Neal Norwitz wrote:
> http://python.org/sf/1513611
> xml.sax.ParseException weirdness in python 2.5b1. The following code
> doesn't work:
>
> from xml.sax import make_parser, SAXParseException
>
> parser = make_parser()
> try:
>parser.parse(StringIO('invalid'))
> except SAXParseException:
>
http://python.org/sf/1513611
xml.sax.ParseException weirdness in python 2.5b1. The following code
doesn't work:
from xml.sax import make_parser, SAXParseException
parser = make_parser()
try:
parser.parse(StringIO('invalid'))
except SAXParseException:
print 'caught it!'
Any comments?
n
On 7/9/06, Tim Peters <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Just to make life harder ;-), I should note that code, docs and tests
> for sys._current_frames() are done, on the tim-current_frames branch.
> All tests pass, and there are no leaks in the new code. It's just a
> NEWS blurb away from being just a
On 7/9/06, Talin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Talin wrote:
> > Some alternatives:
> >
> > use x
> > using x
> > with x -- recycle a keyword?
> > reuse x
> > use extant x
> > share x
> > common x
> > same x
> > borrow x
> > existing x
Of these,
Talin wrote:
> Some alternatives:
>
> use x
> using x
> with x -- recycle a keyword?
> reuse x
> use extant x
> share x
> common x
> same x
> borrow x
> existing x
>
> Although, to be perfectly honest, the longer this discussion goes on,
> th
Ka-Ping Yee wrote:
> On Sun, 9 Jul 2006, Andrew Koenig wrote:
>
>>>Sounds reasonable to me. If we're talking py3k I'd chuck "global" as a
>>>keyword though and replace it with something like "outer".
>>
>>I must say that I don't like "outer" any more than I like "global." The
>>problem is that i
Just to make life harder ;-), I should note that code, docs and tests
for sys._current_frames() are done, on the tim-current_frames branch.
All tests pass, and there are no leaks in the new code. It's just a
NEWS blurb away from being just another hectic release memory :-)
On 7/9/06, Neil Schemenauer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Sun, Jul 09, 2006 at 03:02:06PM -0700, Neal Norwitz wrote:
> > Do we care about this (after your checkin and with my fix to make
> > 32-63 bit values ints rather than longs):
> >
> > # 64 bit box
> > >>>minint = str(-sys.maxint - 1)
> > >>
On Sun, Jul 09, 2006 at 03:02:06PM -0700, Neal Norwitz wrote:
> Do we care about this (after your checkin and with my fix to make
> 32-63 bit values ints rather than longs):
>
> # 64 bit box
> >>>minint = str(-sys.maxint - 1)
> >>>minint
> '-9223372036854775808'
> >>>eval(minint)
> -92233720368547
Do we care about this (after your checkin and with my fix to make
32-63 bit values ints rather than longs):
# 64 bit box
>>> minint = str(-sys.maxint - 1)
>>> minint
'-9223372036854775808'
>>> eval(minint)
-9223372036854775808
>>> eval('-(%s)' % minint[1:])
-9223372036854775808L
n
--
On 7/9/06, N
[Neil Schemenauer]
> The bug was reported by Armin in SF #1333982:
>
> the literal -2147483648 (i.e. the value of -sys.maxint-1) gives
> a long in 2.5, but an int in <= 2.4.
That actually depends on how far back you go. It was also a long "at
the start". IIRC, Fred or I added hackery to
I think it ought to be an int, like before.
--Guido
On 7/9/06, Neil Schemenauer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> The bug was reported by Armin in SF #1333982:
>
> the literal -2147483648 (i.e. the value of -sys.maxint-1) gives
> a long in 2.5, but an int in <= 2.4.
>
> I have a fix but I wond
The bug was reported by Armin in SF #1333982:
the literal -2147483648 (i.e. the value of -sys.maxint-1) gives
a long in 2.5, but an int in <= 2.4.
I have a fix but I wonder if it's the right thing to do. I suppose
returning a long has the chance of breaking someone code. Here's
the test
Patch / Bug Summary
___
Patches : 393 open (+15) / 3315 closed (+17) / 3708 total (+32)
Bugs: 908 open (+22) / 5975 closed (+49) / 6883 total (+71)
RFE : 223 open ( -1) / 229 closed ( +2) / 452 total ( +1)
New / Reopened Patches
__
test_grp.
On Sun, 9 Jul 2006, Andrew Koenig wrote:
> > Sounds reasonable to me. If we're talking py3k I'd chuck "global" as a
> > keyword though and replace it with something like "outer".
>
> I must say that I don't like "outer" any more than I like "global." The
> problem is that in both cases we are sel
On 7/8/06, Talin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Brett Cannon wrote:> On 7/7/06, Guido van Rossum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:>> On 7/8/06, Ka-Ping Yee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:>> > I'd like the answer to be yes. It sounded for a while like this>> > was not part of Brett's plan, though. Now i'm not so
> So, if I understand correctly, in the presence of a global statement
> search
> just goes up the lexical chain looking for the first occurrence of the
> variable to modify?
>
> x = 0
> def f():
> x = 1
> def g():
> global x
> x = 2
> pr
[Anthony Baxter]
> Hm. Would it be a smaller change to expose head_mutex so that the
> external module could use it?
No, in part because `head_mutex` may not exist (depends on the build
type). What an external module would actually need is 3 new public C
API functions, callable workalikes for pys
Ka-Ping Yee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Client-side web scripting tends to have a callback/continuation-ish
> concurrency style because it has to deal with network transactions
> (which can stall for long periods of time) in a user interface that
> is expected to stay always responsive. The Fir
Richard Jones wrote:
> On 09/07/2006, at 9:05 AM, Anthony Baxter wrote:
>> I'm really not keen on this seeming tide of new features that
>> seem to be popping up. We're only a few days away from the second and
>> final planned beta - it's getting _awfully_ late to be slotting in
>> new features.
>
On 09/07/2006, at 9:05 AM, Anthony Baxter wrote:
> I'm really not keen on this seeming tide of new features that
> seem to be popping up. We're only a few days away from the second and
> final planned beta - it's getting _awfully_ late to be slotting in
> new features.
And besides, one person has
On Sunday 09 July 2006 11:31, Tim Peters wrote:
> Back in:
>
>
> http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2005-March/051856.html
>
> I made a pitch for adding:
>
> sys._current_frames()
>
> to 2.5, which would return a dict mapping each thread's id to that
> thread's current (Python) fra
22 matches
Mail list logo
