I noticed that collections.Counter, unlike set, doesn't support the ordered
comparison operators (> < >= <=). I'd like to propose implementing these
operators in an analogous fashion to set: counter1 >= counter2 if counter1
contains at least as many of every key as counter2 does. Cases where
counte
Thanks Nick, Ned, and everyone else who worked on implementing this! If any
further work on the text of the PEP or on the Makefile patch is needed,
please shoot me an email (I have GMail set to archive messages to
python-dev unless they explicitly CC me).
-Kerrick Staley
On Fri, Feb 17, 2012 at
r location, python also gets changed.
-Kerrick Staley
___
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe:
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
hat I mean), so I didn't
make any changes related to idle2 or pydoc2.
-Kerrick Staley
On Wed, Jul 20, 2011 at 3:28 AM, Nick Coghlan wrote:
>
> On Wed, Jul 20, 2011 at 4:53 PM, Kerrick Staley
> wrote:
> > Nick, can you please apply the patch (will be sent in the following
>
On Wed, Jul 20, 2011 at 3:28 AM, Nick Coghlan wrote:
> Done: http://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0394/
Quick question: When I do "svn up", it doesn't show any changes. Has
it been switched over to Mercurial recently?
Thanks,
Kerrick Staley
Command on Unix-Like Systems
Version: $Revision$
Last-Modified: $Date$
Author: Kerrick Staley ,
@@ -53,10 +53,14 @@
* When reinvoking the interpreter from a Python script, querying
``sys.executable`` to avoid hardcoded assumptions regarding the
interpreter location remains the preferred app
so further input from yourself
and the rest of python-dev would be appreciated.
Nick, can you please apply the patch (will be sent in the following
email) to the PEP SVN as soon as we get the hard-link issue is figured
out? Alternatively, could you provide me write access to just the
pep-0394.txt fi
Hi,
These are two emails I sent a short while ago about finalizing PEP
394. There was no response, so in case the messages didn't go through,
I'm resending them.
Thanks,
Kerrick Staley
-- Forwarded message ------
From: Kerrick Staley
Date: Sat, Jul 9, 2011 at 7:45 PM
S
Command on Unix-Like Systems
Version: $Revision$
Last-Modified: $Date$
Author: Kerrick Staley ,
@@ -53,10 +53,14 @@
* When reinvoking the interpreter from a Python script, querying
``sys.executable`` to avoid hardcoded assumptions regarding the
interpreter location remains the preferred app
can be "switched", and it's
needed for flexibility if python3 changes). This really doesn't
matter, but can we keep it this way unless there are serious
objections?
Regards,
Kerrick Staley
___
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python.o
ld be
started so that the discussions can be separated, and those uninterested in
the Windows question can stop following that discussion without missing
Unix-related comments buried in it.
-Kerrick Staley
___
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python.org
n't feel I need write access to
the repository at this point.
-Kerrick Staley
--- pep-0394.txt2011-03-05 01:06:50.0 -0600
+++ pep-0394-revised.txt2011-03-06 15:07:42.37338 -0600
@@ -1,5 +1,5 @@
PEP: 394
-Title: The "python" command on Unix-Like Systems
+Title: Th
between the solutions on the two platforms to justify
keeping the solutions in the same document.
Kerrick Staley
___
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe:
http://mail.python.org/m
tes to the appropriate
pythonX.Y.exe would be a possibility..." However, implementing this solution
will take time and will slow the finalization of a solution for Unix-like
systems if it is included in this PEP.
-Kerrick Staley
___
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe:
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
o write it.)
I like your idea for Windows, but it would take time to implement this
solution, and we won't be able to finalize the solution for *nix as quickly
if we also provide a provision for Windows in this same PEP.
We should keep the use of the singular "they"; it's more
PEP: ???
Title: The python Utility on Unix-Like Systems
Version: ???
Last-Modified: ???
Author: Kerrick Staley
Status: Draft
Type: Informational
Content-Type: text/x-rst
Created: 02-Mar-2011
Post-History: ???
Abstract
==
This PEP provides a convention to ensure that Python scripts can
andard: developers will use the "pythonX.X" invocations instead of
ensuring their code works on all (recent) versions of the interpreter, and
much larger issues will arise when users are forced to repeatedly install
different minor versions of the interpreter. I instead addressed thi
d; I've never
done this before). I think it's a little long winded given how simple the
idea it proposes is, but I thought it would be better to be more specific
than necessary rather than less.
.
PEP: ???
Title: The python Command on Unix-Like Systems
Version: ???
Last-Modified: ??
;ve . In any event,
I do agree that there needs to be a clear standard coming from the Python
community.
Should I submit a PEP for this?
I'm also going to talk to the Arch devs and ask them to follow these
proposed standards (or at least to allow python to be user-switchable).
Thanks,
Kerric
en if distributions do decide to ignore the second point. If not, can
someone point me to official documentation that recommends that python
always invoke Python2, so that I can take the case up with the Arch
developers?
Thanks,
Kerrick Staley
On Tue, Mar 1, 2011 at 3:26 PM, Eric Smith wrote:
>
nsistently, allowing
Python scripts to continue to be cross-platform.
Thanks,
Kerrick Staley
___
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe:
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-d
21 matches
Mail list logo
