On Sun, Nov 8, 2009 at 1:16 AM, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
> Willem, the rationale for this PEP is to give alternative
> implementations the chance to catch up with CPython.
>
> Given your statement that CLPython is quite complete on the language
> level, but missing standard library features, how do
On Fri, Nov 6, 2009 at 6:18 AM, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
> I don't know how mature or active it is, so it may not count as either
> major or complete, but there's also CLPython:
>
> http://common-lisp.net/project/clpython/
CLPython is in steady development, quite complete and stable on the
language
On Sat, Oct 10, 2009 at 1:29 AM, Christian Heimes wrote:
> I'm proposing two new attributes in the sys module: sys.implementation
> and sys.userdirsuffix.
This seems like a good idea.
I'm not sure this idea will easily be accepted, but I'd like to see
the sys module eventually split up in two pa
On Tue, Sep 22, 2009 at 5:12 PM, Mark Dickinson wrote:
> - Exception to the previous item: if the left operand is an instance
> of a built-in type or a new-style class, and the right operand is an
> instance of a proper subclass of that type or class AND overrides the
> base’s __rop__() method, th
On Tue, Jun 16, 2009 at 1:21 PM, Michael Foord wrote:
> Steven D'Aprano wrote:
>> On Tue, 16 Jun 2009 01:20:53 pm Cameron Simpson wrote:
>>> I don't think all pythons do immediate ref-counted GC.
>>
>> Jython and IronPython don't. I don't know about PyPy, CLPython, Unladen
>> Swallow, etc.
>
> PyPy
On Sat, Feb 7, 2009 at 10:04 AM, Greg Ewing wrote:
> def f():
>v = yield *g()
>print v
>
> def g():
>yield 42
>return "spam"
Function g violates the current limitation that generators can't
return with a value. So can g only be used using "yield *" then, or
would that limitation
The issue came up while trying to get some Sympy code running on CLPython.
class C:
exec "a = 3"
print locals()
1. Is it guaranteed that class C gets an attribute "a", i.e. that the
locals printed include {'a': 3}?
2. It it (also) guaranteed if it were in a function scope?
The complete syntax
On Thu, Jun 12, 2008 at 9:46 PM, Guido van Rossum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> The intention was for these dicts to be used as namespaces. I think of
> it as follows:
>
> (a) Using non-string keys is a no-no, but the implementation isn't
> required to go out of its way to forbid it.
That will allo
On Thu, Jun 12, 2008 at 2:56 PM, Carl Friedrich Bolz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Of course attribute name lookups are affected, because you can have a
> non-string key that has a __hash__ and __eq__ method to make it look
> sufficiently like a string to the dict. Then the attribute lookup needs
>
On 7/18/06, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> C++ originally specified multiple inheritance, but it wasn't "cooperative" in
> the sense that super is. In Lisp, though, where cooperative method dispatch
> originated, call-next-method does basically the same thing in the case where
> th
On 8/4/05, Brett Cannon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> OK, once the cron job comes around and is run,
> http://www.python.org/peps/pep-0348.html will not be a 404 but be the
> latest version of the PEP.
Currently, when the "recursion limit" is reached, a RuntimeError is
raised. RuntimeError is in th
On 8/2/05, Stephen J. Turnbull <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I don't see it that way. Rather, "Raisable" is the closest equivalent
> to "serious-condition", and "CriticalException" is an intermediate
> class that has no counterpart in Lisp usage.
That would imply that all raisables are 'serious' i
On 8/1/05, Stephen J. Turnbull <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Uh, according to your example in Common LISP it is indeed an error,
I think you are referring to the first word of this line:
Error: Received signal number 2 (Keyboard interrupt) [condition type:
INTERRUPT-SIGNAL]
Well, that refers to
On 7/31/05, Brett Cannon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 7/31/05, Willem Broekema <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > I does not seem right to me to think of KeyboardInterrupt as a means
> > to cause program halting. An interpreter could in principle recover
> > fr
On 7/31/05, Brett Cannon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> While we do tend to use KeyboardInterrupt as a way to kill a
> program, is that really control flow, or a critical exception
> that the program needs to stop because an serious event
> occurred?
I does not seem right to me to think of KeyboardI
15 matches
Mail list logo
