On 7/4/06, Josiah Carlson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> One thing to remember is that Python is not Scheme/Lisp. It borrows
> some ideas from Scheme/Lisp,
I can say it stronger. Any resemblance between Python and Scheme or
Lisp is purely a coincidence. Neither language is in Python's
ancestry, at
"Bill Chiles" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> For Common Lispers and probably Schemers, Python has some surprising
> semantics around scope and lifetime extent of variables. Three that
> leap out at me are:
One thing to remember is that Python is not Scheme/Lisp. It borrows
some ideas from Sche
For Common Lispers and probably Schemers, Python has some surprising
semantics around scope and lifetime extent of variables. Three that
leap out at me are:
* function parameters with default values are NOT new bindings for each
invocation, so a
default value of [] changes if you destructively
On Mon, 3 Jul 2006, Guido van Rossum wrote:
> To fake things like this, socket.setdefaulttimeout() was added, though
> I don't know if it actually works. Have you tried that?
[...]
It works. I think there's some issue with SSL, though (can't seem to find
the issue now).
Of course, feeding thro
Guido> To fake things like this, socket.setdefaulttimeout() was added,
Guido> though I don't know if it actually works. Have you tried that?
I'm pretty sure it does, but is a rather blunt instrument for the task, as
it affects all socket connections the app might make.
Skip
_
Facundo> I need a timeout in urlopen, just to be able to make:
urllib2.urlopen("http://no.host.org";, timeout=2)
Facundo> This is actually not possible, but I'll make it work.
Facundo> I want to know, please, if this is useful in general, for me to
Facundo> post a patch
To fake things like this, socket.setdefaulttimeout() was added, though
I don't know if it actually works. Have you tried that?
--Guido
On 7/3/06, Facundo Batista <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I need a timeout in urlopen, just to be able to make:
>
> >>> urllib2.urlopen("http://no.host.org";, timeo
On 7/3/06, Andrew Koenig <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Much though the Algol 60 tickles my nostalgia (it was my first
> > programming language!) I don't think that it's a particularly strong
> > argument. I like to think that we have better ways these days.
>
> Even if so, that's not the point I w
Facundo Batista wrote:
urllib2.urlopen("http://no.host.org";, timeout=2)
>
> This is actually not possible, but I'll make it work.
>
> I want to know, please, if this is useful in general, for me to post a
> patch in SF.
While it might be useful, it can only be added to Python 2.6 now.
So t
On Monday 03 July 2006 14:07, Facundo Batista wrote:
> I want to know, please, if this is useful in general, for me to post a
> patch in SF.
It seems like something that should be easy, and lots of people need to
consider this for applications.
-Fred
--
Fred L. Drake, Jr.
_
I need a timeout in urlopen, just to be able to make:
>>> urllib2.urlopen("http://no.host.org";, timeout=2)
This is actually not possible, but I'll make it work.
I want to know, please, if this is useful in general, for me to post a
patch in SF.
Regards,
--
.Facundo
Blog: http://www.tani
> I like the added functionality offered with weakattrs as defined. I'm
> not terribly in love with the syntax of their creation, and I'm curious
> as to how it plays with __slots__
weakattrs are data descriptors, just like properties etc. they are part
of the class, not the instance, so there sho
Martin v. Löwis schrieb:
> Thomas Heller wrote:
>> - Do I need special rights to call 'svnadmin load' to import this dumpfile
>> into Python SVN, or are the normal commit rights sufficient?
>
> It's called "svnadmin" for a reason :-)
>
> Neal Norwitz or myself will have to do that; we need to d
Martin v. Löwis schrieb:
> Thomas Heller wrote:
>> - Do I need special rights to call 'svnadmin load' to import this dumpfile
>> into Python SVN, or are the normal commit rights sufficient?
>
> It's called "svnadmin" for a reason :-)
>
> Neal Norwitz or myself will have to do that; we need to d
> Much though the Algol 60 tickles my nostalgia (it was my first
> programming language!) I don't think that it's a particularly strong
> argument. I like to think that we have better ways these days.
Even if so, that's not the point I was trying to make. The point is that
there is a programming
On 7/3/06, Andrew Koenig <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > I don't think "trivial" is the right word to use here,
> > since it implies something that's of so little importance
> > that it can be ignored. But the simple cases are precisely
> > the ones where this wart hurts the most, so we can't
> > ig
Tim Peters wrote:
> With current trunk that printed
>
> [2.9363677646013846, 2.9489729031005703, 2.9689538729183949]
>
> After changing
>
> #define MAXSAVEDTUPLES 2000
>
> to
>
> #define MAXSAVEDTUPLES 0
>
> the times zoomed to
>
> [4.5894824930441587, 4.6023111649343242, 4.629560027293957
> I don't think "trivial" is the right word to use here,
> since it implies something that's of so little importance
> that it can be ignored. But the simple cases are precisely
> the ones where this wart hurts the most, so we can't
> ignore them.
I'd like to inject an example that might help make
Josiah> As for a solution, I find the "global means 'not local'"
Josiah> proposition is the least undesireable of the possibilities. It
Josiah> suffers from a change in semantics and potential name masking
Josiah> issues...
Pychecker and PyLint both already identify cases where bu
Talin wrote:
> To put it another way - I am an advocate of applying Claude Shannon's
> theory of information to language design. The highest level of
> compression should be used for expressions that occur the most frequently.
I believe the proposal in question would cause no
net worsening in t
Josiah Carlson wrote:
> I had hoped that there would be a response to my second (and I believe
> more applicable statement); "if the feature is really only useful for
> generally trivial cases *without* the feature, then making them even
> more trivial, I think, is a bit of over optimization."
I
[Jack Diederich]
>> PyObject_MALLOC does a good job of reusing small allocations but it
>> can't quite manage the same speed as a free list, especially for things that
>> have some extra setup involved (tuples have a free list for each length).
[Martin v. Löwis]
> I would question that statement,
Josiah Carlson wrote:
> I had hoped that there would be a response to my second (and I believe
> more applicable statement); "if the feature is really only useful for
> generally trivial cases *without* the feature, then making them even
> more trivial, I think, is a bit of over optimization."
It
23 matches
Mail list logo
