Terry Reedy writes:
> Am I correct in guessing that on Windows, at least, R and Emacs do *not*
> run in Command Prompt?
I'm not sure what you mean by that. Of course they do run under
Command Prompt, but the limitations of the command window are so
severe that almost nobody ever does that, th
On 19.09.2015 07:24, Stephen J. Turnbull wrote:
Barry Warsaw writes:
> One thing that came up in a similar discussion is pip, and the
> suggested move to `python -m pip`, which makes a lot of sense.
> However, *inside* a virtualenv, there's no ambiguity about the
> Python version associa
While finishing up the implementation of PEP 498, I realized that the
PEP has an error. It says that this code:
f'abc{expr1:spec1}{expr2!r:spec2}def{expr3:!s}ghi'
Is equivalent to:
'abc' + expr1.__format__(spec1) + repr(expr2).__format__(spec2) + 'def'
+ str(expr3).__format__('') + 'ghi'
But th
On 19 September 2015 at 10:12, Sven R. Kunze wrote:
> The only question I have: is there a particular reason (not technical one)
> why there are many pips on my PC?
That's not an unreasonable question, but (IMO) most of the answers are
technical, or amount to "why would you think that's wrong". S
On 19 September 2015 at 06:49, Terry Reedy wrote:
> On 9/19/2015 1:24 AM, Stephen J. Turnbull wrote:
>>
>> Barry Warsaw writes:
>>
>> > One thing that came up in a similar discussion is pip, and the
>> > suggested move to `python -m pip`, which makes a lot of sense.
>> > However, *inside* a
On 19 Sep 2015 15:40, "Stephen J. Turnbull" wrote:
>
> Mark Lawrence writes:
>
> > I agree very strongly with your point here. Raising umpteen issues
> > over installation failures when a full release comes out strikes me
> > as below the belt when there have been multiple previous releases
>
Good catch, Eric.
For those who wonder what the difference is or why it matters, it's what we
do for all dunder operators: the magic method is looked up on the class,
not on the instance. This means you can't e.g. override + on a per-instance
basis by having an instance variable named '__add__' po
On 19.09.2015 14:44, Paul Moore wrote:
On 19 September 2015 at 10:12, Sven R. Kunze wrote:
The only question I have: is there a particular reason (not technical one)
why there are many pips on my PC?
That's not an unreasonable question, but (IMO) most of the answers are
technical, or amount to
On 19 September 2015 at 18:15, Sven R. Kunze wrote:
>> So, to directly answer:
>>
>> Because there are technical challenges that no-one has stepped up to
>> solve.
>
>
> Let's solve them. :)
I thought my point was "yes, go for it - your code contribution would
be appreciated" :-)
Paul
__
On 19.09.2015 19:19, Paul Moore wrote:
I thought my point was "yes, go for it - your code contribution would
be appreciated" :-) Paul
Well, before coding shouldn't we have vision and a plan for pip somehow
and pinpoint it somewhere where everybody who's willing to contribute
can see it?
Do
Guys, this thread is about removing the pyvenv script, not pip. If you want
to start a discussion about pip and its command structure that should
probably happen on pip's issue tracker or over at distutils-sig.
On Sat, 19 Sep 2015 at 10:37 Sven R. Kunze wrote:
> On 19.09.2015 19:19, Paul Moore w
On 19.09.15 14:03, Eric V. Smith wrote:
While finishing up the implementation of PEP 498, I realized that the
PEP has an error. It says that this code:
f'abc{expr1:spec1}{expr2!r:spec2}def{expr3:!s}ghi'
Is equivalent to:
'abc' + expr1.__format__(spec1) + repr(expr2).__format__(spec2) + 'def'
+
On 9/19/2015 3:22 PM, Serhiy Storchaka wrote:
> On 19.09.15 14:03, Eric V. Smith wrote:
>> While finishing up the implementation of PEP 498, I realized that the
>> PEP has an error. It says that this code:
>>
>> f'abc{expr1:spec1}{expr2!r:spec2}def{expr3:!s}ghi'
>>
>> Is equivalent to:
>>
>> 'abc'
On 19 September 2015 at 19:37, Brett Cannon wrote:
> Guys, this thread is about removing the pyvenv script, not pip. If you want
> to start a discussion about pip and its command structure that should
> probably happen on pip's issue tracker or over at distutils-sig.
Sorry, good point.
Back to t
On 9/19/2015 3:36 PM, Eric V. Smith wrote:
> On 9/19/2015 3:22 PM, Serhiy Storchaka wrote:
>> On 19.09.15 14:03, Eric V. Smith wrote:
>>> Instead of calling __format__, I've changed the code generator to call
>>> format(expr1, spec1). As an optimization, I might add special opcodes to
>>> deal with
On Sun, Sep 20, 2015 at 5:36 AM, Eric V. Smith wrote:
> As the PEP says, the expression with '+' is illustrative, not how it's
> actually implemented. The implementation currently uses ''.join,
> although I reserve the right to change it.
>
>> or even to
>>
>> 'abc{:spec1}{!r:spec2}def{!s}ghi'
For now the default value of the stacklevel parameter in warnings.warn()
is 1. But in most cases stacklevel=2 is required, sometimes >2, and I
don't know cases that need stacklevel=1. I propose to make the default
value of stacklevel to be 2. I think that unlikely this will break
existing code.
On Sat, Sep 19, 2015 at 11:44 PM, Serhiy Storchaka wrote:
> For now the default value of the stacklevel parameter in warnings.warn() is
> 1. But in most cases stacklevel=2 is required, sometimes >2, and I don't
> know cases that need stacklevel=1. I propose to make the default value of
> stackleve
18 matches
Mail list logo
