Re: [Python-Dev] Backward-incompatible change to random.randrange in 2.7.6

2013-12-17 Thread Benjamin Peterson
Mostly yes, but at least you could tell people to upgrade straight to 2.7.7 and skip 2.7.6. 2013/12/17 Donald Stufft : > Isn't changing it in 2.7.6 which is already released and then reverting in > 2.7.7 worse? Either way 2.7.6 will have this change and be in the wild and > broken for people who

Re: [Python-Dev] Backward-incompatible change to random.randrange in 2.7.6

2013-12-17 Thread Donald Stufft
Isn't changing it in 2.7.6 which is already released and then reverting in 2.7.7 worse? Either way 2.7.6 will have this change and be in the wild and broken for people who depend on it > On Dec 17, 2013, at 5:54 PM, Benjamin Peterson wrote: > > 2013/12/17 Antoine Pitrou : >> On Tue, 17 Dec 201

[Python-Dev] thread issues when embedding Python

2013-12-17 Thread Daniel Pocock
I've successfully embedded Python for a single thread I tried to extend the implementation for multiple threads (a worker thread scenario) and I'm encountering either deadlocks or seg faults depending upon how I got about it. There seems to be some inconsistency between what is covered in the d

[Python-Dev] thread issues when embedding Python

2013-12-17 Thread Daniel Pocock
I've successfully embedded Python for a single thread I tried to extend the implementation for multiple threads (a worker thread scenario) and I'm encountering either deadlocks or seg faults depending upon how I got about it. There seems to be some inconsistency between what is covered in the d

Re: [Python-Dev] Backward-incompatible change to random.randrange in 2.7.6

2013-12-17 Thread Benjamin Peterson
2013/12/17 Antoine Pitrou : > On Tue, 17 Dec 2013 13:18:25 -0500 > Tres Seaver wrote: >> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- >> Hash: SHA1 >> >> http://hg.python.org/cpython/rev/b1e94e332ec8 >> >> >> Do we really want to change an undocumented-but-effectively-public API in >> a late-in-the-release-

Re: [Python-Dev] Backward-incompatible change to random.randrange in 2.7.6

2013-12-17 Thread Antoine Pitrou
On Tue, 17 Dec 2013 13:18:25 -0500 Tres Seaver wrote: > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- > Hash: SHA1 > > http://hg.python.org/cpython/rev/b1e94e332ec8 > > > Do we really want to change an undocumented-but-effectively-public API in > a late-in-the-release-cycle third dot release? It caused,

Re: [Python-Dev] cffi in stdlib

2013-12-17 Thread Nick Coghlan
On 18 Dec 2013 06:21, "Maciej Fijalkowski" wrote: > > On Tue, Dec 17, 2013 at 7:21 PM, Brett Cannon wrote: > > Maybe someone from PyPy should bring this up as an official topic at the > > language summit to figure out the blockers (again). Or it can join regex on > > the list of "module discussed

Re: [Python-Dev] Backward-incompatible change to random.randrange in 2.7.6

2013-12-17 Thread Tim Peters
[Barry] > ... > I don't think the API *has* to change in a backward incompatible way either. > The methods could be given **kws with a bit of hackery to figure out whether > the old API was being used (keys: int, default, maxwidth) or the new API was > being used (keys: _int and _maxwidth). Yeah i

Re: [Python-Dev] Backward-incompatible change to random.randrange in 2.7.6

2013-12-17 Thread Guido van Rossum
This really seems a case of ZODB depending on internals where it really, really should have known better. Calling this "a de-facto public interface" seems way too far a stretch of the intention. And please don't fix it by version-testing and using a different argument name... On Tue, Dec 17, 2013

Re: [Python-Dev] Backward-incompatible change to random.randrange in 2.7.6

2013-12-17 Thread Barry Warsaw
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 On Dec 17, 2013, at 01:18 PM, Tres Seaver wrote: >http://hg.python.org/cpython/rev/b1e94e332ec8 > >Do we really want to change an undocumented-but-effectively-public API in >a late-in-the-release-cycle third dot release? It caused, ZODB's tests >to

Re: [Python-Dev] Backward-incompatible change to random.randrange in 2.7.6

2013-12-17 Thread Tres Seaver
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 12/17/2013 01:40 PM, Guido van Rossum wrote: > This really seems a case of ZODB depending on internals where it > really, really should have known better. Calling this "a de-facto > public interface" seems way too far a stretch of the intention. A

Re: [Python-Dev] cffi in stdlib

2013-12-17 Thread Maciej Fijalkowski
On Tue, Dec 17, 2013 at 7:21 PM, Brett Cannon wrote: > Maybe someone from PyPy should bring this up as an official topic at the > language summit to figure out the blockers (again). Or it can join regex on > the list of "module discussed for addition at the language summit but never > quite pushed

[Python-Dev] Backward-incompatible change to random.randrange in 2.7.6

2013-12-17 Thread Tres Seaver
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 http://hg.python.org/cpython/rev/b1e94e332ec8 Do we really want to change an undocumented-but-effectively-public API in a late-in-the-release-cycle third dot release? It caused, ZODB's tests to fail, for instance. While the docstring said, "Don't u

Re: [Python-Dev] cffi in stdlib

2013-12-17 Thread Brett Cannon
Maybe someone from PyPy should bring this up as an official topic at the language summit to figure out the blockers (again). Or it can join regex on the list of "module discussed for addition at the language summit but never quite pushed to commitment". =) On Tue, Dec 17, 2013 at 11:43 AM, Stefan

Re: [Python-Dev] cffi in stdlib

2013-12-17 Thread Stefan Krah
Maciej Fijalkowski wrote: > I would like to discuss on the language summit a potential inclusion > of cffi[1] into stdlib. This is a project Armin Rigo has been working > for a while, with some input from other developers. I've tried cffi (admittedly only in a toy script) and find it very nice to