[Steven D'Aprano]
The suggested
semantics for set.get() with no arguments, as I understand them, are:
(1) it will only fail if the set is empty;
Just like next() except that next() gives you the option to supply a default
and can be used on any iterator (perhaps iter(s) or itertools.cycle(s)
On Wed, 28 Oct 2009 04:47:59 am Raymond Hettinger wrote:
> A dict.get() can be meaningfully used in a loop (because the key can
> vary). A set.get() returns the same value over and over again
> (because there is no key).
I don't believe anyone has requested those semantics. The suggested
semanti
On Thu, Oct 29, 2009 at 8:31 PM, R. David Murray wrote:
> I'd say that particular one is a bug in the tests. If /dev/shm is
> not available and is required, then the tests should be skipped with
> an appropriate message. It would also secondarily be an issue with
> the buildbot fleet, since mul
On 29 Oct, 11:41 pm, jnol...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Oct 29, 2009 at 7:04 PM, wrote:
On 02:30 pm, solip...@pitrou.net wrote:
Hello,
What do you think of creating a "buildbot" category in the tracker?
There
are
often problems on specific buildbots which would be nice to track,
but
there
On Thu, 29 Oct 2009 at 19:41, Jesse Noller wrote:
Then again, I know for a fact certain tests fail ONLY on certain
buildbots because of the way they're configured. For example, certain
multiprocessing tests will fail if /dev/shm isn't accessible on Linux,
and several of the buildbosts are in tigh
Bruno Harbulot wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I would like to ask a few questions and suggestions regarding the ssl
> module (in Python 2.6). (I gather from [1] that there is some effort
> going on to enhance the ssl API, but I'm not sure if this is the right
> place to discuss it.)
>
> Is there a place w
On Thu, Oct 29, 2009 at 7:04 PM, wrote:
> On 02:30 pm, solip...@pitrou.net wrote:
>>
>> Hello,
>>
>> What do you think of creating a "buildbot" category in the tracker? There
>> are
>> often problems on specific buildbots which would be nice to track, but
>> there's
>> nowhere to do so.
>
> Is yo
On 02:30 pm, solip...@pitrou.net wrote:
Hello,
What do you think of creating a "buildbot" category in the tracker?
There are
often problems on specific buildbots which would be nice to track, but
there's
nowhere to do so.
Is your idea that this would be for tracking issues with the *bots*
Martin v. Löwis v.loewis.de> writes:
>
> > What do you think of creating a "buildbot" category in the tracker? There
> > are
> > often problems on specific buildbots which would be nice to track, but
there's
> > nowhere to do so.
>
> Do you have any specific reports that you would want to class
Hello,
I would like to ask a few questions and suggestions regarding the ssl
module (in Python 2.6). (I gather from [1] that there is some effort
going on to enhance the ssl API, but I'm not sure if this is the right
place to discuss it.)
Like other Python users, I was a bit surprised by the
> What do you think of creating a "buildbot" category in the tracker? There are
> often problems on specific buildbots which would be nice to track, but there's
> nowhere to do so.
Do you have any specific reports that you would want to classify with
this category?
Regards,
Martin
___
Daniel Stutzbach wrote:
> It does. If I recall correctly, in addition to Visual Studio Express, I
> also needed the Windows SDK (which is also free as in beer).
The VS 2008 Express Edition is sufficient to build X86 binaries on
Windows. The express edition doesn't support X64_86. though.
Christi
On Thu, Oct 29, 2009 at 6:57 AM, Antoine Pitrou wrote:
> If it's just a matter of building and testing it you don't need any MSDN
> subscription, you just need Visual Studio Express which is free (as in
> free beer...). I don't know if it allows you to build an installer
> though.
>
It does. If
Hello,
What do you think of creating a "buildbot" category in the tracker? There are
often problems on specific buildbots which would be nice to track, but there's
nowhere to do so.
Regards
Antoine.
___
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python.org
Steve Holden gmail.com> writes:
>
> I just wondered, with the recent flood of new MSDN subscriptions loosed
> on the developer community, how many people have installed the required
> version of Visual Studio and built Python for Windows from source? Not
> being that familiar with the process mys
Lennart Regebro wrote:
> 2009/10/28 Antoine Pitrou :
>> pobox.com> writes:
>>> >> So 2.7 support will for the most part be a case not of supporting
>>> >> Python versions, but Python *users*.
>>>
>>> Antoine> That's still not a good reason to backport nonlocal. The same
>>> Antoine
2009/10/28 Antoine Pitrou :
> pobox.com> writes:
>>
>> >> So 2.7 support will for the most part be a case not of supporting
>> >> Python versions, but Python *users*.
>>
>> Antoine> That's still not a good reason to backport nonlocal. The same
>> Antoine> reasoning could be used to
17 matches
Mail list logo
