On Jun 26, 2011, at 05:02 AM, nick.coghlan wrote:
>http://hg.python.org/peps/rev/9f7a0b4e38a7
>changeset: 3889:9f7a0b4e38a7
>user:Nick Coghlan
>date:Sun Jun 26 13:02:17 2011 +1000
>summary:
> Record Guido's acceptance of PEP 380
>
>files:
> pep-0380.txt | 10 --
> 1 f
On Sun, Jun 26, 2011 at 6:38 PM, ezio.melotti
wrote:
> -.. [#] The exception is propagated to the invocation stack only if there is
> no
> - :keyword:`finally` clause that negates the exception.
> +.. [#] The exception is propagated to the invocation stack unless
> + there is a :keyword:`fina
Hi Nick,
given I'm "guilty" for this patch, I'd reply :)
On Sun, Jun 26, 2011 at 15:55, Nick Coghlan wrote:
> On Sun, Jun 26, 2011 at 6:38 PM, ezio.melotti
> wrote:
>> -.. [#] The exception is propagated to the invocation stack only if there is
>> no
>> - :keyword:`finally` clause that negate
Hello!
http://bugs.python.org/issue10403 is a documentation bug which talks
about using the term 'attribute' instead of the term 'member' when it
denotes the class attributes. Agreed.
But the discussion goes on to mention that,
"Members and methods" should just be "attributes".
I find this bit
On 6/26/2011 2:52 PM, Senthil Kumaran wrote:
http://bugs.python.org/issue10403 is a documentation bug which talks
about using the term 'attribute' instead of the term 'member' when it
denotes the class attributes. Agreed.
But the discussion goes on to mention that,
"Members and methods" should
Well it's not really layout, because alignment is handled by pack option. It
is how the field gets allocated. At this point I believe it will be more
complex to come up with custom allocation option, precisely because it's up
to each compiler to allocate the structure. Such flexibility will add a l
On Mon, Jun 27, 2011 at 12:02 AM, Sandro Tosi wrote:
> I gave my interpretation of the footnote at:
> http://bugs.python.org/issue11669#msg139092 . Does this clarify it?
No, because while there *are* ways a finally clause can kill an
exception completely, reraising another exception is not really
On Mon, Jun 27, 2011 at 7:52 AM, Terry Reedy wrote:
>> or the 'attribute' substitution everywhere makes sense?
>
> No.
>
> My strong history-based opinions ;-).
+1 to what Terry said.
"Members" is a historical relic that is best replaced by "attributes"
or "data attributes" if we want to explici
At 12:32 PM 6/25/2011 -0400, R. David Murray wrote:
So your proposed code would allow me, when writing a generator in
my code, do something that would allow me to yield up all the
values from an arbitrary generator I'm calling, over which I have
no control (ie: I can't modify its code)?
With a
