Re: [Python-Dev] run time error anlysis of python source code

2009-06-21 Thread Greg Ewing
Daniel Diniz wrote: Apocalypse Python !!, you say? Maybe something that conveys a security message or anything that doesn't relate to the end of the world could work better. I guess the idea is meant to be that it's safe enough to use for something that would result in the end of the world if

Re: [Python-Dev] run time error anlysis of python source code

2009-06-21 Thread Antoine Pitrou
Maciej Fijalkowski gmail.com> writes: > > Is py3k branch even passing all tests on all buildbots all the time? As much as other branches do (that is, not much, due to the flakiness of some of the tests and the lack of buildbot maintenance). > I don't think > svn head is the right thing to look

Re: [Python-Dev] run time error anlysis of python source code

2009-06-21 Thread Maciej Fijalkowski
On Sun, Jun 21, 2009 at 5:05 PM, Daniel Diniz wrote: > Hi David, > > wrote: >> >> It appears that one possibility of investigation into the development of a >> safety-critical variant of the python language > > There is some interesting work related to a safety-critical variant of Python. > >> wou

Re: [Python-Dev] run time error anlysis of python source code

2009-06-21 Thread Daniel Diniz
Hi David, wrote: > > It appears that one possibility of investigation into the development of a > safety-critical variant of the python language There is some interesting work related to a safety-critical variant of Python. > would be to conduct run time > error analysis of the source code that

Re: [Python-Dev] xmlrpc improvements

2009-06-21 Thread Terry Reedy
Fredrik Lundh wrote: On Sat, Jun 20, 2009 at 6:57 PM, "Martin v. Löwis" wrote: Fredrik Lundh wrote: I think you really need to get Fredrik Lundh to comment on it. If he can't predict when he'll be able to review the changes, maybe he can accept releasing control of xmlrpclib. Pointer to the pa

Re: [Python-Dev] run time error anlysis of python source code

2009-06-21 Thread Terry Reedy
omega_force2...@yahoo.com wrote: It appears that one possibility of investigation into the development of a safety-critical variant of the python language would be to conduct run time error analysis of the source code that is responsible for producing the python language. Therefore, I will no

Re: [Python-Dev] xmlrpc improvements

2009-06-21 Thread Fredrik Lundh
On Sat, Jun 20, 2009 at 6:57 PM, "Martin v. Löwis" wrote: > While I have your attention, please also review > > http://bugs.python.org/issue6233 I'm pretty sure that fix is the wrong fix - afaik, _encode is used to encode tag/attribute names, and charrefs don't work in that context. ___

Re: [Python-Dev] Binary Operator for New-Style String Formatting

2009-06-21 Thread Eric Smith
I'm against syntax for this, for all the reasons stated by others. Jerry Chen wrote: Just one last note: I think my end goal here was to preserve the visual clarity and separation between format string and format parameters, as I much prefer: "%s %s %s" % (1, 2, 3) over "{0} {1} {2}".format(1

Re: [Python-Dev] xmlrpc improvements

2009-06-21 Thread Fredrik Lundh
On Sat, Jun 20, 2009 at 6:57 PM, "Martin v. Löwis" wrote: > Fredrik Lundh wrote: >>> I think you really need to get Fredrik Lundh to comment on it. If he >>> can't predict when he'll be able to review the changes, maybe he can >>> accept releasing control of xmlrpclib. >> >> Pointer to the patch? >

Re: [Python-Dev] Binary Operator for New-Style String Formatting

2009-06-21 Thread Martin v. Löwis
> For better or for worse, I have created a patch against the py3k trunk > which introduces a binary operator '@' as an alternative syntax for > the new string formatting system introduced by PEP 3101 ("Advanced > String Formatting"). [1] I'd like to join everybody else who said that this would be

Re: [Python-Dev] Binary Operator for New-Style String Formatting

2009-06-21 Thread Jerry Chen
Ah, the people have spoken! On Sun, Jun 21, 2009 at 2:12 PM, Terry Reedy wrote: > The place to float trial balloons is the python-ideas list. I'll put this one to rest, and as mentioned, will direct any future suggestions to python-ideas instead of here. Most of the arguments against my proposal

[Python-Dev] run time error anlysis of python source code

2009-06-21 Thread omega_force2003
To All,     It appears that one possibility of investigation into the development of a safety-critical variant of the python language would be to conduct run time error analysis of the source code that is responsible for producing the python language.  Therefore, I will now conduct these run t

Re: [Python-Dev] Binary Operator for New-Style String Formatting

2009-06-21 Thread Terry Reedy
Jerry Chen wrote: Hello all, For better or for worse, I have created a patch against the py3k trunk which introduces a binary operator '@' as an alternative syntax for the new string formatting system introduced by PEP 3101 ("Advanced String Formatting"). [1] For common cases, this syntax shoul

Re: [Python-Dev] Binary Operator for New-Style String Formatting

2009-06-21 Thread R. David Murray
On Sun, 21 Jun 2009 at 12:36, Jerry Chen wrote: For better or for worse, I have created a patch against the py3k trunk which introduces a binary operator '@' as an alternative syntax for the new string formatting system introduced by PEP 3101 ("Advanced String Formatting"). [1] It seems to me t

Re: [Python-Dev] Binary Operator for New-Style String Formatting

2009-06-21 Thread Antoine Pitrou
Hello, > For better or for worse, I have created a patch against the py3k trunk > which introduces a binary operator '@' as an alternative syntax for > the new string formatting system introduced by PEP 3101 ("Advanced > String Formatting"). [1] While many people find the new format() tedious to

Re: [Python-Dev] Binary Operator for New-Style String Formatting

2009-06-21 Thread Steven Bethard
On Sun, Jun 21, 2009 at 1:36 PM, Jerry Chen wrote: > QUICK EXAMPLES > >    >>> "{} {} {}" @ (1, 2, 3) >    '1 2 3' > >    >>> "foo {qux} baz" @ {"qux": "bar"} >    'foo bar baz' > > One of the main complaints of a binary operator in PEP 3101 was the > inability to mix named and unnamed arguments: >

[Python-Dev] Binary Operator for New-Style String Formatting

2009-06-21 Thread Jerry Chen
Hello all, For better or for worse, I have created a patch against the py3k trunk which introduces a binary operator '@' as an alternative syntax for the new string formatting system introduced by PEP 3101 ("Advanced String Formatting"). [1] For common cases, this syntax should be as simple and a