
>> for the trunk, it compiles just fine, using Su
On Sun, Mar 22, 2009 at 18:49, R. David Murray wrote:
> Instead of looking at a bunch of issues last week the way I'd originally
> intended, I wound up doing a review of a particular patch submission,
> issue 2170. This is a refactoring of the 'normalize' method of
> xml.dom.minidom. I wound up
Greg Ewing wrote:
As for confusion, we ignore the return values of function
calls all the time, without worrying that someone might be
confused by the fact that their return value doesn't go
anywhere. And that's the right way to think of a yield-from
expression -- as a kind of function call, not
On Fri, Mar 20, 2009 at 03:18:00PM -0700, average wrote:
-> > Summer of Code is ramping up. ?Every year the common complaint is that not
-> > enough Python core projects get proposed by students, and of course a big
-> > reason for that is often the only encouragement we offer prospective
-> > stud
Instead of looking at a bunch of issues last week the way I'd originally
intended, I wound up doing a review of a particular patch submission,
issue 2170. This is a refactoring of the 'normalize' method of
xml.dom.minidom. I wound up redoing the patch with a different
refactoring after finding o
Antoine Pitrou wrote:
If it's really enough to understand and debug all corner cases of using "yield
from", then fair enough.
In the case where the subiterator is another generator and
isn't shared, it's intended to be a precise and complete
specification. That covers the vast majority of the
I sent this out as a Google Doc a while back, but I just did a
proof-reading, converted it, and pushed it live to the python.org:
http://www.python.org/dev/workflow/ . So now people who ever triage issues
have a guide to follow if they are not sure how to set things.
-Brett
P.S.: Doing this doc h
On Sun, Mar 22, 2009 at 07:30:01PM -0300, Daniel (ajax) Diniz wrote:
-> Even if neither is considered worthy, I'll keep them on my to-do list
-> and hope to slowly and hackishly work towards both proposals' goals.
-> Barring feedback saying that they're out of scope, stupid and
-> downright offensi
Hi,
I'd like to bring up the general idea of using a PSF slot in GSoC2009
to improve the Python development infrastructure. I also happen to
have two concrete proposals for that (such a coincidence!). But I
assure you the general idea is more important than my proposals :)
General:
Solving issues
Christian Tismer stackless.com> writes:
>
> Or was it maybe to just keep the string layout on many
> common platforms compatible, in order to save rebuilding
> so many windows extension modules?
>
> If the latter is true and the only reason, I vote for reclaiming
> the three bytes. Maybe it save
On Sun, Mar 22, 2009 at 20:38, Christian Tismer wrote:
> On 3/22/09 8:01 PM, "Martin v. Löwis" wrote:
>
>> Now, the internals are very clear to me. What I don't understand
>>> is where the three saved bytes should be.
>>>
>>
>> If you look at the various patches in
>>
>> http://bugs.python.org/iss
On 3/22/09 8:01 PM, "Martin v. Löwis" wrote:
Now, the internals are very clear to me. What I don't understand
is where the three saved bytes should be.
If you look at the various patches in
http://bugs.python.org/issue576101
then there is a three-byte saving in all versions from 1 to 6.
Conse
Martin v. Löwis schrieb:
>> According to the user's experience multiprocessing should not compile
>> and run correctly unless this patch is applied.
>
> Can this please be more qualified? I can confirm Scott's observation:
> for the trunk, it compiles just fine, using SunPro CC on Solaris 10,
> on
On 3/22/09 8:01 PM, "Martin v. Löwis" wrote:
Now, the internals are very clear to me. What I don't understand
is where the three saved bytes should be.
If you look at the various patches in
http://bugs.python.org/issue576101
then there is a three-byte saving in all versions from 1 to 6.
Conse
> Now, the internals are very clear to me. What I don't understand
> is where the three saved bytes should be.
If you look at the various patches in
http://bugs.python.org/issue576101
then there is a three-byte saving in all versions from 1 to 6.
Consequentially, the API was changed in those ver
Christian Tismer wrote:
... but I'm curious.
Hi Guido,
while working on Psyco, I stumbled over a log entry in modsupport.h:
19-Aug-2002 GvR1012Changes to string object struct for
interning changes, saving 3 bytes.
The change to stringobject was this (rev. 2
At 08:11 PM 3/22/2009 +1200, Greg Ewing wrote:
P.J. Eby wrote:
(I'm thus finding it hard to believe there's a non-contrived
example that's not doing I/O, scheduling, or some other form of
co-operative multitasking.)
Have you seen my xml parser example?
http://www.cosc.canterbury.ac.nz/greg.
... but I'm curious.
Hi Guido,
while working on Psyco, I stumbled over a log entry in modsupport.h:
19-Aug-2002 GvR 1012Changes to string object struct for
interning changes, saving 3 bytes.
The change to stringobject was this (rev. 28308):
Bef
Greg Ewing canterbury.ac.nz> writes:
>
> "When the iterator is another generator, the effect is the same as if
> the body of the subgenerator were inlined at the point of the ``yield
> from`` expression. Furthermore, the subgenerator is allowed to execute
> a ``return`` statement with a value, an
On Sun Mar 22 09:11:29 CET 2009 Greg Ewing wrote:
As for confusion, we ignore the return values of function
calls all the time, without worrying that someone might be
confused by the fact that their return value doesn't go
anywhere. And that's the right way to think of a yield-from
expression --
P.J. Eby wrote:
(I'm thus finding it hard
to believe there's a non-contrived example that's not doing I/O,
scheduling, or some other form of co-operative multitasking.)
Have you seen my xml parser example?
http://www.cosc.canterbury.ac.nz/greg.ewing/python/yield-from/
Whether you'll conside
> According to the user's experience multiprocessing should not compile
> and run correctly unless this patch is applied.
Can this please be more qualified? I can confirm Scott's observation:
for the trunk, it compiles just fine, using SunPro CC on Solaris 10,
on SPARC. Also, test_multiprocessing
28 matches
Mail list logo
