This is a great start. Do you think it might be a good idea to put
this up on the PythonMac wiki so that others on the list can
contribute? I can foresee this turning into a really good resource.
- Dave
On 8-Feb-06, at 11:29 PM, Bill Janssen wrote:
> I've made up a sample page, at http://bil
On 9-feb-2006, at 1:50, Bill Northcott wrote:
On 09/02/2006, at 5:45 AM, Ronald Oussoren wrote:
#define _POSIX_C_SOURCE 200112L
#include
int main ()
{
}
Is that a valid POSIX program? Don't define _POSIX_C_SOURCE if you
use
system libraries that are not part of POSIX.
It is valid if so
On Feb 8, 2006, at 8:29 PM, Bill Janssen wrote:
> I've made up a sample page, at http://bill.janssen.org/new-
> macpython-page.html.
>
> This is the kind of thing I'd like to see replace the page at
> http://www.python.org/download/download_mac.html.
import statements don't use quotes (import i
On 8-feb-2006, at 22:31, Bob Ippolito wrote:
BTW3. What is the plan w.r.t. merging our patches back into the
python repository? I'd like to get all of this into Python 2.5 at
the very least.
My plan is to make everything work first, and then worry about
upstream. I don't have time to go
On 8-feb-2006, at 22:45, Bill Noon wrote:
On Feb 8, 2006, at 4:16 PM, Ronald Oussoren wrote:
Is that this omniorb: http://omniorb.sourceforge.net/ ?
Yep.
Do you by any change have a binary of the python extension for
Panther lying about? (for python 2.4 of course). A script that woul
On Feb 8, 2006, at 7:40 PM, Charles Hartman wrote:
>
> Well, so PythonIDE is dead. (It hasn't been well for a long time.)
>
> How ready-for-prime-time is IDLE? What drawbacks are there to
> recommending it to beginners? What can't you do? Do I remember that
> it uses TKinter? Does it make wx impo
I've made up a sample page, at http://bill.janssen.org/new-macpython-page.html.
This is the kind of thing I'd like to see replace the page at
http://www.python.org/download/download_mac.html.
Bill
___
Pythonmac-SIG maillist - Pythonmac-SIG@python.org
On 2/8/06 7:33 PM, "Kevin Ollivier" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> What about an app bundle that just starts IDLE?
Or you could just supply an AppleScript applet installer to double-click.
All it needs, apparently, is
do shell script "pythonw -c 'import idlelib.idle'"
All OS X users have 'do
On Feb 8, 2006, at 7:33 PM, Kevin Ollivier wrote:
> On Feb 8, 2006, at 7:24 PM, Bill Janssen wrote:
>
>>> I am one of those too, of course, but I do know a lot of Mac users
>>> who spend most of their time in applications like Photoshop,
>>> Dreamweaver, BBEdit, etc. and rarely venture towards th
On Feb 8, 2006, at 7:13 PM, Kevin Ollivier wrote:
> On Feb 8, 2006, at 5:47 PM, Bob Ippolito wrote:
>
>>
>> On Feb 8, 2006, at 2:11 PM, Kevin Ollivier wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> On Feb 8, 2006, at 1:34 PM, Bob Ippolito wrote:
>>>
>>> [snip]
>>>
>
> It's a bit confusing to talk as if needing new ex
Well, so PythonIDE is dead. (It hasn't been well for a long time.)
How ready-for-prime-time is IDLE? What drawbacks are there to
recommending it to beginners? What can't you do? Do I remember that
it uses TKinter? Does it make wx impossible to use? I haven't used
it, so I'm asking out of ig
Hi Bill,
On Feb 8, 2006, at 7:24 PM, Bill Janssen wrote:
>> I am one of those too, of course, but I do know a lot of Mac users
>> who spend most of their time in applications like Photoshop,
>> Dreamweaver, BBEdit, etc. and rarely venture towards the Terminal.
>> Not quite the same audience, but
> I am one of those too, of course, but I do know a lot of Mac users
> who spend most of their time in applications like Photoshop,
> Dreamweaver, BBEdit, etc. and rarely venture towards the Terminal.
> Not quite the same audience, but at least some of them would be
> potential Python user
Hi Bob,
On Feb 8, 2006, at 5:47 PM, Bob Ippolito wrote:
>
> On Feb 8, 2006, at 2:11 PM, Kevin Ollivier wrote:
>
>>
>> On Feb 8, 2006, at 1:34 PM, Bob Ippolito wrote:
>>
>> [snip]
>>
It's a bit confusing to talk as if needing new extensions ==
breakage. (You know you're a geek when
On Feb 8, 2006, at 6:18 PM, Bill Janssen wrote:
> Bob Ippolito reponds to my question:
>>> Do these people still exist? This sounds like a 2001-2002 point,
>>> back
>>> when most existing Mac users were used to System 7/8/9.
>>
>> Of course they exist. Used to the Mac is used to the Mac, whet
On Feb 8, 2006, at 6:36 PM, Bill Janssen wrote:
> Bob Ippolito writes:
>> You're a UNIX user, you already know what you are doing, you don't
>> count.
>>
>> Wrong.
>
> Wrong what? Are you saying that saying that I don't count is wrong?
That's out of context. I was replying to your statements i
Bob Ippolito writes:
> You're a UNIX user, you already know what you are doing, you don't
> count.
>
> Wrong.
Wrong what? Are you saying that saying that I don't count is wrong?
> I'd have to guess that at least 95% of user-facing Python-
> based applications on Mac OS X are going to need at
> Technically IDLE should even work on a stock Mac OS X 10.4 system if
> the user went to the scary terminal and typed:
>
> pythonw -c "import idlelib.idle"
Sure enough! Cool!
What's more, it puts menus in the menubar, and they're reasonably useful.
Bill
___
Bob Ippolito reponds to my question:
> > Do these people still exist? This sounds like a 2001-2002 point, back
> > when most existing Mac users were used to System 7/8/9.
>
> Of course they exist. Used to the Mac is used to the Mac, whether or
> not UNIX happens to be living underneath these d
Some quick thoughts on previous posts:
Lou Pecora wrote:
> In addtion you are forgetting that we can have them install
> TextWrangler (a no-brainer) and then run scripts from there.
> Almost an IDE in some ways. I work that way from BBEdit and it's
> fine. Write script, hit 'Run.' Termi
> Extensions are installed to /
> Library/Python/2.3 or /Library/Python/2.3/site-packages, depending on
> if you're using 10.3 or 10.4.
Ah, my mistake. Thanks for pointing it out. I suppose that with an
Upgrade install of 10.5, that data under /Library would be preserved.
That's too bad.
Bil
This is a final summary of my experiences building wxPython 2.6.2.1
sources on MacOS X 10.4.4 with ActivePython 2.4.2.10 and Xcode 2.2.1
with gcc-3.3 and g77.
To avoid the problems with _POSIX_C_SOURCE and friends, I
conditionalized the defines for _POSIX_C_SOURCE _XOPEN_SOURCE and
_XOPEN_
On Feb 8, 2006, at 5:37 PM, Bill Janssen wrote:
> Christopher Barker writes:
>> When (If) he upgrades OS-X,
>> that app will break. Almost every other app he has installed on his
>> system will continue to work, but the python based one will not. This
>> would apply to any app using the built in
On Feb 8, 2006, at 5:42 PM, Bill Janssen wrote:
>> But we're not. I never use the Terminal with Python. I use WingIDE
>> (can't recommend to beginners because it uses X11). Why should Mac-
>> type beginners have a *less* friendly interface than that?
>
> Because it doesn't come with the system.
On Feb 8, 2006, at 4:52 PM, Bill Janssen wrote:
>> What I don't see
>> any evidence for is them keeping 2.3.5 around as well. What that
>> means
>> is that all the packages you have compiled and installed for 2.3.*
>> will
>> no longer work.
>
> I agree. In fact, those extensions won't even
On Feb 8, 2006, at 2:11 PM, Kevin Ollivier wrote:
>
> On Feb 8, 2006, at 1:34 PM, Bob Ippolito wrote:
>
> [snip]
>
>>>
>>> It's a bit confusing to talk as if needing new extensions ==
>>> breakage. (You know you're a geek when it's second nature to write
>>> equality tests like this. ;-) I rememb
> But we're not. I never use the Terminal with Python. I use WingIDE
> (can't recommend to beginners because it uses X11). Why should Mac-
> type beginners have a *less* friendly interface than that?
Because it doesn't come with the system.
> I don't think you're completely entering into the b
On Feb 8, 2006, at 3:55 PM, Christopher Barker wrote:
> Charles Hartman wrote:
>> But we're not. I never use the Terminal with Python. I use WingIDE
>> (can't recommend to beginners because it uses X11).
>
> Um, why not? I think X11 now comes with OS-X by default. Or does it
> jsut
> look&feel
Hi Chris,
On Feb 8, 2006, at 5:11 PM, Christopher Barker wrote:
> Kevin Ollivier wrote:
>> My point is: When people upgrade Python, anyway, anyhow, their
>> extensions will break. MacPython 2.4 doesn't do anything more or
>> less than Apple's Python in stopping that; it simply lets you put
On Feb 8, 2006, at 2:42 PM, Charles Hartman wrote:
> I'm afraid that you're right about this, and I think it's the biggest
> obstacle to the project of getting (non-Unix) Mac users interested in
> Python when they go looking for a language, or just looking to get
> started on programming.
>
> Doe
Christopher Barker writes:
> When (If) he upgrades OS-X,
> that app will break. Almost every other app he has installed on his
> system will continue to work, but the python based one will not. This
> would apply to any app using the built in python and any extensions:
> simple scripts, py2app
Kevin Ollivier wrote:
> My point is: When people upgrade
> Python, anyway, anyhow, their extensions will break. MacPython 2.4
> doesn't do anything more or less than Apple's Python in stopping that;
> it simply lets you put off upgrading your Python should you want to do so.
Right. To be softer
> However, I think a consensus is building:
Yeah, among the usual suspects.
>-- define the Framework installer for 2.4 as the "standard" and most
> supported python for OS-X. (the existing build for 10.3 and the
> universal build for 10.4)
I completely disagree with this. The "standard" i
On 8-feb-2006, at 21:42, Ronald Oussoren wrote:
On 8-feb-2006, at 21:21, Bob Ippolito wrote:
On Feb 8, 2006, at 11:59 AM, Ronald Oussoren wrote:
On 7-feb-2006, at 0:59, Bob Ippolito wrote:
Bob, what do you think the timescale is for a universal build?
If it's
soon, then we should wor
If you try to build wxWidgets from the wxPython 2.6.2.1 sources with
'--enable-optimize --disable-debug', configure creates setup.h in a
release directory but the Makefile looks for it in a debug directory.
Whoops!
Maybe this is related to the problem with the monolithic build.
Bill northco
> What I don't see
> any evidence for is them keeping 2.3.5 around as well. What that means
> is that all the packages you have compiled and installed for 2.3.* will
> no longer work.
I agree. In fact, those extensions won't even be there, because they
are by default installed under /System, s
On 09/02/2006, at 5:45 AM, Ronald Oussoren wrote:
>> #define _POSIX_C_SOURCE 200112L
>> #include
>> int main ()
>> {
>> }
>
> Is that a valid POSIX program? Don't define _POSIX_C_SOURCE if you use
> system libraries that are not part of POSIX.
It is valid if somewhat minimal program in both
It's very simple to build Emacs from scratch for X11 on the Mac.
I follow the instructions posted by Andrew Choi at
http://members.shaw.ca/akochoi-emacs/stories/obtaining-and-building.html.
Basically, make sure you have the developer tools installed, then:
1) Install GNU texinfo:
$ cd /tmp
$
Hi Chris,
On Feb 8, 2006, at 2:42 PM, Christopher Barker wrote:
> Kevin Ollivier wrote:
>> As does just explicitly upgrading your Python. I don't see why it's
>> breaking if you install Leopard, but upgrading if you install
>> MacPython
>> 2.4 from pythonmac.org. Either way, your 2.3 extensions
Charles Hartman wrote:
> But we're not. I never use the Terminal with Python. I use WingIDE
> (can't recommend to beginners because it uses X11).
Um, why not? I think X11 now comes with OS-X by default. Or does it jsut
look&feel too non-Macish.
However, I think we need to have a totally open
has wrote:
> I think what's happening in this discussion is we've got two camps
> talking past one another.
>
> One side sees the problem primarily as a marketing issue: "How can we
> attract the widest possible audience, i.e. both serious and casual
> users?"
>
> The other sees it as a purely
On Feb 8, 2006, at 1:40 PM, linc wrote:
>>
>> Full disclosure: I'm a UNIX person. The first thing
>> I do when I get a
>> new Mac is make sure X11 is installed on it, and
>> in my
>> Login Items.
>> The second thi
On Feb 8, 2006, at 6:01 PM, Louis Pecora wrote:
> Charles Hartman wrote:
>> I'm afraid that you're right about this, and I think it's the
>> biggest obstacle to the project of getting (non-Unix) Mac users
>> interested in Python when they go looking for a language, or just
>> looking to g
On Feb 8, 2006, at 4:39 PM, Christopher Barker wrote:
>> I just don't believe it should
>> be necessary for those people, at first, to take on even the
>> beginnings
>> of Unix in order to brave taking on Python.
>
> How are they going to do it? Is there a single free IDE that you think
> is re
Charles Hartman wrote:
> I'm afraid that you're right about this, and I think it's the biggest
> obstacle to the project of getting (non-Unix) Mac users interested in
> Python when they go looking for a language, or just looking to get
> started on programming.
>
> Does the old PythonIDE come
I'm afraid that you're right about this, and I think it's the biggest
obstacle to the project of getting (non-Unix) Mac users interested in
Python when they go looking for a language, or just looking to get
started on programming.
Does the old PythonIDE come with OSX's Python?
I really feel
Kevin Ollivier wrote:
> As does just explicitly upgrading your Python. I don't see why it's
> breaking if you install Leopard, but upgrading if you install MacPython
> 2.4 from pythonmac.org. Either way, your 2.3 extensions don't work and
> you have to start from scratch. And either way, if you
Hi All,
I'm forwarding this message I sent to the VisionEgg list as
they couldn't help me there. Basically there are 2 problems.
1) I can't hide the toolbar when not in FULLSCREEN.
From the post below it seems it used to work.
2) If I try and cover both monitors with the window the
On Feb 8, 2006, at 1:34 PM, Bob Ippolito wrote:
[snip]
>>
>> It's a bit confusing to talk as if needing new extensions ==
>> breakage. (You know you're a geek when it's second nature to write
>> equality tests like this. ;-) I remember Python 2.1 and I've had to
>> upgrade several times, and I n
On 8-Feb-06, at 5:00 PM, Christopher Barker wrote:
> has wrote:
>> - professional Unix developers who want to use Python on OS X just
>> the same as they'd use Python on any other *nix
>
> If this means non-GUI apps, then they don't need any help from us,
> except maybe one line about how python
has wrote:
> - professional Unix developers who want to use Python on OS X just
> the same as they'd use Python on any other *nix
If this means non-GUI apps, then they don't need any help from us,
except maybe one line about how python acts exactly the same from the
command line on OS-X as it do
On Feb 8, 2006, at 4:16 PM, Ronald Oussoren wrote:
>
> Is that this omniorb: http://omniorb.sourceforge.net/ ?
Yep.
>
> Do you by any change have a binary of the python extension for
> Panther lying about? (for python 2.4 of course). A script that would
> tell if the c++ constructors would al
Charles Hartman wrote:
> I just don't believe it should
> be necessary for those people, at first, to take on even the beginnings
> of Unix in order to brave taking on Python.
How are they going to do it? Is there a single free IDE that you think
is ready for this kind of user (including the i
On Feb 8, 2006, at 1:20 PM, Kevin Ollivier wrote:
> Hi Bob,
>
> On Feb 8, 2006, at 1:49 AM, Bob Ippolito wrote:
>
>>
>> On Feb 8, 2006, at 1:06 AM, Kevin Ollivier wrote:
>>
In addition, if you have your code running just fine and dandy
under
Apple's python, then you upgrade to 10
On Feb 8, 2006, at 1:08 PM, Ronald Oussoren wrote:
>
> On 8-feb-2006, at 21:42, Ronald Oussoren wrote:
>
>>
>> On 8-feb-2006, at 21:21, Bob Ippolito wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> On Feb 8, 2006, at 11:59 AM, Ronald Oussoren wrote:
>>>
On 7-feb-2006, at 0:59, Bob Ippolito wrote:
>>
>> Bob, w
Hi Bob,
On Feb 8, 2006, at 1:49 AM, Bob Ippolito wrote:
>
> On Feb 8, 2006, at 1:06 AM, Kevin Ollivier wrote:
>
>>> In addition, if you have your code running just fine and dandy under
>>> Apple's python, then you upgrade to 10.5, chances are that your app
>>> will
>>> no longer work, as Apple is
On Feb 8, 2006, at 3:42 PM, Ronald Oussoren wrote:
> Maybe it is necessary to ensure proper behaviour for C++ extensions
> with global
> variables that have constructors, in which case we'd probably be
> hosed. Does anyone
> has a Python extension that does this lying around (compiled using g
On 8-feb-2006, at 21:53, Bill Noon wrote:
On Feb 8, 2006, at 3:42 PM, Ronald Oussoren wrote:
Maybe it is necessary to ensure proper behaviour for C++
extensions with global
variables that have constructors, in which case we'd probably be
hosed. Does anyone
has a Python extension that does
On Feb 8, 2006, at 12:42 PM, Ronald Oussoren wrote:
>
> On 8-feb-2006, at 21:21, Bob Ippolito wrote:
>
>>
>> On Feb 8, 2006, at 11:59 AM, Ronald Oussoren wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> On 7-feb-2006, at 0:59, Bob Ippolito wrote:
>
> Bob, what do you think the timescale is for a universal build?
On 8-feb-2006, at 21:21, Bob Ippolito wrote:
On Feb 8, 2006, at 11:59 AM, Ronald Oussoren wrote:
On 7-feb-2006, at 0:59, Bob Ippolito wrote:
Bob, what do you think the timescale is for a universal build?
If it's
soon, then we should work on re-0writing the web site as though
it's
rea
On Feb 8, 2006, at 11:59 AM, Ronald Oussoren wrote:
>
> On 7-feb-2006, at 0:59, Bob Ippolito wrote:
>>>
>>> Bob, what do you think the timescale is for a universal build? If
>>> it's
>>> soon, then we should work on re-0writing the web site as though it's
>>> ready to go.
>>
>> I'd say soon...
On 7-feb-2006, at 0:59, Bob Ippolito wrote:
Bob, what do you think the timescale is for a universal build? If
it's
soon, then we should work on re-0writing the web site as though it's
ready to go.
I'd say soon... The only issues left are to sort out the distribution
scripts and some more t
On Feb 8, 2006, at 9:08 AM, Bill Janssen wrote:
>>> In addition, if you have your code running just fine and dandy under
>>> Apple's python, then you upgrade to 10.5, chances are that your
>>> app will
>>> no longer work, as Apple is likely to yank their python out from
>>> under
>>> you. If
On Feb 8, 2006, at 2:26 PM, Dethe Elza wrote:Hmmm. If they don't know that Python is a programming language, why are they here? Familiarity with the terminal app and knowing how to save python as a text file are certainly prerequisites at this point though. I agree with the first point -- w
On Feb 8, 2006, at 10:35 AM, Chris Porter wrote:
> (snip)
>>
>> Then we need Pointers to download pages for packages:
>>
>> One page for the 10.3 build.
>
> How does a build differ from a system?
>
>> One page for the 10.4 build.
This has been talked about a lot recently. The way it's built
d
Bill Janssen wrote:
>I can see that if you are a pre-MacOSX Mac person, used to all the
>groundbreaking UI complexity of Apple in the 80's and 90's, your view
>and your needs might be different. Or if you are a for-Mac developer.
>But most people aren't.
A *very* good point.
Us longtime Mac-hea
On 8-Feb-06, at 10:35 AM, Chris Porter wrote:
> How does a build differ from a system?
I think build refers to a version of Python, and system refers to a
version of OS X.
> I tried typing in python, and got the same response as typing in
> pythonw.
> Then I tried "pythonx" "pythona" and "p
Charles,
First, good start. You've really thought this through and I see the
replies are coming fast and hard.
Second, Chris Barker ( I called you Baker before, my apologies) had some
good replies most of which I agree with.
I will add what little I have to his.
I think the issue of a st
On Feb 8, 2006, at 10:44 AM, Ronald Oussoren wrote:
>
> On 8-feb-2006, at 10:49, Bob Ippolito wrote:
>
>>
>> Given these caveats and limited resources, the vendor Python is
>> absolutely irrelevant as far as I am concerned. If someone wants to
>> deal with separate support and documentation for
On 8-feb-2006, at 13:18, Bill Northcott wrote:
Not happy with the replies I received, I have ground this very small
and think I now understand what is going on.
Try the following test program:
#define _POSIX_C_SOURCE 200112L
#include
int main ()
{
}
Is that a valid POSIX program? Don't defi
>
> Full disclosure: I'm a UNIX person. The first thing
> I do when I get a
> new Mac is make sure X11 is installed on it, and in my
> Login Items.
> The second thing I do is build an X11 version of G
On 8-feb-2006, at 10:49, Bob Ippolito wrote:
Mac OS X 10.5 will surely ship with at least 2.4.2,
Maybe, maybe not. Who knows what apple will do? ;-) ;-)
I agree that anyone that ships Python applications shouldn't rely on
Apple's python unless they have a very good reason to do so (such as
Bill Janssen wrote:
> You had no idea about it because it's not going to happen. "Apple is
> likely to yank their python out from under you"? Come on, this is
> absurd. In 10.5, /usr/bin/python is likely to be Python 2.4 instead
> of 2.3, but the odds are to 1 that it will be there, and the
> In the vein of someone else here who recommended we not denigrate the
> Apple installed Python, I agree. Just treat that like software
> companies do a demo or "stripped-down" version of their application.
> You can use it for simple stuff. Take Python for a test drive and see
> if you li
On 7-feb-2006, at 22:32, Christopher Barker wrote:
Bob Ippolito wrote:
I'll tell you what: I'll drop the ego and get a new pair of
glasses in
exchange for five or six million dollars..
I'll bet I could package up Python, PyObjC etc. with good
installers and
tutorials for only about a on
(snip)
>
> Then we need Pointers to download pages for packages:
>
> One page for the 10.3 build.
How does a build differ from a system?
> One page for the 10.4 build.
>
> Maybe a link to a page with all the other packages that are no at
> pythonmac.org/packages
>
>
> > 2. Would it be legit
Kevin Ollivier wrote:
> It's important to note, though, that you're looking at a use case of
> someone who's already familiar with databases, MySQL, etc. and knows
> exactly what they want to use Python to do.
The only point was that they knew what they wanted to do, and it
involved external pa
Thanks Chris. What's below is not a complete response, just a couple of specific, interim notes while I study up on the rest.Charles On Feb 8, 2006, at 1:06 PM, Christopher Barker wrote:also I hope a prominent one slapped onto the top of the MacPythonsite.)Do you mean Jack Jansen's site?Yes. I'm th
I wrote this yesterday, but didn't get a chance to click send before
catching a bus.
Thanks for doing this Charles.
(I've put in my responses to multiple post here)
> also I hope a prominent one slapped onto the top of the MacPython
> site.)
Do you mean Jack Jansen's site?
> For a page title
See my earlier message, subject "New Page, first proposal", for a
possible organization of the page that builds on Chris Barker's
suggestons (and others). The "beginner's list" thread is (just) an
offshoot of one question posed there.
Charles
On Feb 8, 2006, at 12:00 PM, Louis Pecora wrote
> > In addition, if you have your code running just fine and dandy under
> > Apple's python, then you upgrade to 10.5, chances are that your app will
> > no longer work, as Apple is likely to yank their python out from under
> > you. If it were running with a user-installed Python, chances are i
Bill Janssen wrote:
> I think a "jargon list" is a great idea!
>
> Bill
> ___
>
Absolutely. I read a thread that had so much about Eggs and Cheese Shop
that I thought I was reading my shopping list. I'm still not quite sure
what these are even tho
> Unless you're a unix person, there's very few useful things you can
> do with Python 2.3 sans third party extensions
Ah, I think I'm beginning to understand all the confusion.
MacOS X is the largest-selling UNIX distro in the world. Linux and
Solaris people are deserting in droves and moving
Charles Hartman wrote:
>
> On Feb 8, 2006, at 11:18 AM, Louis Pecora wrote:
>
>
> I'd like to get some feedback on the organization I proposed before I
> start trying to flesh anything out. The better the organization before
> I start, the less confusing (not to mention time-consuming) the work
On Feb 8, 2006, at 11:18 AM, Louis Pecora wrote:
>
> I agree with the 2 teams approach and hope I can add something to the
> non-pro/scientific user end. I would encourage Charles H. to get the
> new web page up sooner than later. That's not demanding he work and I
> watch, but I think that se
OK, you guys have twisted this non-pro's arm enough. I just installed
Python 2.4.1 on my Tiger machine from Bob Ippolito's site (not the
active state one, but the framework).
Yes, I followed up with the TigerFix install.
But I still get Python 2.3.5 when I start python in my terminal.
HAHAHA
I think a "jargon list" is a great idea!
Bill
___
Pythonmac-SIG maillist - Pythonmac-SIG@python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/pythonmac-sig
has wrote:
> So there's two options to this whole "let's market Mac Python" thing. Either
> go for the "my way or the highway" approach, which'll largely look after
> itself but cater to only a subset of the possible market and let Ruby take
> the rest. OR agree to work alongside one another as
Christopher Barker wrote:
>This is my point. You couldn't actually get anything done without downloading
>and installing _something_. Once you're doing that, it would have made very
>little difference if you had downloaded and installed a new version of Python
>as well.
I think what's happenin
> Chris Porter wrote:
> > And here, Mac comes with Python! Very nice.
> > That shouldn't be downplayed. All I needed was the Python that was already
> > installed, plus a couple added things. (I needed Python to talk to MySQL,
> > and
> > that I had to install MySQL, so there was likely no native
I'm watching these responses & collecting views. (Obviously I'm also
watching for comments on my "New Page, first proposal" outlline.)
I'll propose changes to the page organization when things settle out
a little more.
Charles
Charles Hartman
Professor of English, Poet in Residence
Connec
Not happy with the replies I received, I have ground this very small
and think I now understand what is going on.
Try the following test program:
#define _POSIX_C_SOURCE 200112L
#include
int main ()
{
}
Save it once as posix_test.c and again as posix_test.cpp. Try to
compile them:
[PM-G5BN
On Feb 8, 2006, at 1:06 AM, Kevin Ollivier wrote:
>> In addition, if you have your code running just fine and dandy under
>> Apple's python, then you upgrade to 10.5, chances are that your app
>> will
>> no longer work, as Apple is likely to yank their python out from
>> under
>> you.
>
> What
Hi Chris,
On Feb 7, 2006, at 11:07 PM, Christopher Barker wrote:
> Chris Porter wrote:
>> And here, Mac comes with Python! Very nice.
>> That shouldn't be downplayed. All I needed was the Python that was
>> already
>> installed, plus a couple added things. (I needed Python to talk to
>> MySQL
94 matches
Mail list logo
