Thank you so much!
Ryan Smith-Roberts wrote:
>On Thu, Feb 26, 2015 at 5:13 PM, Ryan Smith-Roberts
>wrote:
>> I'm not an official cpython developer but ifdef __ANDROID__ is quite
>in line
>> with other per-platform support (__FreeBSD__, __linux__, etc), as
>well as
>> already being in use in Modu
On 02/26/2015 05:52 PM, Ryan Smith-Roberts wrote:
> Might as well spend the time to answer my own question:
Thanks! Much appreciated. :)
--
~Ethan~
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python
On Thu, Feb 26, 2015 at 5:13 PM, Ryan Smith-Roberts wrote:
> I'm not an official cpython developer but ifdef __ANDROID__ is quite in line
> with other per-platform support (__FreeBSD__, __linux__, etc), as well as
> already being in use in Modules/_posixsubprocess.c. Is __ANDROID__ not being
> def
On behalf of the Python development community and the Python 3.4 release
team, I'm pleased to announce the availability of Python 3.4.3. Python
3.4.3 has many bugfixes and other small improvements over 3.4.2.
You can find it here:
https://www.python.org/downloads/release/python-343/
On 02/26/2015 05:13 PM, Ryan Smith-Roberts wrote:
> I'm not an official cpython developer but ifdef __ANDROID__ is quite in line
> with
> other per-platform support (__FreeBSD__, __linux__, etc), as well as already
> being
> in use in Modules/_posixsubprocess.c. Is __ANDROID__ not being defined
On Wed, Feb 25, 2015, at 22:38, David Bolen wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 24, 2014 at 11:07 AM, Benjamin Peterson
> wrote:
> >
> > On Mon, Nov 24, 2014, at 00:33, David Bolen wrote:
> >> Yeah, it definitely needs it. Historically it was intentional as my own
> >> servers were all on 8.04, but the last o
I'm not an official cpython developer but ifdef __ANDROID__ is quite in
line with other per-platform support (__FreeBSD__, __linux__, etc), as well
as already being in use in Modules/_posixsubprocess.c. Is __ANDROID__ not
being defined when it should be?
On Thu, Feb 26, 2015 at 4:20 PM, Ryan Gonza
On 02/25/2015 10:17 AM, Ryan Gonzalez wrote:
> Which leads me to the question. See, of course, the patches should only be
> enabled if Python is being built targeting
> Android, but I'm not sure how that should be detected.
>
> I know that the Android target triple is arm-linux-androideabi. Shou
DOES NOBODY HAVE AN ANSWER TO THIS???
I'm REALLY relying on someone who works on Python to answer this. PLEASE??
On Wed, Feb 25, 2015 at 12:17 PM, Ryan Gonzalez wrote:
> So...
>
> There was a recent discussion here on porting Python to Android. Well, for
> those of you who saw too many unread m
On 26 February 2015 at 21:34, Guido van Rossum wrote:
> Accepted!
>
> Thanks for your patience, Paul, and thanks everyone for their feedback.
>
> I know there are still a few small edits to the PEP, but those don't affect
> my acceptance. Congrats!
Excellent, thanks to everyone for the helpful co
PEP 486 is hereby accepted. You can fix the typo at the same time as
marking it as accepted.
Paul, thanks and congrats, everyone else, thanks for the feedback!
--Guido
On Tue, Feb 24, 2015 at 12:45 PM, Guido van Rossum wrote:
> Thanks for doing this, Paul!
>
> I think this is a fine PEP and I
Accepted!
Thanks for your patience, Paul, and thanks everyone for their feedback.
I know there are still a few small edits to the PEP, but those don't affect
my acceptance. Congrats!
--Guido
On Thu, Feb 26, 2015 at 9:05 AM, Paul Moore wrote:
> On 24 February 2015 at 18:24, Guido van Rossum w
On Thu, Feb 26, 2015 at 3:38 PM Ethan Furman wrote:
> On 02/26/2015 12:19 PM, Guido van Rossum wrote:
>
> > As a follow-up, Joshua updated the PEP to remove *comprehensions, and it
> is now accepted.
>
> Congratulations Thomas, Joshua, and Neil!!
>
I'll add a "thanks" to everyone involved with t
On 02/26/2015 12:19 PM, Guido van Rossum wrote:
> As a follow-up, Joshua updated the PEP to remove *comprehensions, and it is
> now accepted.
Congratulations Thomas, Joshua, and Neil!!
--
~Ethan~
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
One more thing. This PEP would never have been accepted without a working
implementation. Thanks Neil and Joshua for that! (And for being flexible.)
On Thu, Feb 26, 2015 at 12:19 PM, Guido van Rossum wrote:
> As a follow-up, Joshua updated the PEP to remove *comprehensions, and it
> is now accep
As a follow-up, Joshua updated the PEP to remove *comprehensions, and it is
now accepted.
On Wed, Feb 25, 2015 at 11:42 AM, Guido van Rossum wrote:
> I'm back, I've re-read the PEP, and I've re-read the long thread with "(no
> subject)".
>
> I think Georg Brandl nailed it:
>
> """
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
On 26 February 2015 at 18:23, Ethan Furman wrote:
> On 02/26/2015 09:28 AM, Glenn Linderman wrote:
>> On 2/26/2015 9:05 AM, Paul Moore wrote:
>
>>> ``create_archive(source, target=None, interpreter=None, main=None)``
>>>
>>>
>>>
On 26 February 2015 at 17:28, Glenn Linderman wrote:
> * The name of a directory, in which case a new application archive
> will be created from the content of that directory.
> * The name of an existing application archive file, in which case the
> file is copied to the target. The file name
On 02/26/2015 09:28 AM, Glenn Linderman wrote:
> On 2/26/2015 9:05 AM, Paul Moore wrote:
>> ``create_archive(source, target=None, interpreter=None, main=None)``
>>
>>
>> Create an application archive from *source*. The source ca
On 2/26/2015 9:05 AM, Paul Moore wrote:
On 24 February 2015 at 18:24, Guido van Rossum wrote:
Here's my review. I really like where this is going but I have a few
questions and suggestions (I can't help myself :-).
OK, I've updated both the PEP and the patch based on follow-up
discussions. I t
On 24 February 2015 at 18:24, Guido van Rossum wrote:
> Here's my review. I really like where this is going but I have a few
> questions and suggestions (I can't help myself :-).
OK, I've updated both the PEP and the patch based on follow-up
discussions. I think (again!) it is ready to go.
I've
21 matches
Mail list logo
