Carl Banks wrote:
> Py_BUF_REQUIRE_READONLY - Raise excpetion if the buffer is writable.
Is there a use case for this?
--
Greg
___
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe:
http://mai
Travis Oliphant wrote:
> Carl Banks wrote:
>> My recommendation is, any flag should turn on some circle in the Venn
>> diagram (it could be a circle I didn't draw--shaped arrays, for
>> example--but it should be *some* circle).
> I don't think your Venn diagram is broad enough and it un-necessarily
Travis E. Oliphant schrieb:
> I'd like to ask for access to Python SVN so that I can keep the PEP 3118
> up to date as well as to eventually make the changes needed for
> implementing the extended buffer protocol.
>
> I will email my public SSH key to the appropriate place.
Please send it to me
[Collin Winter]
> This should be fixed in r54844. The problem was that the availability
> of the urlfetch resource wasn't being checked early enough and so
> test_support.run_suite() was converting the ResourceDenied exception
> into a TestError instance. This wasn't showing up on other machines
>
+1
On 4/16/07, Travis E. Oliphant <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I'd like to ask for access to Python SVN so that I can keep the PEP 3118
> up to date as well as to eventually make the changes needed for
> implementing the extended buffer protocol.
>
> I have quite a bit of experience with the Pytho
I'd like to ask for access to Python SVN so that I can keep the PEP 3118
up to date as well as to eventually make the changes needed for
implementing the extended buffer protocol.
I have quite a bit of experience with the Python C-API and understand
many parts of the code base fairly well (thou
I just noticed r53997 (from some unit tests it broke), which disallowed things
like this:
class X(object):
def __repr__(self):
return "blah"
class Y(X, type):
pass
class Z:
__metaclass__ = Y
Making X classic eliminates the TypeError, and is probab
On 4/16/07, Brett Cannon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 4/16/07, Grig Gheorghiu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On 4/16/07, Brett Cannon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > Don't know what suddenly triggered this (nothing I did), but the code
> > > basically looks correct. What should be happening is
On 4/16/07, Grig Gheorghiu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 4/16/07, Brett Cannon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Don't know what suddenly triggered this (nothing I did), but the code
> basically looks correct. What should be happening is regrtest should be
> catching that exception and just saying t
On 4/16/07, Brett Cannon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Don't know what suddenly triggered this (nothing I did), but the code
> basically looks correct. What should be happening is regrtest should be
> catching that exception and just saying the test was skipped.
>
> The last commit on regrtest was
[Neal Norwitz]
> There were some SystemErrors on one of the Windows build slaves.
Not always, though -- looks to be rare.
> Does anyone have any ideas what might be the cause? I looked through about
> 5 previous logs on the same slave and didn't see the same problem.
I'm home today and fired up
On 4/16/07, Grig Gheorghiu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Almost all community buildbots have failed the test step due to a
failure in test_normalization. Here's a link to the community farm for
the trunk:
http://www.python.org/dev/buildbot/community/trunk/
And here's an example of a failure:
ht
Reading this message without the entire PEP in front of me showed some
confusing usage. (Details below) Most (but not all) I could resolve
from the PEP itself, but they could be clarified with different
constant names.
Counter Proposal at bottom, and specific questions in between.
Travis Olipha
Almost all community buildbots have failed the test step due to a
failure in test_normalization. Here's a link to the community farm for
the trunk:
http://www.python.org/dev/buildbot/community/trunk/
And here's an example of a failure:
http://www.python.org/dev/buildbot/community/trunk/x86%20OSX
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Apr 13, 2007, at 4:58 PM, Martin v. Löwis wrote:
>> I don't know, maybe it is. This one's extremely low risk as it only
>> affects certain platforms when test_pty is run verbosely. But if it
>> ain't cool, I'll back it out and re-apply after 2.5.
There were some SystemErrors on one of the Windows build slaves. Does
anyone have any ideas what might be the cause? I looked through about
5 previous logs on the same slave and didn't see the same problem. I
haven't seen this myself and I don't know if it's WIndows specific. I
don't know if th
On 4/12/07, Raymond Hettinger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Ralf, your issue is arising because of revision 53655 which fixes SF 1615701.
I have backed out this change for 2.5.1.
> Am leaving this open for others to discuss and decide. The old behavior was
> surprising to some, but the revised be
17 matches
Mail list logo
