On Fri, Nov 25, 2011 at 12:37, Antoine Pitrou wrote:
> On Fri, 25 Nov 2011 12:37:59 -0500
> Brett Cannon wrote:
> > On Thu, Nov 24, 2011 at 07:46, Nick Coghlan wrote:
> >
> > > On Thu, Nov 24, 2011 at 10:20 PM, Maciej Fijalkowski >
> > > wrote:
> > > > The problem is not with maintaining the m
Le 25/11/2011 19:21, Amaury Forgeot d'Arc a écrit :
> And oh, I almost forgot distutils, which needs to parse some Makefile which
> of course does not exist in PyPy.
This is a bug (#10764) that I intend to fix for the next releases of 2.7
and 3.2. I also want to fix all modules that use sys.versi
2011/11/25 Brett Cannon
>
>
> On Thu, Nov 24, 2011 at 07:46, Nick Coghlan wrote:
>
>> On Thu, Nov 24, 2011 at 10:20 PM, Maciej Fijalkowski
>> wrote:
>> > The problem is not with maintaining the modified directory. The
>> > problem was always things like changing interface between the C
>> > ver
On Fri, 25 Nov 2011 12:37:59 -0500
Brett Cannon wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 24, 2011 at 07:46, Nick Coghlan wrote:
>
> > On Thu, Nov 24, 2011 at 10:20 PM, Maciej Fijalkowski
> > wrote:
> > > The problem is not with maintaining the modified directory. The
> > > problem was always things like changing i
On Thu, Nov 24, 2011 at 07:46, Nick Coghlan wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 24, 2011 at 10:20 PM, Maciej Fijalkowski
> wrote:
> > The problem is not with maintaining the modified directory. The
> > problem was always things like changing interface between the C
> > version and the Python version or introdu
On Thu, Nov 24, 2011 at 10:20 PM, Maciej Fijalkowski wrote:
> The problem is not with maintaining the modified directory. The
> problem was always things like changing interface between the C
> version and the Python version or introduction of new stuff that does
> not run on pypy because it relie
On Wed, Nov 23, 2011 at 11:13 PM, Philip Jenvey wrote:
>
> On Nov 22, 2011, at 12:43 PM, Amaury Forgeot d'Arc wrote:
>
>> 2011/11/22 Philip Jenvey
>> One reason to target 3.2 for now is it's not a moving target. There's
>> overhead involved in managing modifications to the pure python standard l
On Nov 22, 2011, at 12:43 PM, Amaury Forgeot d'Arc wrote:
> 2011/11/22 Philip Jenvey
> One reason to target 3.2 for now is it's not a moving target. There's
> overhead involved in managing modifications to the pure python standard lib
> needed for PyPy, tracking 3.3 changes as they happen as w
2011/11/22 Terry Reedy
> On 11/22/2011 3:28 PM, Philip Jenvey wrote:
>
> One reason to target 3.2 for now is it's not a moving target.
>>
>
> Neither is the basic design and behavior of the new unicode
> implementation. On 3.2 narrow builds, including Windows
>
> >>> len('\U00010101')
> 2
>
> Wi
On 11/22/2011 3:28 PM, Philip Jenvey wrote:
One reason to target 3.2 for now is it's not a moving target.
Neither is the basic design and behavior of the new unicode
implementation. On 3.2 narrow builds, including Windows
>>> len('\U00010101')
2
With 3.3, the answer will be, properly, 1. I
On 11/22/2011 10:35 AM, Stefan Behnel wrote:
Maciej Fijalkowski, 22.11.2011 15:46:
2011/11/21 Terry Reedy:
I strongly recommend that where it makes a difference, the pypy
python3
project target 3.3. In particular, don't reproduce the buggy
narrow-build
behavior of 3.2 and before (perhaps pypy
2011/11/22 Philip Jenvey
> One reason to target 3.2 for now is it's not a moving target. There's
> overhead involved in managing modifications to the pure python standard lib
> needed for PyPy, tracking 3.3 changes as they happen as well exacerbates
> this.
>
> The plans to split the standard lib
On Nov 22, 2011, at 7:35 AM, Stefan Behnel wrote:
> Maciej Fijalkowski, 22.11.2011 15:46:
>> PyPy's py3k branch targets Python 3.2 until 3.3 is released and very
>> likely 3.3 afterwards. Optimizations are irrelevant really in the case
>> of PyPy.
>
> I admit that I wasn't very clear in my wordi
Maciej Fijalkowski, 22.11.2011 15:46:
On Tue, Nov 22, 2011 at 3:15 PM, Stefan Behnel wrote:
Giampaolo Rodolà, 22.11.2011 10:21:
2011/11/21 Terry Reedy:
I strongly recommend that where it makes a difference, the pypy python3
project target 3.3. In particular, don't reproduce the buggy narrow-b
On Nov 22, 2011, at 02:15 PM, Stefan Behnel wrote:
>Well, Py3 still has a lot to catch up in terms of wide spread distribution
>compared to Py2.x, and new users will usually start using the most up to date
>release, which will soon be 3.3.
>
>Besides, 3.3 has received various optimisations that ma
On Tue, Nov 22, 2011 at 3:15 PM, Stefan Behnel wrote:
> Giampaolo Rodolà, 22.11.2011 10:21:
>>
>> 2011/11/21 Terry Reedy:
>>>
>>> I strongly recommend that where it makes a difference, the pypy python3
>>> project target 3.3. In particular, don't reproduce the buggy narrow-build
>>> behavior of 3.
Giampaolo Rodolà, 22.11.2011 10:21:
2011/11/21 Terry Reedy:
I strongly recommend that where it makes a difference, the pypy python3
project target 3.3. In particular, don't reproduce the buggy narrow-build
behavior of 3.2 and before (perhaps pypy avoids this already). Do include
the new unicode
2011/11/21 Terry Reedy :
> I strongly recommend that where it makes a difference, the pypy python3
> project target 3.3. In particular, don't reproduce the buggy narrow-build
> behavior of 3.2 and before (perhaps pypy avoids this already). Do include
> the new unicode capi in cpyext. I anticipate t
2011/11/21 Terry Reedy
> I strongly recommend that where it makes a difference, the pypy python3
> project target 3.3. In particular, don't reproduce the buggy narrow-build
> behavior of 3.2 and before (perhaps pypy avoids this already). Do include
> the new unicode capi in cpyext. I anticipate t
On 11/21/2011 5:36 AM, Maciej Fijalkowski wrote:
==
PyPy 1.7 - widening the sweet spot
==
We're pleased to announce the 1.7 release of PyPy. As became a habit, this
release brings a lot of bugfixes and performance improvements over
20 matches
Mail list logo