On Sun, Mar 25, 2012 at 1:41 AM, Ben Finney wrote:
> PJ Eby writes:
>> Not every tab in my browser is text for reading; some are apps that
>> need the extra horizontal space.
>
> So, again, why make your browser window *for reading text* that large?
Because he prefers controlling the content vi
Here's another try, mainly with default browser font size, more contrast and
collapsible sidebar again:
http://www.python.org/~gbrandl/build/html2/
I've also added a little questionable gimmick to the sidebar (when you collapse
it and expand it again, the content is shown at your current scroll l
On 3/24/2012 5:41 PM, Ben Finney wrote:
It's madness to expect web designers to hobble the flexibility of a web
page to cater preferentially for one minority over others.
But largely, the 99% that makes the rest of them look bad, do, in fact,
do exactly that.
PJ Eby writes:
> On Sat, Mar 24, 2012 at 1:32 AM, Greg Ewing
> wrote:
>
> > If you don't want 1920-pixel-wide text, why make your browser window
> > that large?
>
> Not every tab in my browser is text for reading; some are apps that
> need the extra horizontal space.
So, again, why make your br
By dodging the issue entirely - anything I might want to regularly run from
a source checkout I execute with -m. It gets sys.path right automatically
and I don't need to care about platform specific executable naming
conventions.
--
Sent from my phone, thus the relative brevity :)
On Sat, Mar 24, 2012 at 1:32 AM, Greg Ewing wrote:
> PJ Eby wrote:
>
> Weird - I have the exact *opposite* problem, where I have to resize my
>> window because somebody *didn't* set their text max-width sanely (to a
>> reasonable value based on ems instead of pixels), and I have nearly 1920
>> pi
> I don't see what is the use case requiring a is truly monotonic clock.
A clock that is purely monotonic may not be useful. However, people
typically imply that it will have a certain minimum progress (seconds
advanced/real seconds passed). Then you can use it for timeouts.
Regards,
Martin
_
On Sat, Mar 24, 2012 at 4:38 AM, Brian Curtin wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 23, 2012 at 18:38, Yury Selivanov wrote:
>> On 2012-03-23, at 7:28 PM, Brian Curtin wrote:
>>> This seems like it should have been a PEP, or maybe should become a PEP.
>>
>> Why? AFAIK Victor just proposes to add two new function
On Sat, Mar 24, 2012 at 07:19, Nick Coghlan wrote:
> On Sat, Mar 24, 2012 at 4:35 AM, PJ Eby wrote:
>> Just dumping things in a directory adjacent to the corresponding scripts is
>> the original virtualenv, and it still works just dandy -- most people just
>> don't *know* this. (And again, if th
On Sat, Mar 24, 2012 at 4:35 AM, PJ Eby wrote:
> Just dumping things in a directory adjacent to the corresponding scripts is
> the original virtualenv, and it still works just dandy -- most people just
> don't *know* this. (And again, if there are tools out there that *don't*
> support single-dir
On Fri, Mar 23, 2012 at 10:51, Eli Bendersky wrote:
> The PEP received mostly positive feedback. The only undecided point is
> where to specify that the package is provisional. Currently the PEP
> mandates to specify it in the documentation and in the docstring.
> Other suggestions were to put it
>> Oh, I was not aware of this issue. Do you suggest to not use
>> QueryPerformanceCounter() on Windows to implement a monotonic clock?
>
>
> I do not have an opinion on the best way to implement monotonic to guarantee
> that it actually is monotonic.
I opened an issue:
http://bugs.python.org/issu
>> - time.monotonic(): monotonic clock, its speed may or may not be
>> adjusted by NTP but it only goes forward, may raise an OSError
>> - time.steady(): monotonic clock or the realtime clock, depending on
>> what is available on the platform (use monotonic in priority). may be
>> adjusted by NTP o
> Does this mean that there are circumstances where monotonic will work for a
> while, but then fail?
No. time.monotonic() always work or always fail. If monotonic()
failed, steady() doesn't call it again.
> Otherwise, we would only need to check monotonic once, when the time module
> is first lo
On Fri, 23 Mar 2012 22:38:19 -0500
Brian Curtin wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 23, 2012 at 18:38, Yury Selivanov wrote:
> > On 2012-03-23, at 7:28 PM, Brian Curtin wrote:
> >> This seems like it should have been a PEP, or maybe should become a PEP.
> >
> > Why? AFAIK Victor just proposes to add two new fu
On Sat, Mar 24, 2012 at 00:36, Victor Stinner wrote:
>> This seems like it should have been a PEP, or maybe should become a PEP.
>
> I replaced time.wallclock() by time.steady(strict=False) and
> time.monotonic() by time.steady(strict=True). This change solved the
> naming issue of time.wallclock(
On Tue, Mar 20, 2012 at 3:55 PM, John O'Connor wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 20, 2012 at 6:38 PM, Georg Brandl wrote:
> > recently I've grown a bit tired of seeing our default Sphinx theme,
> > especially as so many other projects use it.
>
> I think regardless of the chosen style, giving the Python 3 do
17 matches
Mail list logo
