On Tue, Jul 26, 2011 at 18:59, jason.coombs wrote:
> http://hg.python.org/cpython/rev/4feb889d3bed
> changeset: 71506:4feb889d3bed
> user:Jason R. Coombs
> date:Tue Jul 26 11:38:04 2011 -0400
> summary:
> Issue #10639: reindent.py tool now accepts a --newline option to specify
On Fri, Jul 29, 2011 at 3:24 PM, Eli Bendersky wrote:
> I propose to just move 3K's docs to the devguide, and make both doc pages
> (in 3K and 2.7) point to it. Is this acceptable?
Yeah, just include a note in the devguide version saying that anything
added in 3.2 or later may not be available wh
On Fri, Jul 29, 2011 at 03:39, Nick Coghlan wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 29, 2011 at 7:33 AM, Brett Cannon wrote:
> >> However, is there any reason why test.support itself shouldn't be
> renamed
> >> test._support, or possibly _test.support, so that the *entire* suite is
> >> marked as a private impleme
Brett Cannon, 28.07.2011 23:49:
On Thu, Jul 28, 2011 at 11:25, Matt wrote:
- What policies are in place for keeping parity with other HTML
parsers (such as those in web browsers)?
There aren't any beyond "it would be nice".
[...]
It's more of an issue of someone caring enough to do the coding
On Fri, Jul 29, 2011 at 7:33 AM, Brett Cannon wrote:
>> However, is there any reason why test.support itself shouldn't be renamed
>> test._support, or possibly _test.support, so that the *entire* suite is
>> marked as a private implementation detail?
>
> Technically no for the _test idea, although
On Thu, Jul 28, 2011 at 11:25, Matt wrote:
> Hello all,
>
> I wanted to ask a few questions and start a discussion about HTML5
> support within the HTMLParser class(es). Over on issue 670664, an
> inconsistency with the way browsers and the HTMLParser parse script
> and style tags was discovered.
On Wed, Jul 27, 2011 at 16:53, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
> Eli Bendersky wrote:
>
> Sure, but I'm still leery of two functions with the same name doing acting
>> slightly differently.
>>
>
>
> and then in a later post:
>
>
> As I mentioned elsewhere, it's not good practice to have two functions
>>
Hello all,
I wanted to ask a few questions and start a discussion about HTML5
support within the HTMLParser class(es). Over on issue 670664, an
inconsistency with the way browsers and the HTMLParser parse script
and style tags was discovered. Currently, HTMLParser adheres strictly
to the HTML4 sta
Victor Stinner wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Three weeks ago, I posted a draft on my PEP on this mailing list. I
> tried to include all remarks you made, and the PEP is now online:
>
>http://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0400/
>
> It's now unclear to me if the PEP will be accepted or rejected. I don't
> kn
Le 28/07/2011 11:03, M.-A. Lemburg a écrit :
Victor Stinner wrote:
Hi,
Three weeks ago, I posted a draft on my PEP on this mailing list. I
tried to include all remarks you made, and the PEP is now online:
http://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0400/
It's now unclear to me if the PEP will be a
Le 28/07/2011 06:10, Benjamin Peterson a écrit :
there any reason to continue using codecs.open()?
It's the easiest way to write Unicode friendly code that spans both 2.x and 3.x.
Even on 2.6, where the io module exists?
io on 2.6 is fairly broken and dead slow. The advantage of codecs.open
11 matches
Mail list logo
