On Thu, 16 Sep 2010 23:45:12 -0400, Terry Reedy wrote:
> Based on the discussion so far, I think you should go ahead and
> implement the API agreed on by the mail sig both because is *has* been
> agreed on (and thinking about the wsgi discussion, that seems to be a
> major achievement) and beca
On Thu, 16 Sep 2010 21:53:17 -0400, Barry Warsaw wrote:
> And of course, what happens if the original subject is in one charset and the
> prefix is in an incompatible one? Then you end up with a wire format of two
> RFC 2047 encoded words separated by whitespace. You have to keep those chunks
>
Based on the discussion so far, I think you should go ahead and
implement the API agreed on by the mail sig both because is *has* been
agreed on (and thinking about the wsgi discussion, that seems to be a
major achievement) and because it seems sensible to me also, as far as I
understand it. Th
On Fri, 17 Sep 2010 00:05:12 +0200, Antoine Pitrou wrote:
> On Thu, 16 Sep 2010 16:51:58 -0400
> "R. David Murray" wrote:
> >
> > What do we store in the model? We could say that the model is always
> > text. But then we lose information about the original bytes message,
> > and we can't reprod
On 9/16/2010 3:07 PM, Jacob Kaplan-Moss wrote:
On 16 September 2010 07:16, Terry Reedy wrote:
I'm not working to get Django running on Python 3.1 because I don't
feel confident I'll be able to put any apps I write into production.
Why not? Since the I/O speed problem is fixed, I have no idea
On Fri, 17 Sep 2010 11:34:26 am R. David Murray wrote:
> Perhaps another difference is that in my mind *as an application
> developer*, the "real" email message consists of unicode headers and
> message bodies, with attachments that are sometimes binary, and that
> the wire-format is this formalize
On Sep 16, 2010, at 09:34 PM, R. David Murray wrote:
>Say we start with this bytes input:
>
>To: Glyph Lefkowitz
>From: "R. David Murray"
>Subject: =?utf-8?q?p=F6stal?=
>
>A simple message.
>
>Part of the responsibility of the email module is to provide that
>in text form on dema
On Thu, 16 Sep 2010 18:11:30 -0400, Glyph Lefkowitz
wrote:
> On Sep 16, 2010, at 4:51 PM, R. David Murray wrote:
>
> > Given a message, there are many times you want to serialize it as text
> > (for example, for presentation in a UI). You could provide alternate
> > serialization methods to get
On Sep 16, 2010, at 7:34 PM, Barry Warsaw wrote:
> On Sep 16, 2010, at 06:11 PM, Glyph Lefkowitz wrote:
>
>> That may be a handy way to deal with some grotty internal
>> implementation details, but having a 'decode()' method is broken. The
>> thing I care about, as a consumer of this API, is th
On Sep 16, 2010, at 06:11 PM, Glyph Lefkowitz wrote:
>That may be a handy way to deal with some grotty internal
>implementation details, but having a 'decode()' method is broken. The
>thing I care about, as a consumer of this API, is that there is a
>clearly defined "Message" interface, which giv
On Sep 16, 2010, at 4:51 PM, R. David Murray wrote:
> Given a message, there are many times you want to serialize it as text
> (for example, for presentation in a UI). You could provide alternate
> serialization methods to get text out on demandbut then what if
> someone wants to push that te
USAOn Thu, Sep 16, 2010 at 16:36, Victor Stinner
wrote:
> Le jeudi 16 septembre 2010 23:10:22, Tom Browder a écrit :
>> I'm attempting to file a bug but keep getting:
>
> File another bug about this bug!
I did, and eventually discovered the problem: I tried to "nosy" Barry
as requested by adding
On Thu, 16 Sep 2010 16:51:58 -0400
"R. David Murray" wrote:
>
> What do we store in the model? We could say that the model is always
> text. But then we lose information about the original bytes message,
> and we can't reproduce it. For various reasons (mailman being a big one),
> this is not a
> If you're talking about distutils2 on Python 3, then of course
> anything goes: backward compatibility isn't an issue. For 2.x, not
> writing the files would indeed produce backward compatibility problems.
I was talking about distutils in 3.2 (or in the release where
wsgiref.egg-info goes awa
Le jeudi 16 septembre 2010 23:10:22, Tom Browder a écrit :
> I'm attempting to file a bug but keep getting:
File another bug about this bug!
--
Victor Stinner
http://www.haypocalc.com/
___
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python.org
http://mail.pytho
I'm attempting to file a bug but keep getting:
An error has occurred
A problem was encountered processing your request. The tracker
maintainers have been notified of the problem.
-Tom
Thomas M. Browder, Jr.
Niceville, Florida
USA
___
Python-Dev mailin
On Thu, 16 Sep 2010 17:40:53 +0200, Antoine Pitrou wrote:
> On Thu, 16 Sep 2010 11:30:12 -0400
> "R. David Murray" wrote:
> >
> > And then BaseHeader uses self.lit.colon, etc, when manipulating strings.
> > It also has to use slice notation rather than indexing when looking at
> > individual cha
At 10:18 PM 9/16/2010 +0200, Ãric Araujo wrote:
Le 15/09/2010 21:45, Tarek Ziadé a écrit : > Could we remove in
any case the wsgiref.egg-info file ? Since we've > been working on a
new format for that (PEP 376), that should be > starting to get used
in the coming years, it'll be a bit of a >
On Sep 16, 2010, at 02:56 PM, Tom Browder wrote:
>On Thu, Sep 16, 2010 at 14:36, Barry Warsaw wrote:
>> When you say "installed python 2.7" do you mean the one you
>> installed to /usr/local from a from-source build, or something else
>> (e.g. a Python 2.7 package perhaps)?
>
>It was the released
Le 15/09/2010 21:45, Tarek Ziadé a écrit :
> Could we remove in any case the wsgiref.egg-info file ? Since we've
> been working on a new format for that (PEP 376), that should be
> starting to get used in the coming years, it'll be a bit of a
> non-sense to have that metadata file in the sdtlib shi
On 9/16/2010 3:07 PM, Jacob Kaplan-Moss wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 16, 2010 at 9:59 AM, Paul Moore wrote:
>> On 16 September 2010 07:16, Terry Reedy wrote:
I'm not working to get Django running on Python 3.1 because I don't
feel confident I'll be able to put any apps I write into production.
On Thu, Sep 16, 2010 at 14:36, Barry Warsaw wrote:
> On Sep 16, 2010, at 01:41 PM, Tom Browder wrote:
>
>>I am trying to rebujild the 2.7 maintenance branch and get this error
>>on Ubuntu 10.04.1 LTS:
>
> I just tried this on my vanilla 10.04.1 system. I checked out release27-maint
> ran configur
On 16/09/2010, Guido van Rossum wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 16, 2010 at 11:16 AM, Toshio Kuratomi
> wrote:
>> You were talking about encodings that were supersets of 7-bit ASCII.
>> I think Martin was demonstrating a byte string that was a superset of
>> 7-bit
>> ASCII being fed to a stdlib function whi
On Sep 16, 2010, at 01:41 PM, Tom Browder wrote:
>I am trying to rebujild the 2.7 maintenance branch and get this error
>on Ubuntu 10.04.1 LTS:
I just tried this on my vanilla 10.04.1 system. I checked out release27-maint
ran configure && make. It built without problem.
>XXX lineno: 743, opcod
Please file the bug and it can be discussed further there.
On Thu, Sep 16, 2010 at 12:05, Tom Browder wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 16, 2010 at 13:48, Brett Cannon wrote:
>> Go ahead and file the bug, but chances are that some other installed
>> Python is executing the code and picking up the .pyc files
On Thu, Sep 16, 2010 at 11:16 AM, Toshio Kuratomi wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 16, 2010 at 10:56:56AM -0700, Guido van Rossum wrote:
>> On Thu, Sep 16, 2010 at 10:46 AM, Martin (gzlist)
>> wrote:
>> > On 16/09/2010, Guido van Rossum wrote:
>> >>
>> >> In all cases I can imagine where such polymorphic f
On Thu, Sep 16, 2010 at 9:59 AM, Paul Moore wrote:
> On 16 September 2010 07:16, Terry Reedy wrote:
>>> I'm not working to get Django running on Python 3.1 because I don't
>>> feel confident I'll be able to put any apps I write into production.
>>
>> Why not? Since the I/O speed problem is fixed,
On Thu, Sep 16, 2010 at 13:48, Brett Cannon wrote:
> Go ahead and file the bug, but chances are that some other installed
> Python is executing the code and picking up the .pyc files which have
> bytecode new to Python 2.7.
But isn't that a problem with the build system? It seems to me it
should
Go ahead and file the bug, but chances are that some other installed
Python is executing the code and picking up the .pyc files which have
bytecode new to Python 2.7.
On Thu, Sep 16, 2010 at 11:41, Tom Browder wrote:
> I am trying to rebujild the 2.7 maintenance branch and get this error
> on Ubu
On Thu, Sep 16, 2010 at 06:28, Nick Coghlan wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 16, 2010 at 10:26 PM, Antoine Pitrou wrote:
>> Why won't you feel confident? Are there any specific issues (apart from
>> the lack of a WSGI PEP)?
>> If they are technical problems, they should be reported on the bug
>> tracker.
>>
I am trying to rebujild the 2.7 maintenance branch and get this error
on Ubuntu 10.04.1 LTS:
XXX lineno: 743, opcode: 0
Traceback (most recent call last):
File "/usr/local/src/python-2.7-maint-svn/Lib/site.py", line 62, in
import os
File "/usr/local/src/python-2.7-maint-svn/Lib/os.py", line
At 12:08 PM 9/16/2010 +0100, Chris Withers wrote:
...I'd thought that the "correct names" for distributions would have
been documented in one of:
http://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0345
http://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0376
http://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0386
...but having read them, I d
On Thu, Sep 16, 2010 at 10:56:56AM -0700, Guido van Rossum wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 16, 2010 at 10:46 AM, Martin (gzlist)
> wrote:
> > On 16/09/2010, Guido van Rossum wrote:
> >>
> >> In all cases I can imagine where such polymorphic functions make
> >> sense, the necessary and sufficient assumption
At 12:08 PM 9/16/2010 +0100, Chris Withers wrote:
Following on from this question:
http://twistedmatrix.com/pipermail/twisted-python/2010-September/022877.html
...I'd thought that the "correct names" for distributions would have
been documented in one of:
...
Where are the standards for thi
On Thu, Sep 16, 2010 at 10:46 AM, Martin (gzlist) wrote:
> On 16/09/2010, Guido van Rossum wrote:
>>
>> In all cases I can imagine where such polymorphic functions make
>> sense, the necessary and sufficient assumption should be that the
>> encoding is a superset of 7-bit(*) ASCII. This includes
On 16/09/2010, Guido van Rossum wrote:
>
> In all cases I can imagine where such polymorphic functions make
> sense, the necessary and sufficient assumption should be that the
> encoding is a superset of 7-bit(*) ASCII. This includes UTF-8, all
> Latin-N variant, and AFAIK also the popular CJK enc
On Thu, Sep 16, 2010 at 8:42 AM, Toshio Kuratomi wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 16, 2010 at 09:52:48AM -0400, Barry Warsaw wrote:
>> On Sep 16, 2010, at 11:28 PM, Nick Coghlan wrote:
>>
>> >There are some APIs that should be able to handle bytes *or* strings,
>> >but the current use of string literals in th
On 16/09/2010 16:37, Georg Brandl wrote:
That reminds me of the undocumented re.Scanner -- which is meant to do
exactly this. Wouldn't it be about time to document or remove it?
There was a long discussion about this on the bug tracker (the
suggestion to document it was rejected at the time
On Thu, 16 Sep 2010 11:30:12 -0400
"R. David Murray" wrote:
>
> And then BaseHeader uses self.lit.colon, etc, when manipulating strings.
> It also has to use slice notation rather than indexing when looking at
> individual characters, which is a PITA but not terrible.
>
> I'm not saying this is
On Thu, Sep 16, 2010 at 09:52:48AM -0400, Barry Warsaw wrote:
> On Sep 16, 2010, at 11:28 PM, Nick Coghlan wrote:
>
> >There are some APIs that should be able to handle bytes *or* strings,
> >but the current use of string literals in their implementation means
> >that bytes don't work. This turns
That reminds me of the undocumented re.Scanner -- which is meant to do
exactly this. Wouldn't it be about time to document or remove it?
Georg
Am 16.09.2010 14:02, schrieb raymond.hettinger:
> Author: raymond.hettinger
> Date: Thu Sep 16 14:02:17 2010
> New Revision: 84847
>
> Log:
> Add tokeni
On Thu, 16 Sep 2010 17:27:50 +0200
Georg Brandl wrote:
> Maybe you want to mention *who* warns?
I suppose it's the -3 flag:
$ ~/cpython/27/python -3 -c "1/0"
-c:1: DeprecationWarning: classic int division
Traceback (most recent call last):
File "", line 1, in
ZeroDivisionError: integer divisi
Maybe you want to mention *who* warns?
Georg
Am 13.09.2010 10:20, schrieb florent.xicluna:
> Author: florent.xicluna
> Date: Mon Sep 13 10:20:19 2010
> New Revision: 84771
>
> Log:
> Silence warning about 1/0
>
> Modified:
>python/branches/release27-maint/Lib/test/test_io.py
>
> Modified:
On Thu, 16 Sep 2010 09:52:48 -0400, Barry Warsaw wrote:
> On Sep 16, 2010, at 11:28 PM, Nick Coghlan wrote:
> >There are some APIs that should be able to handle bytes *or* strings,
> >but the current use of string literals in their implementation means
> >that bytes don't work. This turns out to b
On 16 September 2010 07:16, Terry Reedy wrote:
>> I'm not working to get Django running on Python 3.1 because I don't
>> feel confident I'll be able to put any apps I write into production.
>
> Why not? Since the I/O speed problem is fixed, I have no idea what you are
> referring to. Please do be
On Sep 16, 2010, at 11:28 PM, Nick Coghlan wrote:
>There are some APIs that should be able to handle bytes *or* strings,
>but the current use of string literals in their implementation means
>that bytes don't work. This turns out to be a PITA for some networking
>related code which really wants to
On Thu, Sep 16, 2010 at 10:26 PM, Antoine Pitrou wrote:
> Why won't you feel confident? Are there any specific issues (apart from
> the lack of a WSGI PEP)?
> If they are technical problems, they should be reported on the bug
> tracker.
> If they are representational, cultural or psychological iss
On Thu, Sep 16, 2010 at 8:26 AM, Antoine Pitrou wrote:
> On Wed, 15 Sep 2010 19:55:16 -0500
> Jacob Kaplan-Moss wrote:
>> On Wed, Sep 15, 2010 at 6:31 PM, Jesse Noller wrote:
>> > My goal (personally) is to make sure python 3.2 is perfectly good for use
>> > in web applications, and is therefor
On Wed, 15 Sep 2010 19:55:16 -0500
Jacob Kaplan-Moss wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 15, 2010 at 6:31 PM, Jesse Noller wrote:
> > My goal (personally) is to make sure python 3.2 is perfectly good for use
> > in web applications, and is therefore a much more interesting porting
> > target for web projects/
Hi All,
Following on from this question:
http://twistedmatrix.com/pipermail/twisted-python/2010-September/022877.html
...I'd thought that the "correct names" for distributions would have
been documented in one of:
http://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0345
http://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-037
> Why not? Since the I/O speed problem is fixed, I have no idea what you
> are referring to. Please do be concrete.
There's still a performance issue with pickling, but if issue 3873 could
be resolved, Python 3 would actually be faster there.
- Hagen
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital
51 matches
Mail list logo
