ing works, then let's copy that
> text into the documentation at an appropriate place. If a PEP doesn't have
> such a description, then all the more reason not to send readers there.
+1 The writing required to specificy and adovocate a feature are
usually quite different from that ne
On 12 October 2013 17:55, Christian Heimes wrote:
> Am 12.10.2013 17:37, schrieb Nick Coghlan:
>> I think the default recommendation in PEP 399 still makes sense - 2
>> modules are easy to manage than three and the idiom allows for easy
>> partial replacement.
>
> We could ues yet another approach
2013/10/17 Ethan Furman :
> Good day!
>
> What is the effect of assigning a bug tracker issue to docs@python?
The assignee field is set to d...@python.org.
In other words, nothing magical happens.
--
Regards,
Benjamin
___
Python-Dev mai
On 17 October 2013 19:40, Xavier Morel wrote:
> I think there's already a significant split between context managers
> which handle the lifecycle of a local resource (file, transaction) and
> those which purport to locally alter global-ish state (cwd,
> decimal.localcontext, logging.captureWarning
On 17 October 2013 20:01, Guido van Rossum wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 17, 2013 at 11:55 AM, Oscar Benjamin
> wrote:
>>
>> On 17 October 2013 19:40, Xavier Morel wrote:
>> > I think there's already a significant split between context managers
>> > which handl
gt; 3.5.2 ('6-12')?
>
> 3.6.0a2 ('6-13')?
>
> --
> Terry Jan Reedy
>
> ___
> Python-Dev mailing list
> Python-Dev@python.org
> https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
> Uns
://www.python.org/downloads/release/python-2712rc1/
The complete changelog may be viewed at
https://hg.python.org/cpython/raw-file/v2.7.12rc1/Misc/NEWS
Please test the pre-release and report any bugs to
https://bugs.python.org
Servus,
Benjamin
ore we hit the
unlucky 2.7.13.
Servus,
Benjamin
2.7 release manager
___
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python.org
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe:
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
h is always up-to-date (vs.
> docs.python.org/devguide which is on a cronjob).
> ___
> Python-Dev mailing list
> Python-Dev@python.org
> https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
> Unsubscribe:
> https://mail.python.o
shootout with new TryTLS version next week. We would love to get
> as fair, clean and comparable results as possible. Moreover, if you
> can recommend any docs on proper "Do's and Don'ts" we'd love a link
> to them.
>
> Thank you very much,
>
> Mauri Miettinen
>
> ___
> Python-Dev mailing list
> Python-Dev@python.org
> https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
> Unsubscribe:
> https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/benjamin%40python.org
___
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python.org
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe:
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
gt; Python-Dev@python.org
> https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
> Unsubscribe:
> https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/benjamin%40python.org
___
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python.org
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe:
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
On Sun, Aug 28, 2016, at 13:40, Christian Heimes wrote:
> Here is the deal for 2.7 to 3.5:
>
> 1) All versions older than 0.9.8 are completely out-of-scope and no
> longer supported.
+1
>
> 2) 0.9.8 is semi-support. Python will still compile and work with 0.9.8.
> However we do NOT promise th
On Sun, Aug 28, 2016, at 22:42, Christian Heimes wrote:
> On 2016-08-29 04:38, Ned Deily wrote:
> > On Aug 28, 2016, at 19:06, Benjamin Peterson wrote:
> >> On Sun, Aug 28, 2016, at 13:40, Christian Heimes wrote:
> >>> Here is the deal for 2.7 to 3.5:
> >
On 3 September 2016 at 16:42, Nick Coghlan wrote:
> On 2 September 2016 at 19:13, Nathaniel Smith wrote:
>> This works OK on CPython because the reference-counting gc will call
>> handle.__del__() at the end of the scope (so on CPython it's at level
>> 2), but it famously causes huge problems whe
re those familiar with that
> code are more likely to see the post.)
> ___
> Python-Dev mailing list
> Python-Dev@python.org
> https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
> Unsubscribe:
> https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/benjamin%40py
To conclude our discussion about using C99 features, I've updated PEP 7
to allow the following features:
- Standard integer types in and
- ``static inline`` functions
- designated initializers
- intermingled declarations
- booleans
I've been adding examples of these to 3.6 over the last
One more thing I forgot: C++-style line comments are kosher, too.
On Wed, Sep 7, 2016, at 10:56, Benjamin Peterson wrote:
> To conclude our discussion about using C99 features, I've updated PEP 7
> to allow the following features:
> - Standard integer types in and
>
On Wed, Sep 7, 2016, at 15:58, Martin Panter wrote:
> Thank you very much Benjamin.
>
> On 7 September 2016 at 17:56, Benjamin Peterson
> wrote:
> > To conclude our discussion about using C99 features, I've updated PEP 7
> > to allow the following features:
&g
On Thu, Sep 8, 2016, at 04:09, Christian Heimes wrote:
> On 2016-09-07 17:47, benjamin.peterson wrote:
> > https://hg.python.org/cpython/rev/234f758449f8
> > changeset: 103223:234f758449f8
> > branch: 3.5
> > parent: 103213:7537ca1c2aaf
> > user:
On Thu, Sep 8, 2016, at 02:10, Christian Heimes wrote:
> Hi,
>
> About 10 minutes ago I got a couple of remote segfaults from
> hg.python.org. They occurred during push and pull operations:
>
> $ hg push
> pushing to ssh://h...@hg.python.org/cpython
> remote: bash: line 1: 25019 Segmentation fa
On Thu, Sep 8, 2016, at 09:09, Chris Barker wrote:
> > > - Standard integer types in and
> >
>
>
> > Yes, I will clarify we require the fixed-width types.
>
>
> Does this mean that we might be able to have the built-in integer be
> based
> on int64_t now? so Windows64 and *nix64 wil
On Thu, Sep 8, 2016, at 22:33, Tim Delaney wrote:
> On 9 September 2016 at 07:45, Chris Angelico wrote:
>
> > On Fri, Sep 9, 2016 at 6:22 AM, Victor Stinner
> > wrote:
> > > A nice "side effect" of compact dict is that the dictionary now
> > > preserves the insertion order. It means that keywo
hat do you think?
>
> See also the issue #26900, "Exclude the private API from the stable API":
> http://bugs.python.org/issue26900
>
> Victor
> ___
> Python-Dev mailing list
> Python-Dev@python.org
> https://mail.python.org/mailman/
couple of weeks.
>
> Yury
> ___
> Python-Dev mailing list
> Python-Dev@python.org
> https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
> Unsubscribe:
> https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/benjamin%40python.org
_
On Mon, Sep 19, 2016, at 01:35, Eric V. Smith wrote:
> Shouldn't there be a test added for this?
In fact, there is one: test_particularly_evil_undecodable in
test_compile.py. No has managed to make Python crash by exploiting this
particular problem—it's just ASan complaints.
On Wed, Sep 21, 2016, at 02:06, Christian Heimes wrote:
> On 2016-09-21 05:39, benjamin.peterson wrote:
> > https://hg.python.org/cpython/rev/278b21d8e86e
> > changeset: 103977:278b21d8e86e
> > branch: 3.6
> > parent: 103975:d31b4de433b7
> > user:
On Wed, Sep 21, 2016, at 03:42, Victor Stinner wrote:
> I see that the old macro is now an alias to va_copy(). A similar change
> was
> done for Py_MEMCPY(). Would it make sense to put these old macros in a
> new
> backward_compat.h header, so maybe one day we can remove them? :-)
That's fine wi
On Thu, Sep 22, 2016, at 04:44, Victor Stinner wrote:
> 2016-09-22 8:02 GMT+02:00 Benjamin Peterson :
> > Just dump the compat macros in Python 4.0 I think.
>
> Please don't. Python 3 was so painful because we decided to make
> millions of tiny backward incompatible ch
On Fri, Sep 23, 2016, at 00:04, Victor Stinner wrote:
> 2016-09-23 8:47 GMT+02:00 Benjamin Peterson :
> > I'm being flippant here because of the triviality of the change. Anyone
> > using Py_VA_COPY or Py_MEMCPY can fix their code in a backwards and
> > forwards comp
On Fri, Sep 23, 2016, at 09:32, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 22, 2016 at 11:47:20PM -0700, Benjamin Peterson wrote:
> >
> > On Thu, Sep 22, 2016, at 04:44, Victor Stinner wrote:
> > > 2016-09-22 8:02 GMT+02:00 Benjamin Peterson :
> > > > Just dum
I've have just updated PEP 373 to say that Python 2.7.13 release
candidate 1 will be released on December 3. The final will follow two
weeks later on December 17. If there are delays in the process, the
final will likely to pushed into January.
Servus,
Ben
or become less stable depending on the
release stage of Python 3.
On Mon, Nov 28, 2016, at 20:50, Raymond Hettinger wrote:
>
> > On Nov 28, 2016, at 10:36 AM, Serhiy Storchaka wrote:
> >
> > On 28.11.16 09:06, Benjamin Peterson wrote:
> >> I've have just upda
last one at the
> > end of 2019, presumably)? I too would like to know the intended use of the
> > extra time.
> >
> > Top-posted from my Windows Phone
> >
> > -Original Message-
> > From: "Benjamin Peterson"
> > Sent: 11/29/20
On Wed, Nov 30, 2016, at 10:19, Antoine Pitrou wrote:
> On Tue, 29 Nov 2016 23:07:14 -0800
> Benjamin Peterson wrote:
> > Okay, now that we're heard from the other side, and I lacking a concrete
> > reason to delay the release, I'm putting 2.7.13 back at the origina
://bugs.python.org
A final release is scheduled for 2 weeks time.
Servus,
Benjamin
(on behalf of all of 2.7's contributors)
___
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python.org
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe:
https://mail.pytho
> continued the discussion on the issue #28838. We agreed on better
> names, and so I pushed a different change.
>
> Victor
> ___
> Python-Dev mailing list
> Python-Dev@python.org
> https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
:
https://bugs.python.org/
2.7.14 will appear mid-2017.
All the best in the new year,
Benjamin Peterson
2.7 release manager
___
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python.org
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe:
https
code prior to Python 3.5, but I wanted to double-check before editing the
> PEP.
> ___
> Python-Dev mailing list
> Python-Dev@python.org
> https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
> Unsubscribe:
> https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/benjamin%40pyth
On Tue, Jan 17, 2017, at 15:34, Paul Moore wrote:
> On 17 January 2017 at 20:02, Steve Dower wrote:
> > Avoiding header files would be my only request. As Brett says, the C99
> > requirement should not be enforced on all embedders or extenders, so we
> > should try and keep the headers they'll u
On Thu, Feb 23, 2017, at 20:36, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
> I haven't seen any response to the following alleged security
> vulnerability.
>
> I am not qualified to judge the merits of this, but it does seem
> worrying that (alledgedly) the Python security team hasn't responded for
> over 12 mon
On Mon, Mar 20, 2017, at 13:18, Antoine Pitrou wrote:
> On Mon, 20 Mar 2017 13:26:34 +0200
> Serhiy Storchaka wrote:
> > What is the preferable way of getting the size of tuple, list, bytes,
> > bytearray: Py_SIZE or PyTuple_GET_SIZE, PyList_GET_SIZE,
> > PyBytes_GET_SIZE, PyByteArray_GET_SIZE
st
> Python-Dev@python.org
> https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
> Unsubscribe:
> https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/benjamin%40python.org
___
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python.org
https://mail.python.org/m
The reason we're having this conversation at all is probably a matter of
timing. If MemoryBIO was in Python 3 when PEP 466 was accepted, it
surely would have come along for the ride to 2.7. I believe PEP 466 is
generally considered to have produced positive results. PEP 546,
carrying no breaking ch
On Tue, Jul 25, 2017, at 21:59, Devin Jeanpierre wrote:
> https://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0007/ says two things:
>
> > Python versions greater than or equal to 3.6 use C89 with several select
> > C99 features:
> > [...]
> > C++-style line comments
This section overrides further edicts in t
Hi all,
I've set the 2.7.14 release schedule. There will be a release candidate
on August 26 with a planned final for September 16.
___
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python.org
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe:
https:/
g the release with your libraries and applications
and reporting any bugs to
https://bugs.python.org
A final release is expected in 3 weeks.
Regards,
Benjamin
2.7 release manager
(on behalf of 2.7's contributors)
___
Python-Dev mailing list
Since IRIX was EOLed in 2013, I propose support for it be removed in
Python 3.7. I will add it to PEP 11.
___
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python.org
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe:
https://mail.python.org/mailman/o
On Tue, Sep 5, 2017, at 19:57, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
> Sorry, are we to interpret this as you asking that the PEP be rejected?
> I can't tell whether you are being poetic and actually think the PEP is
> a good idea, or whether you have written it to have it rejected and
> prevent anyone else
On Wed, Sep 6, 2017, at 03:14, Antoine Pitrou wrote:
>
> Hello,
>
> I'm a bit concerned about
> https://github.com/python/cpython/commit/76d5abc8684bac4f2fc7cccfe2cd940923357351
>
> My main gripe is that makes writing C code more tedious. Simple C
> global variables such as "_once_registry" a
On Wed, Sep 6, 2017, at 10:08, Antoine Pitrou wrote:
> On Wed, 06 Sep 2017 09:42:29 -0700
> Benjamin Peterson wrote:
> > On Wed, Sep 6, 2017, at 03:14, Antoine Pitrou wrote:
> > >
> > > Hello,
> > >
> > > I'm a bit concerned
On Fri, 15 Oct 2021 at 14:12, Petr Viktorin wrote:
>
> Most of this is, hopefully, just capturing existing tribal knowledge, but:
[snip]
>
> Micro Versions
> --
>
> A new micro version marks *bugfix* and *security* releases.
> These releases are managed for stability; only fixes for kn
On Thu, 25 Nov 2021 at 15:16, Stephen J. Turnbull
wrote:
>
> Executive summary:
>
> The typing-suspicious crowd has a valid complaint about PEPs 563 and
> 649, but it's not that they weren't warned.
>
> Christopher Barker writes:
>
> > Annotations can be, and are, used for other things than "typi
On Tue, 30 Nov 2021 at 09:23, Paul Moore wrote:
>
> On Tue, 30 Nov 2021 at 02:52, Steve Dower wrote:
> >
> > THAT'S the kind of thing that also has been happening with typing, and
> > why some of us feel the need to publicly re-state things that are all
> > agreed upon within this group, but are
On Tue, 30 Nov 2021 at 23:37, Guido van Rossum wrote:
>
> We should definitely push back on zealous new converts to typing who insist
> that everything should be annotated. But we should also recognize that even
> in their current, far from perfect state, type annotations can provide a lot
> of
On Wed, 1 Dec 2021 at 12:12, Sebastian Rittau wrote:
>
> Am 30.11.21 um 13:39 schrieb Oscar Benjamin:
>
>> Others have mentioned the pressure on libraries to adopt typing and
>> I've certainly noticed this with SymPy. I think type hints could be
>> good for Sym
On Sun, 30 Jan 2022 at 20:36, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
>
> On Sun, Jan 30, 2022 at 08:36:43AM -0800, Jelle Zijlstra wrote:
>
> > Agree, the count of 1.6k open PRs is not a good look for new contributors.
>
> How does that compare to other comparable open source projects?
How it compares is a separa
On Mon, 28 Nov 2022 at 22:56, Brett Cannon wrote:
>
> On Sun, Nov 27, 2022 at 11:36 AM Yoni Lavi wrote:
>>
>> All it takes is for your program to compute a set somewhere with affected
>> keys, and iterate on it - and determinism is lost.
>
> That's actually by design. Sets are not meant to be de
On Tue, 29 Nov 2022 at 01:33, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
>
> On Mon, Nov 28, 2022 at 11:13:34PM +0000, Oscar Benjamin wrote:
> > On Mon, 28 Nov 2022 at 22:56, Brett Cannon wrote:
>
> As I understand it, we could make sets ordered, but only at the cost of
> space (much mo
On Tue, 29 Nov 2022 at 23:46, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
>
> On Tue, Nov 29, 2022 at 08:51:09PM -, Yoni Lavi wrote:
>
> > It does make your argument invalid though, since it's based on this
> > assumption that I was asking for a requirement on iteration order
> > (e.g. like dict's iteration order
On Thu, 1 Dec 2022 at 06:56, Chris Angelico wrote:
>
> On Thu, 1 Dec 2022 at 17:26, Yoni Lavi wrote:
> >
> > So it's not like it's even possible to require this generally for all
> > objects.
>
> Well, I mean, in theory you could require that objects whose hash
> isn't otherwise defined get give
sunset-python-2/
Regards,
Benjamin
___
Python-Dev mailing list -- python-dev@python.org
To unsubscribe send an email to python-dev-le...@python.org
https://mail.python.org/mailman3/lists/python-dev.python.org/
Message archived at
https://mail.python.org
On Tue, Sep 10, 2019, at 15:54, Ned Batchelder wrote:
> Maybe I'm not involved enough in the release process, but this seems
> confusing to me. On the same day that the PSF put up a page about the
> 1/1/2020 date, we choose April 2020 as the last release? Why? I
> thought the point was to sav
On Fri, Sep 13, 2019, at 18:18, Sumana Harihareswara wrote:
> Hi. I've joined python-dev to participate in this thread (I don't have
> email delivery turned on; I'll be checking back via the web).
sorry :)
>
> Benjamin, I am sorry that I didn't check in with
On Wed, Sep 18, 2019, at 19:23, Kyle Stanley wrote:
> Benjamin, what are you thoughts on usage of the "needs backport to 2.7"
> label? For most of the PRs I've reviewed I tend to avoid adding it
> myself, but I've seen it used periodically. It seems to be used rat
On Wed, Sep 25, 2019, at 17:25, Rob Cliffe via Python-Dev wrote:
> > I additionally share the bemusement of some other commentators on this
> > thread to the idea of Python 2 "support", which is not something ever
> > promised to Python 2 (or 3) users by CPython core developers. Essentially,
>
release schedule, calls for 2.7.17 to be the
penultimate bug fix release of the Python 2.7 series. Time for Python 2 is
running low!
Regards,
Benjamin
2.7 release manager
___
Python-Dev mailing list -- python-dev@python.org
To unsubscribe send an email to
nates 2.7.17 as the penultimate
Python 2.7 release. So, be aware that the upstream demise of Python 2 is not
far away.
For the time being, bugs may be reported to https://bugs.python.org.
See you soon for The End,
Benjamin
___
Python-Dev mailing list -- p
It's known: https://bugs.python.org/issue38007
On Mon, Oct 21, 2019, at 20:11, Kacvinsky, Tom wrote:
> Today I discovered the this struct
>
> typedef struct{
> const char* name;
> int basicsize;
> int itemsize;
> unsigned int flags;
> PyType_Slot *slots; /* terminated by slot=
On Wed, 4 Dec 2019 at 05:41, Chris Angelico wrote:
>
> On Wed, Dec 4, 2019 at 3:16 PM Steven D'Aprano wrote:
> >
> > On Wed, Dec 04, 2019 at 01:47:53PM +1100, Chris Angelico wrote:
> >
> > > Integer sizes are a classic example of this. Is it acceptable to limit
> > > your integers to 2^16? 2^32?
On Sat, 7 Dec 2019 at 06:29, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
>
> A million seems reasonable for lines of source code, if we're prepared
> to tell people using machine generated code to split their humongous .py
> files into multiple scripts. A small imposition on a small subset of
> Python users, for the b
On Mon, 9 Dec 2019 at 14:10, Mark Shannon wrote:
> On 07/12/2019 7:37 pm, Oscar Benjamin wrote:
> > On Sat, 7 Dec 2019 at 06:29, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
> >>
> >> A million seems reasonable for lines of source code, if we're prepared
> >> to tell peop
On Tue, 10 Dec 2019 at 00:00, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
>
> On Sat, Dec 07, 2019 at 07:37:58PM +0000, Oscar Benjamin wrote:
>
> > I recently hit on a situation that created a one million line code file:
> > https://github.com/pytest-dev/pytest/issues/4406#issuecomment-4396
On Wed, Feb 12, 2020, at 08:22, mailer@app.tempr.email wrote:
> I've just been looking through the multiprocessing module and open
> issues and wondered why there were some small bugs/patches not being
> fixed/merged. Is this the "normal" patch cycle? Does it take years for
> bugs to get fixe
On Fri, Mar 27, 2020, at 11:49, Sumana Harihareswara wrote:
> Benjamin: now that PyCon 2020 has been cancelled, are you considering
> releasing 2.7.18 slightly earlier?
The plan is to follow the dates in PEP 373.
___
Python-Dev mailin
us know if there are any critical problems at
https://bugs.python.org/
(This is the last chance!)
All the best,
Benjamin
___
Python-Dev mailing list -- python-dev@python.org
To unsubscribe send an email to python-dev-le...@python.org
https
The relevant parties are aware.
On Sat, Apr 11, 2020, at 17:17, Mike Miller wrote:
>
> Unless I've read something wrong, it looks like the final Python 2 release
> (2.7.18) should approximate the math constant e:
>
> >>> import math
> >>> math.e
> 2.718281828459045
>
> Aka:
>
>
hased Python 2 out of their
archives. Users migrated hundreds of millions of lines of code, developed
porting guides, and kept Python 2 in their brain while Python 3 gained 10 years
of improvements.
Finally, thank you to GvR for creating Python 0.9, 1, 2, and 3.
I've taken a look through PEP 622 and I've been thinking about how it
could be used with sympy.
In principle case/match and destructuring should be useful for sympy
because sympy has a class Basic which defines a common structure for
~1000 subclasses. There are a lot of places where it is necessar
On Thu, 16 Jul 2020 at 02:09, Guido van Rossum wrote:
>
> On Wed, Jul 15, 2020 at 4:41 PM Oscar Benjamin
> wrote:
>>
>> I've taken a look through PEP 622 and I've been thinking about how it
>> could be used with sympy.
>>
>> In principle case/m
On Mon, Jul 20, 2020, at 13:50, Brett Cannon wrote:
> The SC has chosen to accept PEP 387! https://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0387/
Thank you, steering council! I am particularly grateful to Brett for pushing
this PEP, in its eleventh year of existence, over the finish line.
_
On Tue, Sep 8, 2020, at 08:13, Petr Viktorin wrote:
> Hello,
> The "xxlimited" module (Modules/xxlimited.c) was added as part of PEP
> 384 (Defining a Stable ABI), and is undocumented. As far as I can tell,
> it was added partly to test the stable ABI, and partly as an example of
> how to wri
On Tue, Sep 15, 2020, at 20:10, Greg Ewing wrote:
> On 16/09/20 12:37 pm, Guido van Rossum wrote:
> > IMO if we were to standardize the AST for times immemorial this would
> > have to be a separate PEP.
>
> Perhaps, but a stable AST seems to be a prerequisite for this kind
> of feature. Prefer
On Tue, Sep 15, 2020, at 23:54, Guido van Rossum wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 15, 2020 at 7:31 PM Benjamin Peterson wrote:
> > On Tue, Sep 15, 2020, at 20:10, Greg Ewing wrote:
> > > Maybe the PEP should propose an AST of its own, which would initially
> > > be a third th
On Wed, 14 Oct 2020 at 19:12, Ivan Pozdeev via Python-Dev
wrote:
>
>
> On 14.10.2020 17:04, M.-A. Lemburg wrote:
> > On 14.10.2020 16:00, Pablo Galindo Salgado wrote:
> >>> Would it be possible to get the data for older runs back, so that
> >> it's easier to find the changes which caused the slo
situation.
+10 for tracker access for you. This is the kind of work is something
I think everybody has on their lists and really needs some TLC. Thank
you!
--
Regards,
Benjamin
___
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python.org
http://mail.python.
Dear Python developers,
Introduction:
I am writing from the perspective of Sugar Labs [1], which produces Sugar, a
free software project written almost entirely in Python. Sugar is designed
to run on small, resource-constrained computers. So far those computers
have been mostly x86, but it seem
e searching)? I'd hate to bury some important report in a sea of
> ancientness.
No, don't worry. We can just search issues by priority.
--
Regards,
Benjamin
___
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python.org
http://mail.python.org/mai
Are we going to keep developing the 3.0 maintenance branch in
expectation of releasing 3.0.2 sometime or will we just focus our
efforts on 3.1?
--
Regards,
Benjamin
___
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman
On Fri, Feb 13, 2009 at 9:15 PM, Barry Warsaw wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> On behalf of the Python development team, I'm happy to announce the
> availability of Python 3.0.1, the first bug fix release of Python 3.0.
> Version 3.0.1 fixes dozens of bugs reported si
se. Do you think we need that much time? Otherwise, we
could move the final release back sometime in mid June.
--
Regards,
Benjamin
___
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe:
http://mail.
On Sun, Feb 15, 2009 at 10:59 AM, Guido van Rossum wrote:
> On Sat, Feb 14, 2009 at 12:29 PM, Benjamin Peterson
> wrote:
>> 3.1a1 March 7 (Saturday)
>> 3.1a2 April 11 (Saturday)
>> 3.1b1 May 2 (Saturday)
>> 3.1b2 May 23 (Saturday)
>> 3.1rc1 June 13 (S
ng wisdom it should be referenced. If I'm missing something
> fundamental about how people are expected to approach porting 2.x code to
> 3.x, please let me know.
All your points are valid. See http://wiki.python.org/moin/PortingToPy3k
Please contribute if you can!
On Sun, Feb 15, 2009 at 9:15 PM, Ned Deily wrote:
>
> It would be great if someone could add OS X links for the 3.0.1 and
> 2.6.1 to the main download page, too:
> <http://www.python.org/download/>
I've now added them to the main download page.
t;
> I believe items changed from open to pending get closed automatically after
> a couple of weeks (this should be documented, I hope), so that there is no
> need to revisit.
No, that feature hasn't yet been implemented.
--
Regards,
Benjamin
_
rds,
Benjamin
___
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe:
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
e distutils test coverage greatly.
--
Regards,
Benjamin
___
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe:
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
to
>
> http://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0373/
>
> that there is some name mangling in pep-0375?
It seems I left "2.7" in the prose a few times. I've fixed that now.
--
Regards,
Benjamin
___
Python-Dev mailing lis
On Tue, Feb 17, 2009 at 3:02 PM, Georg Brandl wrote:
> Benjamin Peterson schrieb:
>> On Tue, Feb 17, 2009 at 5:25 AM, Samuele Pedroni wrote:
>>> Didn't a test fail because of this? seems the underlying issue is that this
>>> part of the stdlib didn't hav
so much for the
larger scale analysis that a lint tool would require. In addition,
we'd have to write some sort of symtable analyzer. High level AST is
much nicer to work with that.
--
Regards,
Benjamin
___
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev
vm implementors).
Thoughts?
http://bugs.python.org/issue4565
--
Regards,
Benjamin
___
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe:
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev
401 - 500 of 1550 matches
Mail list logo
