[issue3477] grammar productionlist are not properly indented

[Georg Brandl]

Georg Brandl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> added the comment:

Thanks, fixed in r65547.

--
resolution:  -> fixed
status: open -> closed

___
Python tracker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

___
___
Python-bugs-list mailing list
Unsubscribe: 
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com

[issue3503] Calls to print() function in Python 3.0 tutorial

[Georg Brandl]

Georg Brandl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> added the comment:

Thanks for the patch! Committed in r65545.

For the fibonacci example, I just left out the final print(). For
simplicity's case, it's fine for the example to have the minor flaw of
not printing a final newline -- it is there to show the end keyword,
after all.

--
resolution:  -> fixed
status: open -> closed

___
Python tracker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

___
___
Python-bugs-list mailing list
Unsubscribe: 
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com

[issue3504] Python Reference Manual inconsistency (Notation)

[Georg Brandl]

Georg Brandl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> added the comment:

This is already fixed in the development docs:
http://docs.python.org/dev/reference/introduction.html#id2

--
resolution:  -> out of date
status: open -> closed

___
Python tracker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

___
___
Python-bugs-list mailing list
Unsubscribe: 
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com

[issue3504] Python Reference Manual inconsistency (Notation)

[paul stoop]

New submission from paul stoop <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:

On page http://docs.python.org/ref/notation.html the following text:
name::= lc_letter
lc_letter   ::= "a"..."z"
The first line says that a name is an lc_letter followed by a sequence
of zero or more lc_letters and underscores
...

should read (imho) 
name::= lc_letter(_|lc_letter)*
...

--
assignee: georg.brandl
components: Documentation
messages: 70732
nosy: georg.brandl, pavlosto
severity: normal
status: open
title: Python Reference Manual inconsistency (Notation)
versions: Python 2.5

___
Python tracker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

___
___
Python-bugs-list mailing list
Unsubscribe: 
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com

[issue3505] single/double quote error in Python v2.6b2 documentation

[paul stoop]

New submission from paul stoop <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:

hi,

On http://docs.python.org/ref/strings.html we find
longstring ::= "'''" longstringitem* "'''" | '"""' longstringitem* '"""'
(correct),

but,

on http://docs.python.org/dev/reference/lexical_analysis.html#id7
we find:
vv
longstring ::= ""'" longstringitem* ""'" | '"""' longstringitem* '"""'
^^
(not correct, i think(?)).

--
assignee: georg.brandl
components: Documentation
messages: 70735
nosy: georg.brandl, pavlosto
severity: normal
status: open
title: single/double quote error in Python v2.6b2 documentation
versions: Python 2.6

___
Python tracker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

___
___
Python-bugs-list mailing list
Unsubscribe: 
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com

[issue3500] unbound methods of different classes compare equal

[Jean-Paul Calderone]

Jean-Paul Calderone <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> added the comment:

> But you acknowledge they are really the same method attached to
> different classes, right? The notion of "unbound method" is mostly an
> implementation detail. The term occurs only 4 times in the whole Python
> documentation (according to Google). And in py3k they are gone. (*)

It's the same function attached to two different classes.  I don't
really buy the "implementation detail" argument - if Guido says it,
then I don't have much choice but to accept it, but I'm going to
argue about it with anyone else. :)  In this case, I'd say it's
definitely not an implementation detail because it has major
consequences visible to applications.  If I get method x from
class A and try to call it with an instance of class B, then
it's going to break.  I have to know about this behavior in order
to write a program that works.  Py3k may be different, but I'm
not going to talk about Py3k here because I'm only interested
in the Python 2.x behavior.

> Moreover, you say you want them to compare unequal because you
> *explicitly* want the same method called separately for each class it is
> defined on. Is there anything preventing you to have a set of (class,
> method) tuples instead? Because it sounds like the logical thing to do
> in your case.

I could do that.  I probably will, too, since this code needs to work
on Python 2.3 through Python 2.5.  I still want to make Python 2.6
better, though.  It seems to me that an unbound method is already
effectively a tuple of (class, function) - it has a reference to both
of those.  Requiring applications to tie it up with a class again is
just redundant.

> "Trust" is a strong word. You can trust the comparison operator if you
> agree with its semantics, you cannot trust it if you want different
> semantics. But that doesn't mean it is generally trustworthy or
> untrustworthy.

You're right.  "trust" was a bad word to use there.

> I don't think there are lots of use cases for comparing *unbound*
> methods. One such use case is checking for redefinition of inherited
> methods, and the current __eq__ semantics look fine for that.

This use-case is already satisfied though - if an application wants
to see if the function is the same, then the application can compare
the im_func attribute of the method objects.

___
Python tracker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

___
___
Python-bugs-list mailing list
Unsubscribe: 
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com

[issue3500] unbound methods of different classes compare equal

[Antoine Pitrou]

Antoine Pitrou <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> added the comment:

Hi,

> It's the same function attached to two different classes.  I don't
> really buy the "implementation detail" argument - if Guido says it,
> then I don't have much choice but to accept it, but I'm going to
> argue about it with anyone else. :)

I understand that :-)

> Py3k may be different, but I'm
> not going to talk about Py3k here because I'm only interested
> in the Python 2.x behavior.

Granted, but Python 2.6 (and subsequent 2.x versions) strives to make it easier
to port code to 3.x by gradually reducing compatibility issues. Your proposal to
change unbound method __eq__ behaviour would, on the contrary, add another
incompatibility between 3.x and 2.x.

> This use-case is already satisfied though - if an application wants
> to see if the function is the same, then the application can compare
> the im_func attribute of the method objects.

But your use case is already satisfied as well - you just have to use the
(class, method) tuple for comparison. In other words, both use cases can be
satisfied by circumventing, if needed, the default __eq__ behaviour. If there's
no overwhelming reason to change the current default, keeping 2.x and 3.0
compatibility should prevail.

Regards

Antoine.

___
Python tracker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

___
___
Python-bugs-list mailing list
Unsubscribe: 
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com

[issue2396] Backport memoryview object to Python 2.6

[Benjamin Peterson]

Benjamin Peterson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> added the comment:

I concur.

--
nosy: +benjamin.peterson
versions: +Python 2.7 -Python 2.6

___
Python tracker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

___
___
Python-bugs-list mailing list
Unsubscribe: 
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com

[issue1745] Backport of PEP 3102 "keyword-only arguments" to 2.6

[Benjamin Peterson]

Benjamin Peterson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> added the comment:

On Mon, Aug 4, 2008 at 1:35 AM, tav <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> tav <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> added the comment:
>
> What's holding back the backport to 2.6?

The fact that we are working towards the 3rd and final beta.
>
> --
> nosy: +tav
>
> ___
> Python tracker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> 
> ___
>

-- 
Cheers,
Benjamin Peterson
"There's no place like 127.0.0.1."

___
Python tracker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

___
___
Python-bugs-list mailing list
Unsubscribe: 
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com

[issue3499] Python 2.6 requires pre-installed Python to build

[Benjamin Peterson]

Benjamin Peterson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> added the comment:

It should be simple to modify release.py to touch these files. Barry,
I'm on vacation now, but I should be able to do this before you spin the
releases.

--
assignee:  -> benjamin.peterson
nosy: +barry, benjamin.peterson
priority: critical -> release blocker

___
Python tracker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

___
___
Python-bugs-list mailing list
Unsubscribe: 
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com

[issue2396] Backport memoryview object to Python 2.6

[Antoine Pitrou]

Antoine Pitrou <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> added the comment:

Not a release blocker then :-)

--
priority: release blocker -> critical

___
Python tracker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

___
___
Python-bugs-list mailing list
Unsubscribe: 
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com

[issue2305] Update What's new in 2.6

[Guido van Rossum]

Guido van Rossum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> added the comment:

How's this coming along?

--
versions: +Python 2.6

___
Python tracker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

___
___
Python-bugs-list mailing list
Unsubscribe: 
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com

[issue2389] Array pickling exposes internal memory representation of elements

[Guido van Rossum]

Guido van Rossum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> added the comment:

Agreed, this has been broken for a long time, and few people have
noticed or complained.  Let's wait.

--
assignee: gvanrossum -> 
versions: +Python 2.7, Python 3.1 -Python 2.6, Python 3.0

___
Python tracker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

___
___
Python-bugs-list mailing list
Unsubscribe: 
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com

[issue1179] [CVE-2007-4965] Integer overflow in imageop module

[Guido van Rossum]

Guido van Rossum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> added the comment:

The two segfaults reported in msg64682 are still there in 2.6.
I'm elevating this to release blocker but don't have time to fix this
myself.

--
assignee: gvanrossum -> 
priority: critical -> release blocker
versions: +Python 2.6

___
Python tracker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

___
___
Python-bugs-list mailing list
Unsubscribe: 
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com

[issue1717] Get rid of more refercenes to __cmp__

[Guido van Rossum]

Guido van Rossum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> added the comment:

Can someone other than me test and apply this?  It seems still relevant,
and __cmp__ is not coming back.

--
assignee: gvanrossum -> 

___
Python tracker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

___
___
Python-bugs-list mailing list
Unsubscribe: 
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com

[issue1518] Fast globals/builtins access (patch)

[Guido van Rossum]

Guido van Rossum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> added the comment:

Won't have time myself.

--
assignee: gvanrossum -> 
priority: critical -> normal

___
Python tracker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

___
___
Python-bugs-list mailing list
Unsubscribe: 
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com

[issue1616] compiler warnings

[Guido van Rossum]

Guido van Rossum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> added the comment:

Let someone else review this.

--
assignee: gvanrossum -> 
priority: critical -> normal

___
Python tracker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

___
___
Python-bugs-list mailing list
Unsubscribe: 
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com

[issue2235] __eq__ / __hash__ check doesn't take inheritance into account

[Guido van Rossum]

Guido van Rossum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> added the comment:

How's this going?

___
Python tracker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

___
___
Python-bugs-list mailing list
Unsubscribe: 
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com

[issue3262] re.split doesn't split with zero-width regex

[Guido van Rossum]

Guido van Rossum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> added the comment:

I think it's better to leave this alone.  Such a subtle change is likely
to trip over more people in worse ways than the alleged "bug".

--
resolution:  -> rejected

___
Python tracker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

___
___
Python-bugs-list mailing list
Unsubscribe: 
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com

[issue1503] test_xmlrpc is still flakey

[Guido van Rossum]

Guido van Rossum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> added the comment:

Without a patch this will not improve.

___
Python tracker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

___
___
Python-bugs-list mailing list
Unsubscribe: 
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com

[issue616013] cPickle documentation incomplete

[Guido van Rossum]

Guido van Rossum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> added the comment:

2.6 should keep the original cPickle, warts and all, for backwards
compatibility.  I'd be okay though with also having _pickle there --
just don't call in cPickle (and don't import it from pickle.py either).

___
Python tracker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

___
___
Python-bugs-list mailing list
Unsubscribe: 
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com

[issue3262] re.split doesn't split with zero-width regex

[Mike Coleman]

Mike Coleman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> added the comment:

Okay.  For what it's worth, note that my original 2004 patch for this
(#988761) is completely backward compatible (a flag must be set in the
call to get the new behavior).

___
Python tracker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

___
___
Python-bugs-list mailing list
Unsubscribe: 
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com

[issue2305] Update What's new in 2.6

[A.M. Kuchling]

A.M. Kuchling <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> added the comment:

It's in good shape.  There are a few items in my saved-email folder that
need to be added, and a few XXX markers here and there, but I've done
the large stuff, like writing a section on the multiprocessing module.

___
Python tracker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

___
___
Python-bugs-list mailing list
Unsubscribe: 
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com

[issue1985] Bug/Patch: Problem with xml/__init__.py when using freeze.py

[Guido van Rossum]

Guido van Rossum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> added the comment:

Nobody seems to care enough.

--
resolution:  -> rejected

___
Python tracker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

___
___
Python-bugs-list mailing list
Unsubscribe: 
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com

[issue3506] Change buffer/memoryview DeprecationWarning

[Brett Cannon]

New submission from Brett Cannon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:

Right now in 2.6, using buffer() warns that it is going away and to use
memoryview(). Unfortunately memoryview() won't be backported to 2.6 in
time for release.

That means the warning is covering something that is within 2to3's
realm. So the warning should be changed to more align with any specific
difference between buffer() and memoryview() (or bring buffer() back to
3.0).

--
components: Interpreter Core
messages: 70755
nosy: brett.cannon
priority: release blocker
severity: normal
status: open
title: Change buffer/memoryview DeprecationWarning
versions: Python 2.6

___
Python tracker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

___
___
Python-bugs-list mailing list
Unsubscribe: 
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com

[issue2310] Reorganize the 3.0 Misc/NEWS file

[Guido van Rossum]

Guido van Rossum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> added the comment:

Let's see if we can fix this by beta3.

--
assignee: gvanrossum -> 
priority:  -> release blocker

___
Python tracker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

___
___
Python-bugs-list mailing list
Unsubscribe: 
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com

[issue2590] S_unpack_from() Read Access Violation

[Guido van Rossum]

Guido van Rossum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> added the comment:

Ping? Patch?

--
nosy: +gvanrossum

___
Python tracker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

___
___
Python-bugs-list mailing list
Unsubscribe: 
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com

[issue1309567] linecache module returns wrong results

[Guido van Rossum]

Guido van Rossum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> added the comment:

Is this still relevant?

___
Python tracker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

___
___
Python-bugs-list mailing list
Unsubscribe: 
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com

[issue1503] test_xmlrpc is still flakey

[Ralf Schmitt]

Ralf Schmitt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> added the comment:

I would say without a decision on what to do, there will be no patch :)

I can write a patch, which unconditionally turns on blocking mode for
sockets returned from accept (on unix-platforms). Would that be fine?

___
Python tracker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

___
___
Python-bugs-list mailing list
Unsubscribe: 
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com

[issue3507] spelling in try.html

[jqxvjqxv]

New submission from jqxvjqxv <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:

http://docs.python.org/ref/try.html
Please replace "propogate" with correct spelling "propagate".

--
assignee: georg.brandl
components: Documentation
messages: 70760
nosy: georg.brandl, jqxvjqxv
severity: normal
status: open
title: spelling in try.html

___
Python tracker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

___
___
Python-bugs-list mailing list
Unsubscribe: 
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com

[issue2305] Update What's new in 2.6

[Guido van Rossum]

Guido van Rossum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> added the comment:

Great!  The same cannot be said of the 3.0 version, which is on my plate.

I wonder if you have an opinion on what to do with features that were
initially targeted for 3.0 and then backported to 2.6.  Should these
appear in "what's new in 2.6", in "what's new in 3.0", or in both?  I'm
thinking that perhaps these should appear in both, for the benefit of
folks planning to jump straight into 3.0 from 2.5.  After all, 2.6 and
3.0 are coming out at the same time.  Or should be just add these to 2.6
and add a generic clause to the 3.0 document saying "also see the 2.6
document"?

___
Python tracker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

___
___
Python-bugs-list mailing list
Unsubscribe: 
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com

[issue3506] Change buffer/memoryview DeprecationWarning

[Guido van Rossum]

Guido van Rossum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> added the comment:

Definitely don't bring buffer() back in 3.0!  It needs to die.

If 2to3 can do this reasonably well, let's do that.

--
nosy: +gvanrossum

___
Python tracker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

___
___
Python-bugs-list mailing list
Unsubscribe: 
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com

[issue2305] Update What's new in 2.6

[A.M. Kuchling]

A.M. Kuchling <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> added the comment:

I agree; we don't want to require people to read the 2.6 document, and
then the 3.0 document to get a complete picture.  

Besides, the organization of the 2.x documents may not be suitable for
the 3.0 document.  The 2.x documents are organized by PEP, then a
section for miscellaneous language changes, then a section for library
changes.  For 3.0, you probably want to do all language changes in one
section, ignoring how they were broken up into PEPs, then a section on 
the library reorganization, and then maybe sections on using 2to3 
or porting C extensions.

It's certainly OK with me to copy text from the 2.6 document into the
3.0 one, if some of the text is useful.

___
Python tracker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

___
___
Python-bugs-list mailing list
Unsubscribe: 
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com

[issue2305] Update What's new in 2.6

[A.M. Kuchling]

A.M. Kuchling <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> added the comment:

Oh, and it might be more realistic to keep the 3.0 document as a set of
notes, and aim to have a more finished document in 3.1.  ISTM it'll be
hard to finish writing it in time for a planned 3.0 release, even if you
spent your 20% work-time on the task.

___
Python tracker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

___
___
Python-bugs-list mailing list
Unsubscribe: 
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com

[issue2305] Update What's new in 2.6

[Guido van Rossum]

Guido van Rossum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> added the comment:

Thanks for the feedback, I'll do that.  I have 50% time instead of 20%,
though it doesn't feel that way lately. ;-)

___
Python tracker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

___
___
Python-bugs-list mailing list
Unsubscribe: 
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com

[issue1309567] linecache module returns wrong results

[Hans Ulrich Niedermann]

Hans Ulrich Niedermann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> added the comment:

Unless someone has fixed it since 2008-07-05, it is still relevant.

I'll have to take a look at the current code first, though, to confirm
in either way.

There has been some discussion on this issue over at
http://bugs.python.org/issue1754483 but no complete resolution either.

___
Python tracker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

___
___
Python-bugs-list mailing list
Unsubscribe: 
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com

[issue3026] integer overflow in hashlib causes wrong results for cryptographic hash functions [was: mmap broken with large files on 64bit system]

[Ralf Schmitt]

Changes by Ralf Schmitt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:


--
title: mmap broken with large files on 64bit system -> integer overflow in 
hashlib causes wrong results for cryptographic hash functions [was: mmap broken 
with large files on 64bit system]

___
Python tracker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

___
___
Python-bugs-list mailing list
Unsubscribe: 
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com

[issue3173] external strftime for Python?

[Ralf Schmitt]

Changes by Ralf Schmitt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:


--
nosy: +schmir

___
Python tracker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

___
___
Python-bugs-list mailing list
Unsubscribe: 
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com

[issue3506] Change buffer/memoryview DeprecationWarning

[Brett Cannon]

Brett Cannon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> added the comment:

On Tue, Aug 5, 2008 at 12:41 PM, Guido van Rossum
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Guido van Rossum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> added the comment:
>
> Definitely don't bring buffer() back in 3.0!  It needs to die.
>
> If 2to3 can do this reasonably well, let's do that.
>

There is already a fixer to go from buffer() to memoryview(), but I
don't know how compatible the APIs are. That might still require a
warning.

___
Python tracker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

___
___
Python-bugs-list mailing list
Unsubscribe: 
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com

[issue3160] Building a Win32 binary installer crashes

[Viktor Ferenczi]

Viktor Ferenczi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> added the comment:

Note: It is already fixed and should go into the next beta. Thanks.

___
Python tracker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

___
___
Python-bugs-list mailing list
Unsubscribe: 
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com

[issue3508] range() is not a generator when used in for's

[Diego]

New submission from Diego <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:

Hi.

I am a debian lenny user so i am still using python 2.5 so i dont know 
how is this "bug" working on newer pythons. Please close it if you find 
that it doesnt exists.

It may not be a bug but.

I have maked an script to optimice minterms sums (This is electronics 
stuff to reduce the number of logic devices in an electronic design).
The algorithm depends exponentially on the number of bits in the input 
and the output. So to test it i have to generate 2**N_input_bits 
strings in a list. Each string being of N_input_bits+N_output_bits long.

The problem starts when N_input_bits is too much long. (from 25 and up)
The function range(2**N_input_bits) instantiates a list with all thoose 
numbers.

I have maked a test script to check it out:

import time

N=32

try:
  range(2**N)
  # range(): allocates N's integer's items in a list
except Exception, error:
  print "ERROR: ",error, "   Items=",N
  print

time.sleep(10)

def RANGE(a):
  # GENERATOR: Creates one output eachtime it is called.
  i=0
  while i

___
___
Python-bugs-list mailing list
Unsubscribe: 
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com

[issue3508] range() is not a generator when used in for's

[Ezio Melotti]

Ezio Melotti <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> added the comment:

In Python 2.x range() always return a list.
In Python 3.x it will return an iterator.

Other functions will be changed to return an iterator too (see
http://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-3100/#built-in-namespace).

--
nosy: +ezio.melotti

___
Python tracker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

___
___
Python-bugs-list mailing list
Unsubscribe: 
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com

[issue3300] urllib.quote and unquote - Unicode issues

[Bill Janssen]

Bill Janssen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> added the comment:

Here's my version of how quote and unquote should be implemented in
Python 3.0.  I haven't looked at the uses of it in the library, but I'd
expect improper uses (and there are lots of them) will break, and thus
can be fixed.

Basically, percent-quoting is about creating an ASCII string that can be
safely used in URI from an arbitrary sequence of octets.  So, my version
of quote() takes either a byte sequence or a string, and percent-quotes
the unsafe ones, and then returns a str.  If a str is supplied on input,
it is first converted to UTF-8, then the octets of that encoding are
percent-quoted.

For unquote, there's no way to tell what the octets of the quoted
sequence may mean, so this takes the percent-quoted ASCII string, and
returns a byte sequence with the unquoted bytes.  For convenience, since
the unquoted bytes are often a string in some particular character set
encoding, I've also supplied unquote_as_string(), which takes an
optional character set, and first unquotes the bytes, then converts them
to a str, using that character set encoding, and returns the resulting
string.

--
nosy: +janssen
Added file: http://bugs.python.org/file11062/myunquote.py

___
Python tracker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

___
___
Python-bugs-list mailing list
Unsubscribe: 
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com