have,
then the python-ideas list is the place for that. But if you want
anyone to take it seriously, it should be a better formed idea before
you post there.
But:
On Tue, Sep 12, 2017 at 4:43 PM, Matthieu Bec <mailto:mdcb...@gmail.com>> wrote:
There are times when you deal wit
There are times when you deal with completely independent input/output
'pipes' - where parallelizing would really help speed things up.
Can't there be a way to capture that idiom and multi thread it in the
language itself?
Example:
loop:
read an XML
produce a JSON like
Regards,
idays season it didn't get noticed. I wont
bring much anything more so you may rest otherwise. Happy new year!
On 12/18/2014 12:47 PM, mdcb808 wrote:
done - http://bugs.python.org/issue23084
On 12/17/14 8:20 PM, Eric Snow wrote:
On Wed, Dec 17, 2014 at 7:52 PM, Matthieu Bec wrote:
Attached patch defines a new type struct_timespec for the time module. A
new capsule exports the type along with to/from converters - opening a
bridge for C, and for example the datetime module.
Your comments welcomed. If people feel this is worth the effort and
going the right direction, I
On 12/16/14 3:31 PM, Matthieu Bec wrote:
On 12/16/14 3:28 PM, Matthieu Bec wrote:
Maybe what I meant with `nothing looks quite right':
seconds as float, microseconds as float, nanosecond as 0..999,
nanoseconds as 0..9 with mandatory keyword that precludes
microseconds - all c
n downsides. So just go for what
looks the least wrong.
On Tue, Dec 16, 2014 at 3:28 PM, Matthieu Bec mailto:m...@gmto.org>> wrote:
Maybe what I meant with `nothing looks quite right':
seconds as float, microseconds as float, nanosecond as 0..999,
nanoseconds as 0..9 w
On 12/16/14 3:28 PM, Matthieu Bec wrote:
Maybe what I meant with `nothing looks quite right':
seconds as float, microseconds as float, nanosecond as 0..999,
nanoseconds as 0..9 with mandatory keyword that precludes
microseconds - all can be made to work, none seems compl
On 12/16/14 12:45 PM, Alexander Belopolsky wrote:
On Tue, Dec 16, 2014 at 12:10 PM, matthieu bec mailto:m...@gmto.org>> wrote:
I wonder if the datetime module is really the right location, that
has constructor(year, month, day, ..., second, microsecond) - with
0 01:02:03.12345
been revolving around strftime/strptime.
That seems to validate Antoine's point in the first place.
Let's see what people say but maybe this thread should end to restart as
separate topics?
Regards,
Matthieu
On 12/16/14 11:08 AM, Skip Montanaro wrote:
On Tue, Dec 16, 2014 at 11:10 A
As long as you don't need to represent or parse
those timestamps, strptime / strftime don't come into the picture.
Regards
Antoine.
___
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python.org
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe:
https
Thanks Stephen elaborating on the process.
and apologies, I was dismissing the last point only half jokingly.
I read the comment for strftime / strptime in the report as meant to
remember to implement it. It seems picking a new format letter (or keep
using "%f" if acceptable) that would accept
newbie first post on this list, if what follows is of context ...
Hi all,
I'm struggling with issue per the subject, read different threads and
issue http://bugs.python.org/issue15443 that started 2012 still opened
as of today.
Isn't there a legitimate case for nanosecond support? it's all
12 matches
Mail list logo
