Am 21.05.17 um 12:38 schrieb bartc:
On 21/05/2017 10:32, Christian Gollwitzer wrote:
Am 18.05.17 um 10:10 schrieb Christian Gollwitzer:
The whole discussion reminds me of the "bumblebees can't fly" thing.
tcc is a very small compiler (some 100kb) which supports most of C99.
For what it's wort
On 21/05/2017 10:32, Christian Gollwitzer wrote:
Am 18.05.17 um 10:10 schrieb Christian Gollwitzer:
The whole discussion reminds me of the "bumblebees can't fly" thing.
tcc is a very small compiler (some 100kb) which supports most of C99.
For what it's worth, I compiled Python 3.6.1 on Linux/x
Am 18.05.17 um 10:10 schrieb Christian Gollwitzer:
The whole discussion reminds me of the "bumblebees can't fly" thing.
tcc is a very small compiler (some 100kb) which supports most of C99.
For what it's worth, I compiled Python 3.6.1 on Linux/x86 using tcc. It
was a simple matter of cloning
On Mon, 14 Oct 2013 13:41:35 +0800, chandan kumar wrote:
>
> Now my question is of there any issue with logging to excel it should
> happen for the first test suite itself,but it occurs in either 2,3,4 or
> 5 test suite. Some it runs without any issues.
Logging to excel is probably a wrong thing
[Please post your answer below the previous reply, not above]
[... snip most of original traceback ...]
> File "C:\Python27\lib\site-packages\pyExcelerator\CompoundDoc.py",
> line 554, in save
> f = file(filename, 'wb')
> IOError: [Errno 22] invalid mode ('wb') or filename:
> '.\\TestResults
2013 1:10 PM, Tim
Golden wrote:
On 14/10/2013 06:41,
chandan kumar wrote:
> I'm
working on a python project for protocol testing.I need to
provide
> only python compiled source to
our customer.
>
>
Here are the steps followed to take python compiled from
actual sourc
/2013 06:41, chandan kumar wrote:
> I'm working on a python project for protocol testing.I need to provide
> only python compiled source to our customer.
>
> Here are the steps followed to take python compiled from actual source.
> 1.There are 5 different test suites under the pr
On 14/10/2013 06:41, chandan kumar wrote:
> I'm working on a python project for protocol testing.I need to provide
> only python compiled source to our customer.
>
> Here are the steps followed to take python compiled from actual source.
> 1.There are 5 different test suites u
Hi,
I'm working on a python project for protocol testing.I need to provide only
python compiled source to our customer.
Here are the steps followed to take python compiled from actual source.
1.There are 5 different test suites under the project
2..Run all 5 test suite with python sourc
Le Tue, 27 Apr 2010 02:43:19 -0700, King a écrit :
>
> Python is compiled and installed successfully. However the
> modules(_socket.so, _random.so etc) are two big in terms of file size.
> They are around 4.5-5.0 mb each. I have used "strip strip-all *.so", but
> still size is around 1.5 mb each.
Hi Jon,
I do have a limited skill sets in c/c++ and also new on linux. I think
I am missing some flags or anything when I am compiling python from
sources.
Still hoping that some one point me out the missing link.
Cheers
Prashant
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
On 27 Apr, 10:43, King wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I have just compiled python 2.6.5 from sources on ubuntu "hardy" 8.04.
> I have used a simple script to do everything in one go:
>
> ./configure --enable-shared
> make
> make install
>
> Python is compiled and installed successfully. However the
> modules(_s
Hi,
I have just compiled python 2.6.5 from sources on ubuntu "hardy" 8.04.
I have used a simple script to do everything in one go:
./configure --enable-shared
make
make install
Python is compiled and installed successfully. However the
modules(_socket.so, _random.so etc) are two big in terms of
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
>In a C++ application having a Python interpreter embedded, is it
>possible to compile a small Python snippet into object code and
>serialize the compiled object code to, for example, a database? I am
>exploring the possibility of writing a data driven application, where
--- [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> In a C++ application having a Python interpreter
> embedded, is it
> possible to compile a small Python snippet into
> object code and
> serialize the compiled object code to, for example,
> a database? I am
> exploring the possibility of writing a data driven
> appl
Hi everyone,
In a C++ application having a Python interpreter embedded, is it
possible to compile a small Python snippet into object code and
serialize the compiled object code to, for example, a database? I am
exploring the possibility of writing a data driven application, where
small-sized objec
On 7 Feb 2007 09:44:32 GMT, Duncan Booth <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>Franz Steinhaeusler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>>>Yes, people have compiled Python with gcc on windows. I believe it is
>>>slightly slower than the standard release, but I would guess that may
>>>depend on the exact versions of
Franz Steinhaeusler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>Yes, people have compiled Python with gcc on windows. I believe it is
>>slightly slower than the standard release, but I would guess that may
>>depend on the exact versions of gcc/msc you choose to compare, and the
>>exact compiler options you choos
of course there
>is always cygwin.
>
>But I still don't understand what difference it makes to anyone between:
>
>an application (could be open or closed source) running on an open
>source language (Python) compiled with a closed source compiler on a
>closed source OS.
e of Python, and of course there
is always cygwin.
But I still don't understand what difference it makes to anyone between:
an application (could be open or closed source) running on an open
source language (Python) compiled with a closed source compiler on a
closed source OS.
versus
On Mon, 05 Feb 2007 12:17:48 +0100, hg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Duncan Booth wrote:
>
>> Franz Steinhaeusler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>>> Hello, I'm only curious.
>>>
>>> Why is Python and most extension (also wxPython) not built using an
>>> open source compiler like gcc or g++ on Windo
Duncan Booth wrote:
> Franz Steinhaeusler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> Hello, I'm only curious.
>>
>> Why is Python and most extension (also wxPython) not built using an
>> open source compiler like gcc or g++ on Windows?
>>
>> I'm always wondering, why Microsoft is still supported
>> in tha
Franz Steinhaeusler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hello, I'm only curious.
>
> Why is Python and most extension (also wxPython) not built using an
> open source compiler like gcc or g++ on Windows?
>
> I'm always wondering, why Microsoft is still supported
> in that way, using VC++ 7.1, if I'm n
Hello, I'm only curious.
Why is Python and most extension (also wxPython) not built using an
open source compiler like gcc or g++ on Windows?
I'm always wondering, why Microsoft is still supported
in that way, using VC++ 7.1, if I'm not wrong.
Ok, maybe the compiled assembler code could be bett
Hi, When i run the python file, the python compiled file is created. Is it possible to relocate the python compiled file to some other directory?. Is it possible to frequent update the relocated pyc file while running the py file?thanks and regards, abbi
Yahoo! Mail
Bring photos
"Robert Kern" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Terry Reedy wrote:
>> Nor has 386 'machine language' suffered from being interpreted, at a
>> deeper
>> level, by microcode.
>
> I think both you and Paul may be missing Tim's point. I don't think he's
> talking about "s
Terry Reedy wrote:
> "Tim Roberts" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>>"billiejoex" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>>>Hi all. I'm sorry for a noob question like this but I'll try to ask it
>>>anyway.
>>>One of the greatest problem that may discourage a new user to cho
"Tim Roberts" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> "billiejoex" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>>Hi all. I'm sorry for a noob question like this but I'll try to ask it
>>anyway.
>>One of the greatest problem that may discourage a new user to choose
>>Python
>>language is
Tim Roberts <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I doubt it. C#, VB.NET, VBscript, Javascript and Perl have not suffered
> from being interpreted.
Are you kidding?
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
"billiejoex" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>Hi all. I'm sorry for a noob question like this but I'll try to ask it
>anyway.
>One of the greatest problem that may discourage a new user to choose Python
>language is it's interpreted nature.
I doubt it. C#, VB.NET, VBscript, Javascript and Perl hav
On 2005-09-08, Jorgen Grahn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Tue, 06 Sep 2005 17:29:46 -, Grant Edwards <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> On 2005-09-06, Jorgen Grahn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>>> I also believe it's better to convince the end user to install
>>> Python before installing the appl
On Wed, 7 Sep 2005 08:40:28 -0500, Terry Hancock <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Tuesday 06 September 2005 11:32 am, Jorgen Grahn wrote:
>> I hope people are less hesitant to install "interpreted" applications today
>> than they were ten years ago.
>>
>> I also believe it's better to convince the
On Tue, 06 Sep 2005 17:29:46 -, Grant Edwards <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 2005-09-06, Jorgen Grahn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> I also believe it's better to convince the end user to install Python before
>> installing the application[1], rather than to try to sneak in an interpreter
>>
On Tuesday 06 September 2005 11:32 am, Jorgen Grahn wrote:
> I hope people are less hesitant to install "interpreted" applications today
> than they were ten years ago.
>
> I also believe it's better to convince the end user to install Python before
> installing the application[1], rather than to
On Tue, 06 Sep 2005 03:06:52 -, rumours say that Grant Edwards
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> might have written:
>There are very, very few pure "exe"
>single-file executable windows apps. Putty is the only one
>I've run across in a _long_ while.
Then you should also run across Media Player Classic (do
On 2005-09-06, Jorgen Grahn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I also believe it's better to convince the end user to install Python before
> installing the application[1], rather than to try to sneak in an interpreter
> with py2exe or something -- an interpreter which the end user cannot update,
> mana
On Mon, 5 Sep 2005 22:48:19 +0200, billiejoex <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> there are "noob" questions and there are uneducated questions, yours
>> are of the latter ( actually yours are STATEMENTS not questions ), and
>> just trolling for what it is worth, if you would take the time to read
>> wha
On 2005-09-06, Fredrik Lundh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Grant Edwards wrote:
>
>> > distributing DLLs have been a solved problem for at least
>> > 15-20 years...
>>
>> There are days when some poeple might disagree with that. ;)
>
> distributing them has never been a problem. installing them in
Clear. Thank you all.
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Grant Edwards wrote:
> > distributing DLLs have been a solved problem for at least
> > 15-20 years...
>
> There are days when some poeple might disagree with that. ;)
distributing them has never been a problem. installing them in a
shared location has always been a problem.
(the solution to the
On 2005-09-05, Fredrik Lundh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> distributing DLLs have been a solved problem for at least
> 15-20 years...
There are days when some poeple might disagree with that. ;)
--
Grant Edwards grante Yow! LOOK!!! I'm WALKING
On 2005-09-05, billiejoex <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Py2exe is surely a good compromise but it is not comparable to
> an executable file compiled, for example, in C for obvious
> sizing reasons
In theory something written in C could be smaller. In
practice, it isn't. Most "real" apps end up sh
Hmm, this may be offtopic, but does anyone know how pyinstaller
actually works? Does it just unpack everything into a temporary
directory at runtime? How can it work in Windows and Linux?
Their website was sparse...
Well I'm trying it now. Let me know if anyone has these answers in the meantim
billiejoex <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> interpretation and compilation at the same time, should be a great
> advantage.
Python is compiled and needs a runtime environment.
just like java does and like C needs the C standard library installed.
I can see no differences except one is compiled to n
"billiejoex" wrote:
> I know the great advanteges deriving by using interpretation too, I
> appreciate it very much (I'm newbie in Python and the
> interpeter really helps me out in many situations), but a 'pure'
> interpretated language needs obligatorily an interpreter and
> (sorry for repea
billiejoex wrote:
> I'm sorry. Maybe you misunderstanded.
> I know the great advanteges deriving by using interpretation too, I
> appreciate it very much (I'm newbie in Python and the interpeter really
> helps me out in many situations), but a 'pure' interpretated language needs
> obligatorily
> there are "noob" questions and there are uneducated questions, yours
> are of the latter ( actually yours are STATEMENTS not questions ), and
> just trolling for what it is worth, if you would take the time to read
> what Python is and why it is you would not be asking these "questions".
I'm rea
I'm sorry. Maybe you misunderstanded.
I know the great advanteges deriving by using interpretation too, I
appreciate it very much (I'm newbie in Python and the interpeter really
helps me out in many situations), but a 'pure' interpretated language needs
obligatorily an interpreter and (sorry fo
there are "noob" questions and there are uneducated questions, yours
are of the latter ( actually yours are STATEMENTS not questions ), and
just trolling for what it is worth, if you would take the time to read
what Python is and why it is you would not be asking these "questions".
--
http://mail
Hi !
One of the greatest reason which encouraged me to choose Python is its
interpreted nature (more exactly its nature of dynamic language).
The utilities of distribution, or packaging, are enough numerous to solve
this kind of problem.
The existence of Py2exe (inter alia), could concillier
> One of the greatest problem that may discourage a new user to choose Python
> language is it's interpreted nature.
Strange.. this is one reason I love Python :-)
> Another important problem is that no interpreter is installed on Windows
> machine by default and this makes harder to distribute
billiejoex wrote:
> Hi all. I'm sorry for a noob question like this but I'll try to ask it
> anyway.
> One of the greatest problem that may discourage a new user to choose Python
> language is it's interpreted nature.
What? The instant gratification of immediate results is not
discouraging.
> Ano
Hi all. I'm sorry for a noob question like this but I'll try to ask it
anyway.
One of the greatest problem that may discourage a new user to choose Python
language is it's interpreted nature.
Another important problem is that no interpreter is installed on Windows
machine by default and this mak
53 matches
Mail list logo
