On Nov 6, 2011, at 12:49 AM, Petri Lehtinen wrote:
Currently, find(), rfind(), index(), rindex(), count(), startswith()
and endswith() of str, bytes and bytearray accept None. Should
list.index() and tuple.index() accept it, too?
The string methods accept None as a historical artifact
of
On Nov 1, 2011, at 1:31 PM, Barry Warsaw wrote:
On Oct 31, 2011, at 06:23 PM, Éric Araujo wrote:
I thought that patches that clean up code but don’t fix actual bugs were
not done in stable branches. Has this changed?
I hope not. Sure, if they fix actual bugs, that's fine, but as MvL
On Oct 3, 2011, at 6:12 AM, Lars Buitinck wrote:
After some digging, I found out that Counter [2] does not
have __iadd__ and += copies the entire left-hand side in __add__!
This seems like a reasonable change for Py3.3.
I also figured out that I should use the update method instead, which
On Sep 27, 2011, at 11:24 AM, Ethan Furman wrote:
Alexander Belopolsky wrote:
On Tue, Sep 27, 2011 at 2:23 AM, Greg Ewing greg.ew...@canterbury.ac.nz
wrote:
..
And I don't like linspace either. Something more self
explanatory such as subdivide or interpolate might
be better.
Grid would
On Sep 27, 2011, at 3:22 PM, Ethan Furman wrote:
Well, actually, I'd be using it with dates. ;)
FWIW, an approach using itertools is pretty general but even it doesn't work
for dates :-)
from itertools import count, takewhile
from decimal import Decimal
from fractions import Fraction
On Sep 6, 2011, at 1:36 PM, Martin v. Löwis wrote:
I think this is what people underestimate. I can't name
applications either - but that doesn't mean they don't exist.
Google code search is pretty good indicator that this method
has near zero uptake. If it dies, I don't think anyone will
On Aug 26, 2011, at 8:51 PM, Terry Reedy wrote:
On 8/26/2011 8:42 PM, Guido van Rossum wrote:
On Fri, Aug 26, 2011 at 3:57 PM, Terry Reedytjre...@udel.edu wrote:
My impression is that a UFT-16 implementation, to be properly called such,
must do len and [] in terms of code points,
On Aug 15, 2011, at 5:35 AM, Nick Coghlan wrote:
On Mon, Aug 15, 2011 at 10:17 PM, Antoine Pitrou solip...@pitrou.net wrote:
AFAICT, often with True and False:
x = (some condition) ? Py_True : Py_False;
Py_INCREF(x);
return x;
And that's an idiom that works better with a
On Aug 10, 2011, at 4:15 AM, Nick Coghlan wrote:
After implementing the aforementioned step 5, you will find that the
performance of everything, including the threaded code, will be quite a bit
worse. Frankly, this is probably the most significant obstacle to have any
kind of GIL-less
On Aug 10, 2011, at 1:36 PM, Antoine Pitrou wrote:
Le Wed, 10 Aug 2011 14:54:33 -0500,
Benjamin Peterson benja...@python.org a écrit :
2011/8/10 Brian Curtin brian.cur...@gmail.com:
Now that we have concurrent.futures, is there any plan for
multiprocessing to follow suit? PEP 3148 mentions
On Jul 30, 2011, at 11:28 PM, Georg Brandl wrote:
(Also, there must have been some reason to make ... available everywhere
for Python 3.)
It's really nice for stub functions:
def foo(x):
...
Raymond
___
Python-Dev mailing list
On Jul 23, 2011, at 5:18 PM, Antoine Pitrou wrote:
My point is that on non-trivial benchmarks, the savings are almost zero.
That could be said of any optimization in Python.
Typical Python scripts exercise many features at time,
so any one optimization by itself if almost useless.
On Jul 20, 2011, at 3:16 PM, Brett Cannon wrote:
On Wed, Jul 20, 2011 at 11:48, Terry Reedy tjre...@udel.edu wrote:
On 7/20/2011 12:25 PM, Victor Stinner wrote:
Le 20/07/2011 17:58, Éric Araujo a écrit :
Do we have a policy of not adding new test files to stable branches?
New logging
Please don't add the IRC link to the devguide.
Based on conversations with Guido, he is against it being part of the core
development process.
Raymond
On Jul 21, 2011, at 4:08 AM, Nick Coghlan wrote:
On Thu, Jul 21, 2011 at 7:16 PM, Ezio Melotti ezio.melo...@gmail.com wrote:
FWIW you
On Jun 30, 2011, at 2:14 AM, Ezio Melotti wrote:
Hi,
On Thu, Jun 30, 2011 at 2:51 AM, raymond.hettinger
python-check...@python.org wrote:
Fixup repr for dict_proxy objects.
This was already fixed in a slightly different way in 3.x.
The %R formatting code is not available in 2.x
On Jun 12, 2011, at 8:29 AM, Lukas Lueg wrote:
Hi.
We extensively use the struct module to crunch large amounts of binary
data. There are basically two operations for us that only seem to the
naked eye as one: Filtering (see if certain fields have certain
values, throw everything away if
On Jun 12, 2011, at 3:18 PM, Greg Ewing wrote:
Raymond Hettinger wrote:
The problem you're trying to solve isn't unique to structs.
That's why we get periodic requests for ropes-like behaviors
I don't think he's asking for rope-like behaviour here.
How would you describe the creation
On Jun 4, 2011, at 11:32 PM, Martin v. Löwis wrote:
b) telling people to use Twisted or asyncore on the server side
if they are new to sockets is bad advice. People *first* have
to understand sockets, and *then* can use these libraries
and frameworks. Those libraries aren't made to
On Jun 3, 2011, at 10:27 AM, eric.araujo wrote:
Fix reST label for collections ABCs.
The previous markup hijacked the abstract-base-classes glossary entry,
which resulted in the HTML linking to collections.abc when defining the
generic ABC concept. Now the glossary links to the abc
On May 19, 2011, at 7:40 PM, Ethan Furman wrote:
Several folk have said that objects that compare equal must hash equal...
And so do the docs:
http://docs.python.org/dev/reference/datamodel.html#object.__hash__
, the only required property is that objects which compare equal have the same
On May 17, 2011, at 5:27 PM, Ethan Furman wrote:
The bytes type in Python 3 does not feel very consistent.
For example:
-- some_var = 'abcdef'
-- some_var
'abcdef'
-- some_var[3]
'd'
-- some_other_var = b'abcdef'
-- some_other_var
b'abcdef'
-- some_other_var[3]
100
On the
On May 5, 2011, at 10:18 AM, Guido van Rossum wrote:
On Thu, May 5, 2011 at 10:17 AM, Amaury Forgeot d'Arc
amaur...@gmail.com wrote:
2011/5/5 Guido van Rossum gu...@python.org:
Seems you're in agreement with this. IMO when references are borrowed
it is not very interesting. The interesting
On May 5, 2011, at 11:41 AM, Benjamin Peterson wrote:
2011/5/5 raymond.hettinger python-check...@python.org:
http://hg.python.org/cpython/rev/1a56775c6e54
changeset: 69857:1a56775c6e54
branch: 3.2
parent: 69855:97a4855202b8
user:Raymond Hettinger pyt...@rcn.com
date
On May 1, 2011, at 10:57 AM, Georg Brandl wrote:
I'd like to release Python 3.2.1 on May 21, with a release candidate
on May 14. Please bring any issues you think need to be fixed in it
to my attention by assigning release blocker status in the tracker.
Thanks to
ISTM there is no right or wrong answer.
There is just a question of what is most useful.
AFAICT, the code for dictionaries (and therefore the code for sets)
has always had identity-implies-equality logic. It makes dicts
blindingly fast for common cases. It also confers some nice
properties like
On Apr 28, 2011, at 1:27 PM, Holger Krekel wrote:
On Thu, Apr 28, 2011 at 6:59 PM, Guido van Rossum gu...@python.org wrote:
On Thu, Apr 28, 2011 at 12:54 AM, Tarek Ziadé ziade.ta...@gmail.com wrote:
In my opinion assert should be avoided completely anywhere else than
in the tests. If this is
On Apr 28, 2011, at 3:07 PM, Guido van Rossum wrote:
On Thu, Apr 28, 2011 at 2:53 PM, Raymond Hettinger
raymond.hettin...@gmail.com wrote:
On Apr 28, 2011, at 1:27 PM, Holger Krekel wrote:
On Thu, Apr 28, 2011 at 6:59 PM, Guido van Rossum gu...@python.org wrote:
On Thu, Apr 28, 2011
On Apr 27, 2011, at 2:37 AM, Hrvoje Niksic wrote:
The other day I was surprised to learn this:
nan = float('nan')
nan == nan
False
[nan] == [nan]
True # also True in tuples, dicts, etc.
Would also be surprised if you put an object in a dictionary but couldn't get
it
On Apr 27, 2011, at 7:53 AM, Guido van Rossum wrote:
Maybe we should just call off the odd NaN comparison behavior?
I'm reluctant to suggest changing such enshrined behavior.
ISTM, the current state of affairs is reasonable.
Exotic objects are allowed to generate exotic behaviors
but
On Apr 27, 2011, at 10:16 AM, Alexander Belopolsky wrote:
Unfortunately NaNs are not that exotic.
They're exotic in the sense that they have the unusual property of not being
equal to themselves.
Exotic (adj) strikingly strange or unusual
Raymond
On Apr 25, 2011, at 11:43 AM, cool-RR wrote:
Today I was trying to use `total_ordering` for the first time. I was
expecting that in order to implement e.g. `x y` it would do `not x y and
not x == y`, assuming that `__lt__` and `__eq__` are defined.
This was fixed. The current code has:
On Apr 18, 2011, at 10:11 AM, Maciej Fijalkowski wrote:
* we usually target CPython version that's already frozen, which is
pretty inconvinient to post this changes back. Example would be a
socket module where it has changed enough in 3.x that 2.7 changes make
no sense.
Do you have any
In the grand python-dev tradition of silence means acceptance, I consider
this PEP finalized and implicitly accepted.
I haven't seen any responses that said, yes this is a well thought-out
proposal
that will actually benefit any of the various implementations.
In that case it may well
On Apr 16, 2011, at 2:45 PM, Brett Cannon wrote:
On Sat, Apr 16, 2011 at 14:23, Stefan Krah ste...@bytereef.org wrote:
Brett Cannon br...@python.org wrote:
In the grand python-dev tradition of silence means acceptance, I consider
this PEP finalized and implicitly accepted.
I haven't
On Apr 14, 2011, at 8:34 AM, P.J. Eby wrote:
At 03:55 PM 4/14/2011 +0100, Michael Foord wrote:
Ricardo isn't suggesting that Python should always call super for you, but
when you *start* the chain by calling super then Python could ensure that
all the methods are called for you. If an
On Apr 14, 2011, at 12:22 PM, Sandro Tosi wrote:
The version we have in cpython of json is simplejson 2.0.9 highly
patched (either because it was converted to py3k, and because of the
normal flow of issues/bugfixes) while upstream have already released
2.1.13 .
Their 2 roads had diverged
On Apr 14, 2011, at 3:32 PM, Ricardo Kirkner wrote:
What would the semantics be of a super that intentially calls all siblings?
In particular what is the return value of such a call? The implementation
can't know how to combine the implementations in the inheritance chain and
should
On Apr 13, 2011, at 4:52 AM, Antoine Pitrou wrote:
On Wed, 13 Apr 2011 06:28:58 +0200
Stefan Behnel stefan...@behnel.de wrote:
However, I think we are really discussing a theoretical issue here. All the
PEP is trying to achieve is to raise the bar for C code in the stdlib, for
exactly
On Apr 7, 2011, at 9:22 AM, anatoly techtonik wrote:
On Thu, Apr 7, 2011 at 7:01 AM, Benjamin Peterson benja...@python.org wrote:
2011/4/6 anatoly techtonik techto...@gmail.com:
Is it a good idea to have code highlighting in tracker?
+0
That has its highpoints;
* give tracker entries a
On Apr 6, 2011, at 10:24 AM, Maciej Fijalkowski wrote:
I saw no need to complicate the pure python code for this.
if you complicate the C code for this, then please as well complicate
python code for this since it's breaking stuff.
Do you really need a PEP for this one extraordinary and
On Apr 6, 2011, at 10:39 AM, Brett Cannon wrote:
Since people are taking my semantically identical point too strongly for
what I mean (there is a reason I said except in cases
where implementation details of a VM prevents [semantic equivalency]
entirely), how about we change the requirement
On Apr 6, 2011, at 1:22 PM, Brett Cannon wrote:
On Wed, Apr 6, 2011 at 12:45, Raymond Hettinger raymond.hettin...@gmail.com
wrote:
On Apr 6, 2011, at 10:39 AM, Brett Cannon wrote:
Since people are taking my semantically identical point too strongly for
what I mean
On Apr 6, 2011, at 1:22 PM, Brett Cannon wrote:
How about the test suite needs to have 100% test coverage (or as close as
possible) on the pure Python version? That will guarantee that the C code
which passes that level of test detail is as semantically equivalent as
possible. It also
On Apr 6, 2011, at 2:40 PM, Antoine Pitrou wrote:
For the record, I've tried to make the force build form clearer on the
buildbot Web UI. See e.g.:
http://www.python.org/dev/buildbot/all/builders/x86%20OpenIndiana%20custom
Much improved. Thanks.
Raymond
[Brett]
This PEP requires that in these instances that both
the Python and C code must be semantically identical
Are you talking about the guaranteed semantics
promised by the docs or are you talking about
every possible implementation detail?
ISTM that even with pure python code, we get
On Apr 1, 2011, at 12:40 PM, Martin v. Löwis wrote:
That's *way* better:
https://bitbucket.org/mirror/cpython/src/3558eecd84f0/Lib/linecache.py
Why can't we have that for our primary source viewer.
Would you like to install this, or something else, or change the
templates? If so,
The Hg source viewer needs to be tweaked to improve its usability.
What we've got now is a step backwards from the previous svn viewer.
Looking at http://hg.python.org/cpython/file/default/Lib/linecache.py for
example,
there are two issues. 1) the code cannot be cut-and-pasted because the
line
On Mar 31, 2011, at 9:52 AM, Terry Reedy wrote:
I would like to try putting the comment box after the last (most recent)
comment, as that is the message one most ofter responds to. Having to now
scroll up and down between comment box and last message(s) is often of a
nuisance.
While that
On Mar 31, 2011, at 5:02 PM, Westley Martínez wrote:
How 'bout no? YouTube uses this and it's horrid and unnatural, and
bulletin boards have been using chronological order for whiles with
great success. Reverse chronological order has a niche for feeds,
updates, whatever you want to call
On Mar 31, 2011, at 5:30 PM, Antoine Pitrou wrote:
On Thu, 31 Mar 2011 16:15:48 -0700
Raymond Hettinger raymond.hettin...@gmail.com wrote:
The Hg source viewer needs to be tweaked to improve its usability.
What we've got now is a step backwards from the previous svn viewer.
Looking
On Mar 31, 2011, at 5:55 PM, Antoine Pitrou wrote:
Le jeudi 31 mars 2011 à 17:46 -0700, Raymond Hettinger a écrit :
On Mar 31, 2011, at 5:30 PM, Antoine Pitrou wrote:
On Thu, 31 Mar 2011 16:15:48 -0700
Raymond Hettinger raymond.hettin...@gmail.com wrote:
The Hg source viewer needs
On Mar 31, 2011, at 6:28 PM, Victor Stinner wrote:
Le 01/04/2011 01:15, Raymond Hettinger a écrit :
The Hg source viewer needs to be tweaked to improve its usability.
What we've got now is a step backwards from the previous svn viewer.
Looking at http://hg.python.org/cpython/file/default
On Mar 30, 2011, at 2:35 PM, Terry Reedy wrote:
The tracker was recently changed so that when I click on a link to a tracker
page, the page is properly displayed, but then a fraction of a second it
blinks and redisplays with the edit form hidden. This is so obnoxious to me
that I no
On Mar 28, 2011, at 12:38 AM, Daniel Stutzbach wrote:
On Sun, Mar 27, 2011 at 10:53 PM, Nick Coghlan ncogh...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Mar 28, 2011 at 2:11 PM, Daniel Stutzbach stutzb...@google.com
wrote:
Is there a good use-case for the func argument?
The examples that Raymond gives
On Mar 21, 2011, at 8:25 AM, Barry Warsaw wrote:
Does Mercurial have a way of acting like a centralized vcs to the end user,
the way Bazaar does? IOW, if Skip or others were more comfortable with a
centralized workflow (which is entirely valid imo), can they set up their
local workspace to
On Mar 21, 2011, at 11:56 AM, Daniel Stutzbach wrote:
People love it because it's a very powerful tool. People hate it because it
allows you to shoot yourself in the foot.
There's a certain irony in this. The original motivation for version control
was to be a safety rope, to serve as a
On Mar 19, 2011, at 11:21 AM, Antoine Pitrou wrote:
On Sat, 19 Mar 2011 09:25:07 -0500
s...@pobox.com wrote:
The dev guide says something about collapsing changesets. Is that
collapsing commits within a changeset or collapsing multiple changesets
(whatever that might be)? Do I need this
On Mar 17, 2011, at 12:22 PM, Eric Smith wrote:
On 03/17/2011 03:08 PM, Jesus Cea wrote:
I would suggest to keep deprecating things in 3.x, BUT keeping the
deprecated stuff around (maybe reimplementing them using the new stuff)
until we decide is safe to axe it, instead of the regular 3.x
On Mar 16, 2011, at 11:33 AM, R. David Murray wrote:
On Wed, 16 Mar 2011 13:33:20 -0400, Michael Foord fuzzy...@voidspace.org.uk
wrote:
On 16/03/2011 12:39, Alexander Belopolsky wrote:
I was editing the turtle module (for issue11571, if you are
interested) when I noticed that it has the
On Mar 16, 2011, at 12:36 PM, Thomas Heller wrote:
I would like my committer rights to be retracted.
I have been contributing to Python here and there for 10 years now,
and it was a pleasant experience.
Unfortunately, since about a year I have lots more things to do, and
I won't be able
I think devguide's suggested interbranch workflow introduces too much
complexity for too little payoff.
If I need to make a fix to 3.2, I can't just fix it. I would need to also
merge the changeset into 3.3 and then revert it, and then commit both. There
is not much payoff to this style. It
One of simplest and least invasive ways to get help()
to show the underscore methods and attributes is to
make pydoc aware of named tuples by checking for the
presence of _fields.
* That leaves the named tuple code as simple as possible
(which is important because the self-documenting code
is
On Mar 13, 2011, at 7:41 PM, Tim Lesher wrote:
[I mentioned this to Raymond Hettinger after his PyCon talk, and I
promised a bug and hopefully a patch. I don't see an obvious solution,
though, so I'll ask here first.]
Just make a tracker entry and assign it to me.
I'll take a look and see
There are separate social, strategic, and tactical questions.
The social question: if the person who designed, implemented, and maintained
the optimizer recommends against a patch and another committer just checks it
in anyway, do we care? I've taken responsibility for this code and have
I would like to withdraw my suggestion for the recursive constant folding patch
to be reverted. I value social harmony much more than a decision about whether
a particular patch is a good idea. I apologize to anyone who is upset over the
discussion.
Raymond
On Mar 12, 2011, at 3:44 PM, Guido van Rossum wrote:
I was just reminded that in Python 3, list.sort() and sorted() no
longer support the cmp (comparator) function argument. The reason is
that the key function argument is always better. But now I have a
nagging doubt about this:
I
Today, there was a significant check-in to the peephole optimizer that I think
should be reverted:
http://hg.python.org/cpython/rev/14205d0fee45/
The peephole optimizer pre-dated the introduction of the abstract syntax tree.
Now that we have an AST, the preferred way to
On Mar 11, 2011, at 11:11 PM, Eugene Toder wrote:
Experience shows that optimizations are always error prone, no matter
what framework or internal representation you use.
On that basis, I believe that we ought to declare peephole.c as being
somewhat off-limits for further development (except
On Mar 5, 2011, at 8:44 AM, Antoine Pitrou wrote:
On Sat, 5 Mar 2011 08:36:04 -0800
Daniel Stutzbach stutzb...@google.com wrote:
On Sat, Mar 5, 2011 at 5:54 AM, Tim Delaney
timothy.c.dela...@gmail.comwrote:
If those were to be removed from .hgignore then there would be a high
On Mar 3, 2011, at 4:40 AM, anatoly techtonik wrote:
How about official RoadMap? There is no visibility into what's going
on in Python development. New people can' t jump in and help do bring
some features faster. http://dungeonhack.sourceforge.net/Roadmap
Thanks for the link. Their roadmap
On Feb 28, 2011, at 12:07 PM, Georg Brandl wrote:
On 28.02.2011 20:58, Antoine Pitrou wrote:
Le lundi 28 février 2011 à 13:56 -0600, Benjamin Peterson a écrit :
2011/2/28 Antoine Pitrou solip...@pitrou.net:
On Mon, 28 Feb 2011 13:36:11 -0500
Terry Reedy tjre...@udel.edu wrote:
+ an
On Feb 26, 2011, at 4:09 PM, Antoine Pitrou wrote:
On Sat, 26 Feb 2011 10:09:33 +0100
Hagen Fürstenau ha...@zhuliguan.net wrote:
I just hunted down a change in behaviour between Python 3.1 and 3.2 to
possibly changed iteration order of sets due to the optimization in
issue #8685. Of
On Feb 25, 2011, at 12:09 AM, Martin v. Löwis wrote:
I think I would have liked the strategy of the PEP better (i.e.
create clones for feature branches, rather than putting all
in a single repository).
In my brief tests, the single repository has been easy to work with.
If they were
On Feb 24, 2011, at 4:19 PM, Antoine Pitrou wrote:
Georg and I have been working on converting the SVN repository to
Mercurial. We can now present you a test repository (actually, two).
CPython repository: http://hg.python.org/cpython/
Thank you both for all the effort you put in.
I'll
On Feb 22, 2011, at 5:43 PM, Nick Coghlan wrote:
On Tue, Feb 15, 2011 at 6:30 PM, Martin v. Löwis mar...@v.loewis.de wrote:
I'm going to perform a Debian upgrade of svn.python.org on Friday,
between 9:00 UTC and 11:00 UTC. I'll be disabling write access during
that time. The outage shouldn't
On Feb 16, 2011, at 2:39 PM, Nick Coghlan wrote:
On Thu, Feb 17, 2011 at 5:05 AM, Barry Warsaw ba...@python.org wrote:
On Feb 16, 2011, at 12:34 PM, Terry Reedy wrote:
I would like the next release called 3.2.0 rather than just 3.2.
+1
(I'd have said +0 for the humor of it :).
+0
On Jan 30, 2011, at 8:21 PM, eli.bendersky wrote:
Please use the open tracker item and do not edit the document directly.
Raymond
___
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe:
On Jan 28, 2011, at 10:09 AM, Brett Cannon wrote:
On Thu, Jan 27, 2011 at 20:55, Eli Bendersky eli...@gmail.com wrote:
I'm working on improving the .rst documentation of test.support (Issue
11015), and came upon the undocumented fcmp function that's being
exported from test.support, along
On Jan 28, 2011, at 11:21 AM, Michael Foord wrote:
On 28/01/2011 16:29, Brian Curtin wrote:
Recently I've talked to two Python trainers/educators and the major gripe
their attendees see is that you can't just sit down and type python and
have something work. For multi-Python installs,
Looking at http://docs.python.org/dev/library/html.html#module-html it would
appear that we've created a new module with a single trivial function.
In reality, there was already a python package, html, that served to group two
loosely related modules, html.parser and html.entities.
ISTM, that
Right now, the tests for the unittest package are under the package directory
instead of Lib/test where we have most of the other tests.
There are some other packages that do the same thing, each for their own reason.
I think we should develop a strong preference for tests going under Lib/test
On Jan 24, 2011, at 3:40 PM, Michael Foord wrote:
It isn't just unittest, it seems that all *test packages* are in their
respective package and not Lib/test except for the json module where Raymond
already moved the tests:
distutils/tests
email/test
ctypes/test
On Jan 22, 2011, at 11:04 AM, Terry Reedy wrote:
The 3.x docs mostly started fresh with 3.0. The major exception is the What's
new section, which goes back to 2.0. The 2.x stuff comprises about 650KB in
the repository and whatever that translates into in the distribution. I
cannot imagine
Can you please take a look at
http://docs.python.org/dev/whatsnew/3.2.html#pep--python-web-server-gateway-interface-v1-0-1
to see if it accurately recaps the resolution of the WSGI text/bytes issues.
I would appreciate any feedback, as it is likely that the whatsnew
document will be most
On Jan 4, 2011, at 4:36 PM, Brett Cannon wrote:
For those of you who don't know, the PSF has given me a two month
grant to work on the core. It's mostly focused on the long overdue
overhaul of the dev docs (now being called the devguide) and writing a
HOWTO on porting Python 2 code to Python
On Dec 25, 2010, at 2:59 AM, Stefan Behnel wrote:
Hrvoje Niksic, 24.12.2010 09:45:
On 12/23/2010 10:03 PM, Laurens Van Houtven wrote:
On Thu, Dec 23, 2010 at 9:51 PM, Georg Brandl wrote:
Yes and no -- there may not be an ambiguity to the parser, but still to
the human. Except if you
On Dec 24, 2010, at 10:56 AM, Terry Reedy wrote:
On 12/24/2010 11:09 AM, Michael Foord wrote:
On 22/12/2010 02:26, Terry Reedy wrote:
On 12/21/2010 7:17 AM, Michael Foord wrote:
My first priority is that doc and code match.
Close second is consistency (hence, ease of learning and use)
On Dec 19, 2010, at 10:41 AM, Guido van Rossum wrote:
On Sun, Dec 19, 2010 at 5:13 AM, Antoine Pitrou solip...@pitrou.net wrote:
On Sat, 18 Dec 2010 20:23:49 -0800
Guido van Rossum gu...@python.org wrote:
I may be unique, but I fear there is no great answer. On the one hand
I almost always
On Dec 14, 2010, at 3:38 AM, Fred Drake wrote:
On Tue, Dec 14, 2010 at 6:24 AM, Steven D'Aprano st...@pearwood.info wrote:
The good thing about that idea is that maintenance of buggy.py will be so
simple!
It's self-describing, and needs no further documentation. :-)
And psychologically
On Dec 13, 2010, at 1:21 PM, Terry Reedy wrote:
Same here. A strong +1 for a consistent rule (always or never allowed) with a
+1 for always given others use case of one param/arg per line.
It seems to me that a trailing comma in an argument list is more likely to be a
user error than a
On Dec 13, 2010, at 2:16 PM, Guido van Rossum wrote:
On Mon, Dec 13, 2010 at 1:55 PM, Raymond Hettinger
raymond.hettin...@gmail.com wrote:
It seems to me that a trailing comma in an argument list is more likely to
be a user error than a deliberate comma-for-the-future.
Really? Have you
On Dec 11, 2010, at 9:21 AM, Nick Coghlan wrote:
On Sun, Dec 12, 2010 at 12:17 AM, Antoine Pitrou solip...@pitrou.net wrote:
On Sat, 11 Dec 2010 12:55:25 +1000
Nick Coghlan ncogh...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sat, Dec 11, 2010 at 12:44 PM, Terry Reedy tjre...@udel.edu wrote:
On 12/10/2010 4:59
On Dec 10, 2010, at 6:20 AM, Éric Araujo wrote:
Final note: with 3.2 being in beta, I don’t know how much can be changed
now.
Part of the purpose of a beta, and in our case, two betas is to give
people a chance to exercise new APIs and fix them before they
become set in stone two months later.
On Dec 10, 2010, at 12:56 PM, Antoine Pitrou wrote:
On Fri, 10 Dec 2010 12:27:26 -0800
Raymond Hettinger raymond.hettin...@gmail.com wrote:
IMO, sysconfig did not warrant a whole module.
Where would you put it?
A single function in the sys module.
Rather than using two levels
On Dec 9, 2010, at 9:02 AM, Brian Quinlan wrote:
On Dec 9, 2010, at 4:26 AM, Thomas Nagy wrote:
Hello,
I am looking forward to replacing a piece of code
(http://code.google.com/p/waf/source/browse/trunk/waflib/Runner.py#86) by
the futures module which was announced in python 3.2
On Dec 9, 2010, at 2:18 PM, Nick Coghlan wrote:
On Fri, Dec 10, 2010 at 2:41 AM, raymond.hettinger
python-check...@python.org wrote:
@@ -588,7 +593,12 @@
pointing to the original callable function. This allows wrapped functions
to
be introspected. It also copies
On Dec 9, 2010, at 12:29 PM, Alexander Belopolsky wrote:
The str type already has 40+ methods many of which are not well-suited
to handle the complexities inherent in Unicode. Rather than rushing
in two more methods that will prove to be about as useful as
str.swapcase(), lets consider
Does anyone know why this needed a separate module and so many accessor
functions?
ISTM it mostly could have been reduced to single call returning a nested
dictionary.
Raymond
from sysconfig import *
import json
def sysconf():
return dict(paths = get_paths(),
config_vars
On Dec 3, 2010, at 10:05 AM, Guido van Rossum wrote:
Regardless of what I or others may have said before, I am not
currently a fan of adding transform() to either str or bytes.
Just to clarify, is your preference to go back to the Python 2.x way
and use encode()/decode() for both unicode
On Dec 5, 2010, at 3:36 AM, Vinay Sajip wrote:
I've just been notified via being added to the nosy list of
http://bugs.python.org/issue10627
about the deprecation of ConfigParser for 3.2. I presume I was added to this
list because logging.config uses ConfigParser, but logging.config
301 - 400 of 1337 matches
Mail list logo
