Meador Inge schrieb:
> Hi All,
>
> Recently some discussion began in the issue 3132 thread (
> http://bugs.python.org/issue3132) regarding
> implementation of the new struct string syntax for PEP 3118. Mark Dickinson
> suggested that I bring the discussion on over to Python Dev. Below is a
> sum
On approximately 2/25/2010 8:51 PM, came the following characters from
the keyboard of Meador Inge:
Hi All,
Recently some discussion began in the issue 3132 thread
(http://bugs.python.org/issue3132) regarding
implementation of the new struct string syntax for PEP 3118. Mark
Dickinson
suggeste
Hi All,
Recently some discussion began in the issue 3132 thread (
http://bugs.python.org/issue3132) regarding
implementation of the new struct string syntax for PEP 3118. Mark Dickinson
suggested that I bring the discussion on over to Python Dev. Below is a
summary
of the questions\comments from
Michael Foord wrote:
I thought we agreed at the language summit that if a .pyc was in the
place of the source file it *could* be imported from - making pyc only
distributions possible.
Ah, that's okay, then. Sorry about the panic!
--
Greg
___
Pytho
On Thu, Feb 25, 2010 at 3:50 PM, Michael Foord
wrote:
> On 25/02/2010 23:56, Greg Ewing wrote:
>>
>> Barry Warsaw wrote:
>>
>>> We discussed this at Pycon and agreed that we will not support
>>> source-less
>>> deployments by default. The source file must exist or it will be an
>>> ImportError.
>>
On 25/02/2010 23:56, Greg Ewing wrote:
Barry Warsaw wrote:
We discussed this at Pycon and agreed that we will not support
source-less
deployments by default. The source file must exist or it will be an
ImportError.
This does not mean source-less deployments are not possible though. To
support
Barry Warsaw wrote:
We discussed this at Pycon and agreed that we will not support source-less
deployments by default. The source file must exist or it will be an
ImportError.
This does not mean source-less deployments are not possible though. To
support this use case, you'd have to write a c
On Feb 03, 2010, at 12:42 PM, Brett Cannon wrote:
>So what happens when only bytecode is present?
We discussed this at Pycon and agreed that we will not support source-less
deployments by default. The source file must exist or it will be an
ImportError.
This does not mean source-less deployment
On Feb 03, 2010, at 01:07 PM, Antoine Pitrou wrote:
>Well, I don't think we need another transition... Just keep __file__ for the
>source file, and add a __cache__ or __compiled__ attribute for the compiled
>file(s).
>Since there might be several compiled files for a single source file (for
>exa
On Feb 25, 2010, at 2:47 PM, Antoine Pitrou wrote:
Le Thu, 25 Feb 2010 14:38:42 -0500, Doug Hellmann a écrit :
I have commit access, can I just check in the patch?
If you are sure of yourself, you can. But in this case see my
comment on
the tracker.
OK, good point. I'll see about a te
Doug Hellmann wrote:
>
> On Feb 25, 2010, at 2:34 PM, Martin v. Löwis wrote:
>
>> Doug Hellmann wrote:
>>> We've recently run into an issue with subprocess on Solaris, as
>>> described (by an earlier reporter) in issue #7242. The patch there
>>> solves our problem, and has been verified to work b
Le Thu, 25 Feb 2010 14:38:42 -0500, Doug Hellmann a écrit :
>
> I have commit access, can I just check in the patch?
If you are sure of yourself, you can. But in this case see my comment on
the tracker.
Regards
Antoine.
___
Python-Dev mailing list
P
On Feb 25, 2010, at 2:34 PM, Martin v. Löwis wrote:
Doug Hellmann wrote:
We've recently run into an issue with subprocess on Solaris, as
described (by an earlier reporter) in issue #7242. The patch there
solves our problem, and has been verified to work by other users as
well. What's the stat
Doug Hellmann wrote:
> We've recently run into an issue with subprocess on Solaris, as
> described (by an earlier reporter) in issue #7242. The patch there
> solves our problem, and has been verified to work by other users as
> well. What's the status of the ticket? Is there anything I can do to
Maciej Fijalkowski wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 24, 2010 at 6:35 AM, Nick Coghlan wrote:
>> Tarek Ziadé wrote:
>>> That makes me wonder : why don't we have a sys.implementation variable ?
>>> (cython/jython/pypi), since we can have several values for cython in
>>> sys.platform
>
> Hello.
>
> So I propos
Antoine Pitrou wrote:
> Le Wed, 24 Feb 2010 12:13:10 +, Florent Xicluna a écrit :
>> Hello,
>>
>> I am a semi-regular contributor for Python: I have contributed many
>> patches since end of last year, some of them were reviewed by Antoine.
>
> Semi-regular is quite humble. You have been cranki
16 matches
Mail list logo