Foundation, https://docs.python.org/reference/index.html. Retrieved 16
September 2018.
I'd say that's all settled. If anyone asks you, "How can you be sure that
settles it?" You can answer, "Some guy said it on a mailing list." And then
you can site the message:
Jere
I don't think there's any need to keep this feature. I hope we have better
ways to profile function and method calls now than we did when this code
was submitted.
Jeremy
On Sat, Nov 26, 2016 at 3:34 AM Raymond Hettinger <
raymond.hettin...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > On Nov 25, 2016, at 1:28 AM, Vic
I posted in the bug report, but repeating here: I don't remember why
exec in a nested function changed either. It would help if someone
could summarize why we made the change. (I hope I didn't do it <0.2
wink>.)
Jeremy
On Tue, Mar 31, 2009 at 11:36 PM, Maciej Fijalkowski wrote:
> Because clas
Eeek, I think it was me. Part of the AST changes involved raising a
SyntaxError when exec was used in a scope that had a free variable,
since the behavior is pretty much undefined. If the compiler decides
a variable is free, then it can't be assigned to in the function body.
The compiled exec co
A question came up at work about docstring formatting. It relates to
the description of the summary line in PEP 257.
http://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0257/
"""Multi-line docstrings consist of a summary line just like a
one-line docstring, followed by a blank line, followed by a more
elaborate d
On Sat, Mar 6, 2010 at 11:27 AM, Gregg Lind wrote:
> Python-devs,
>
> I'm writing to you for some help in understanding the Python grammar. As an
> excuse to deep dive into Python's tokenizer / grammar, I decided (as a
> hideous, hideous joke) to want to allow braces where colons are allowed (as
On 7/10/06, Ka-Ping Yee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Mon, 10 Jul 2006 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > I think Talin's got a point though. It seems hard to find one short English
> > word that captures the essence of the desired behavior. None of the words
> > in his list seem strongly suggestive
On 7/10/06, Ka-Ping Yee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 7/10/06, Ka-Ping Yee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > What's wrong with "nonlocal"? I don't think i've seen an argument
> > against that one so far (from Talin or others).
>
> On Mon,
On 7/12/06, Fredrik Lundh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Boris Borcic wrote:
>
> >> note that most examples of this type already work, if the target type is
> >> mutable, and implement the right operations:
> >>
> >> def counter(num):
> >> num = mutable_int(num)
> >> def inc
On 7/14/06, Anthony Baxter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Friday 14 July 2006 16:39, Neal Norwitz wrote:
> > Remember I also tried to push for more features to go in early?
> > That would have given more time for external testing. Still
> > features are coming in. Python developers weren't happy
On 7/14/06, Nick Coghlan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Anthony Baxter wrote:
> > On Friday 14 July 2006 16:39, Neal Norwitz wrote:
> >> Remember I also tried to push for more features to go in early?
> >> That would have given more time for external testing. Still
> >> features are coming in. Pyth
I'd like to repeat my invitation to spend a week at Google in
California or New York for a Python sprint. We are hosting sprints at
our offices in Mountain View and New York City the week of Aug. 21,
Monday through Thursday.
We're planning to work broadly on Python 2.6 and Python 3000. If
you're
On 9/23/06, Anthony Baxter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I'd like to propose that the AST format returned by passing PyCF_ONLY_AST to
> compile() get the same guarantee in maintenance branches as the bytecode
> format - that is, unless it's absolutely necessary, we'll keep it the same.
> Otherwise a
On 9/28/06, Anthony Baxter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Friday 29 September 2006 00:30, Jeremy Hylton wrote:
> > On 9/23/06, Anthony Baxter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > I'd like to propose that the AST format returned by passing PyCF_ONLY_AST
> >
On 10/4/06, Guido van Rossum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> You are all wasting your time on this. It won't go in.
+1 from me. Should you mark PEP 315 as rejected?
Jeremy
>
> --
> --Guido van Rossum (home page: http://www.python.org/~guido/)
> ___
> Pyt
On 12/19/06, tomer filiba <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> to my understanding of the object model, the code of snippet 1
> and snippet 2 should be equivalent. a class is just a "special function"
> that returns its locals automatically and passes them to the metaclass
> constructor:
>
> --- snippet 1
I was wondering today how I could convince myself that a sequence of
Py_CLEAR() calls in a tp_clear function was safe. Take for example a
really trivial sequence of code on frame_clear():
Py_CLEAR(f->f_exc_type);
Py_CLEAR(f->f_exc_value);
Py_CLEAR(f->f_exc_traceback);
e. The INCREF guarantees that the object can't be
collected until the tp_clear() returns. Thanks.
Jeremy
>
> --Guido
>
> On 2/12/07, Jeremy Hylton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > I was wondering today how I could convince myself that a sequence of
> > Py_CLEAR(
I'm organizing a trip to Standard in downtown Dallas for dinner
tonight (Sunday night). It's about a 10 minute cab ride to Standard.
We can share cabs and get there without too much trouble. The
restaurant is on the expensive side. I'm thinking we should leave
from the hotal around 6:30pm.
http
I'm organizing a trip to Standard in downtown Dallas for dinner
tonight (Sunday night). It's about a 10 minute cab ride to Standard.
We can share cabs and get there without too much trouble. The
restaurant is on the expensive side. I'm thinking we should leave
from the hotal around 6:30pm.
http
On 1/3/07, "Martin v. Löwis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> In #1626545, Anton Tropashko requests that object.h should be
> renamed, because it causes conflicts with other software.
>
> I would like to comply with this requests for 2.6, assuming there
> shouldn't be many problems with existing softwa
ass to locals.
Jeremy
>
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Guido van
> Rossum
> Sent: Monday, March 05, 2007 2:14 PM
> To: Dino Viehland
> Cc: python-dev@python.org
> Subject: Re: [Python-Dev] locals(), closures, and I
On 3/6/07, Georg Brandl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Raymond Hettinger schrieb:
> > [Phil Thompson]
> >> I think a lot of people care, but many can't
> >> do anything about because the barrier to entry is too great.
> >
> > Do you mean commit priviledges? ISTM, those tend to be
> > handed out read
On 3/15/07, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 05:51 pm, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> >At 07:45 AM 3/15/2007 +0100, Martin v. Löwis wrote:
> >>I apparently took the same position that you now take back then,
> >>whereas I'm now leaning towards (or going beyond) the position
> >>Tim had
On 4/10/07, Facundo Batista <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Facundo Batista wrote:
>
> > Martin v. Löwis wrote:
> > ...
> >
> >> think it should treat all 2xx responses as success. Callers can
> >> then still check the response code themselves if they need to.
> >
> > The same I think. If nobody has a
On 10/1/07, Justin Tulloss <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I've been doing some tests on removing the GIL, and it's becoming clear that
> some basic changes to the garbage collector may be needed in order for this
> to happen efficiently. Reference counting as it stands today is not very
>
On Fri, May 2, 2008 at 1:38 PM, "Martin v. Löwis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Thomas Lee wrote:
> > Martin v. Löwis wrote:
> >>> This leaves us with a few options:
> >>>
> >>
> >> 5. Reuse/Abuse Num(object) for arbitrary constants.
> >>AFAICT, this should work out of the box.
> >>
> >>
I'm not sure I understand the problem exactly. If we have one pass
converting the concrete syntax to the AST, we can mark functions as
generators as part of that pass. In a later pass, you can remove the
unreachable code.
Jeremy
On Sat, May 3, 2008 at 12:51 AM, Thomas Lee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wr
On Wed, May 7, 2008 at 11:43 AM, Thomas Lee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Nick Coghlan wrote:
>
> >
> > As Thomas mentions in a later message, making it possible to annotate
> nodes would permit Functions to be annotated as being a generator at the AST
> stage (currently it is left to the bytecode c
On Thu, May 8, 2008 at 8:00 AM, Nick Coghlan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Jeremy Hylton wrote:
>
> > On Wed, May 7, 2008 at 11:43 AM, Thomas Lee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > > Nick Coghlan wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > > >
sily just move over to
> urllib2). The current solution of keeping around urllib's classes was
> a compromise, but I had not thought out the transition yet (and Jeremy
> Hylton will be running into this as he has volunteered to handle
> this).
>
> What do people think we s
Does anyone have a clue about why this test fails only on this
platform? The test is question is verifying that URLError gets
raised. From the traceback, it appears that there is an uncaught
exception (URLError) but it fails in an assertRaises() check for
URLError. That doesn't make much sense u
I wanted to ask a policy question on the bug tracker. What are we
doing with bugs filed against Python 2.4?
This bug http://bugs.python.org/issue1208304 reports a fd leak in
Python 2.4, which doesn't exist in the head. Since Python 2.4 is in
security-fix only mode, is it fair to close this with a
On Mon, Nov 24, 2008 at 12:54 PM, Brett Cannon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 24, 2008 at 08:58, Jeremy Hylton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> I wanted to ask a policy question on the bug tracker. What are we
>> doing with bugs filed against Python 2.4?
>>
On Thu, Dec 4, 2008 at 2:36 AM, "Martin v. Löwis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I would like to merge mailing lists, now that the design and first
> implementation of Python 3000 is complete. In particular, I would
> like to merge the python-3000 mailing list back into python-dev,
> and the python-3
On Thu, Dec 4, 2008 at 10:12 AM, Christian Heimes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Several people have asked about the patch and merge flow. Now that Python
> 3.0 is out it's a bit more complicated.
>
> Flow diagram
>
>
> trunk ---> release26-maint
> \-> py3k ---> release3
This bug is pretty serious, because urllib will insert garbage into
the application-visible data for a chunked response. It simply
ignores the fact that it's reading a chunked response and includes the
chunked header data is payload data. The original bug was reported in
September, but no one not
I have a patch that appears to fix this bug
http://bugs.python.org/file12361/urllib-chunked.diff
but I'm not sure about its interaction with the io module and
RawIOBase. Is there a new IO expert who could take a look at it for
me?
Jeremy
On Sun, Dec 14, 2008 at 11:06 PM, Jeremy Hylton
~guido/)
>
>
>
> On Mon, Dec 15, 2008 at 11:19 AM, Jeremy Hylton wrote:
>> I have a patch that appears to fix this bug
>> http://bugs.python.org/file12361/urllib-chunked.diff
>> but I'm not sure about its interaction with the io module and
>> RawIOBase. Is t
(home page: http://www.python.org/~guido/)
>
>
>
> On Thu, Dec 18, 2008 at 5:22 AM, Jeremy Hylton wrote:
>> On Wed, Dec 17, 2008 at 1:05 PM, Guido van Rossum wrote:
>>> The inheritance from io.RawIOBase seems fine.
>>
>> There is a small problem with the interacti
4631 should be a release blocker. I'll have a bit of time on Monday
and Tuesday to wrap it up.
Jeremy
On Fri, Dec 19, 2008 at 5:28 PM, Barry Warsaw wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> I'd like to get Python 3.0.1 out before the end of the year. There are no
> showstopp
On Thu, 9 Dec 2004 14:16:18 -0500, James Y Knight <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Dec 9, 2004, at 1:31 PM, Phillip J. Eby wrote:
> > Isn't it funny, by the way, that people don't go around talking about
> > how slow Jython is? At least, I haven't seen it to the extent that
> > I've seen with CPyth
On Fri, 10 Dec 2004 14:01:55 -0500, A.M. Kuchling <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 09, 2004 at 05:11:04PM +0300, Oleg Broytmann wrote:
> > some popular areas. Let's add another topic, "Making things fast". Let's
> > even make it the first topic, though I personnaly dont see a need for
> > t
On Mon, 13 Dec 2004 11:30:45 -0500 (EST), Stephan Deibel
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> For example, a September article in InfoWorld said "But the big winner
> this time around is the object-oriented scripting language Python, which
> saw a 6 percent gain in popularity, almost doubling last year's r
On Mon, 13 Dec 2004 13:11:38 -0500 (EST), Stephan Deibel
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Mon, 13 Dec 2004, Jeremy Hylton wrote:
> > Two possibilities come to mind. 1) 14% of developers in the survey
> > work at companies that use Python. How many developers are there?
> &
On Mon, 20 Dec 2004 15:03:13 -0500, Barry Warsaw <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Mon, 2004-12-20 at 12:48, Raymond Hettinger wrote:
>
> > Perhaps a rather quick Py2.4.1 would be in order.
>
> +1
Nothing wrong with an incremental release, but none of these sound
like critical bugs to me.
Jeremy
On Mon, 20 Dec 2004 18:25:39 -0500, Aahz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 20, 2004, Jeremy Hylton wrote:
> > On Mon, 20 Dec 2004 15:03:13 -0500, Barry Warsaw <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> On Mon, 2004-12-20 at 12:48, Raymond Hettinger wrote:
> >>
On Sun, 19 Dec 2004 02:13:24 -0800, Titus Brown <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hello all,
>
> per previous discussion,
>
> http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2004-October/049495.html
>
> I'd like to push a trivial little patch to sgmllib (#1087808) on you
> gents, in exchange for
On Mon, 03 Jan 2005 18:02:52 -0800, Brett C. <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Plus there is the running tradition of sprinting on the AST branch at PyCon.
> I
> was planning on shedding my bug fixing drive at PyCon this year and sprinting
> with (hopefully) Jeremy, Neal, Tim, and Neil on the AST bran
The list archives look like they are mostly full of spam, but it's
also the only list we've used to discuss the ast work. I haven't
really worried whether the sig was "active," as long as the list was
around. I don't mind if you want to resurrect it. Is there some way
to delete the spam from the
That's fine with me. We had taken it to the compiler-sig when it
wasn't clear there was interest in the ast branch :-).
Jeremy
On Tue, 4 Jan 2005 07:31:30 -0800, Guido van Rossum
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >I was suggesting that there
> > is an ongoing discussion that should continue on the c
Does anyone want to volunteer to integrate the current head to the
branch? I think that's a pretty important near-term step.
Jeremy
___
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe:
http:/
On Thu, 6 Jan 2005 01:32:44 +0900, Jiwon Seo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I'd like to help here on the AST branch, if it's not too late.
> (Especially I'm interested with the generator expression part.)
Great! It's not too late.
> If I want to volunteer, do I just begin to work with it? Or do I
The existing ast-branch mostly works, but it does not include most of
the new features of Python 2.4. There is a substantial integration
effort, perhaps easy for someone who does a lot of CVS branch merges.
(In particular, the head has already been merged to this branch once.)
I think it would b
On Wed, 5 Jan 2005 13:28:11 -0500, Raymond Hettinger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Would it be helpful for me to move the peepholer out of compile.c into a
> separate source file?
It doesn't really matter. There are two reasons. 1) We've been
working on the new compiler code in newcompile.c, rath
On Wed, 05 Jan 2005 13:20:51 -0500, Kurt B. Kaiser <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Jeremy Hylton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > Does anyone want to volunteer to integrate the current head to the
> > branch? I think that's a pretty important near-term step.
>
How's the merge going?
And if I haven't already said thanks, then, thanks for doing it!
Jeremy
___
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe:
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/pyth
On Fri, 07 Jan 2005 16:18:11 -0500, Kurt B. Kaiser <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Looks like it's done. I tagged ast-branch when I finished:
>
> merged_from_MAIN_07JAN05
>
> Right now I'm trying to get Python-ast.c to compile. It wasn't
> modified by the merge, so there's some other issue.
I'm g
On Tue, 18 Jan 2005 07:56:19 -0800, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Update of /cvsroot/python/python/dist/src/Python
> In directory sc8-pr-cvs1.sourceforge.net:/tmp/cvs-serv4034/Python
>
> Modified Files:
> ceval.c
> Log Message:
> Change the name of the macro used by --with
On Fri, 4 Feb 2005 10:46:52 -0800, Guido van Rossum
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Log Message:
> > Add NEWS item about future parser bug.
>
> Give back the time machine!
I already will have by the time you needed it.
Jeremy
___
Pyt
On Sat, 5 Feb 2005 02:31:26 -0500, Raymond Hettinger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> [Anthony]
> > While this is undoubtedly a bug fix, I'm not sure that it should be
> > backported - it will break people's code that is "working" now (albeit
> > in a faulty way). What do people think?
>
> I concur --
Maybe some ambitious PSF activitst could contact Roskind and Steve
Kirsch and see if they know who at Disney to talk to... Or maybe the
Disney guys who were at PyCon last year could help.
Jeremy
On Tue, 8 Feb 2005 15:37:50 -0500, Tim Peters <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> [Matthias Klose]
> > A De
On Fri, 11 Feb 2005 12:55:02 +0100, Matthias Klose <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Currently md5c.c is included in the python sources. The libmd
> > implementation has a drop in replacement for md5c.c. The openssl
> > implementation is a complicated tangle of Makefile expanded template
> > code that
On Fri, 11 Mar 2005 07:19:56 -0800, Guido van Rossum
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Personally, I think Python has too many builtins already.
>
> It has fewer than most dynamic languages; and remember that I'm
> trading product(), any(), all() for reduce(), map() and filter().
> There are others s
I seem to have a problem with the install on XP SP1. Python itself is
installed, but IDLE won't start. The error says: "IDLE's subprocess
didn't make connection. Either IDLE can't start a subprocess or
personal firewall software is blocking the connection." I believe the
problem is the firewall
Are the thread semantics for file objecst documented anywhere? I
don't see anything in the library manual, which is where I expected to
find it. It looks like read and write are atomic by virtue of fread
and fwrite being atomic.
I'm less sure what guarantees, if any, the other methods attempt to
On Thu, 17 Mar 2005 16:25:44 -0500, Aahz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 17, 2005, Jeremy Hylton wrote:
> >
> > Are the thread semantics for file objecst documented anywhere? I
> > don't see anything in the library manual, which is where I expected to
>
On Thu, 17 Mar 2005 23:04:16 +0100, "Martin v. Löwis"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Jeremy Hylton wrote:
> >>>Are the thread semantics for file objecst documented anywhere? I
> >>>don't see anything in the library manual, which is where I expected to
On Thu, 17 Mar 2005 17:13:05 -0500, Tim Peters <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> [Jeremy Hylton]
> > Are the thread semantics for file objecst documented anywhere?
>
> No. At base level, they're inherited from the C stdio implementation.
> Since the C standard doesn&#
On Thu, 17 Mar 2005 23:57:52 +0100, "Martin v. Löwis"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Remember, you were asking what behaviour is *documented*, not what
> behaviour is guaranteed by the implementation (in a specific version
> of the implementation).
Martin,
I think you're trying to find more finesse
On Fri, 18 Mar 2005 07:57:25 +0100, "Martin v. Löwis"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Writing down all these properties does little good, IMO. This includes
> your proposed property of file reads: anybody reading your statement
> will think "of course it works this way - why even mention it".
The thi
On Mon, 21 Mar 2005 16:08:57 +0100, Thomas Heller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
>
> > PEP 314 implementation (client side):
>
> I'm not sure where I should post this, but shouldn't there be a way to
> specify the encoding of the metadata? There are people (not me,
> fort
For filter and map, list comprehensions and generator expressions are
the answer.
>>> numbers = [5, 9, 56, 34, 1, 24, 37, 89]
>>> [x for x in numbers if x < 30]
[5, 9, 1, 24]
>>> (x for x in numbers if x < 30)
>>> list(_)
[5, 9, 1, 24]
Jeremy
On Wed, 23 Mar 2005 10:33:53 -0600 (CST), Ka-Ping Ye
On Apr 8, 2005 9:31 AM, Fred Drake <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Thursday 07 April 2005 10:58, Raymond Hettinger wrote:
> > Eric Price
>
> Eric Price was an intern at CNRI; I think it's safe to remove him from the
> list, as I've not seen anything from him in a *long* time.
Eric Price did so
On 5/24/05, Ka-Ping Yee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Would there be any interest in extending the compiler package with tools
> for AST transformations and for emitting Python source code from ASTs?
Sure. Eventually, we'll have to figure out how to unify the compiler
package AST and the ast-branc
On 5/26/05, Chad Whitacre <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Would there be any interest in extending the compiler package with tools
> > for AST transformations and for emitting Python source code from ASTs?
>
> Heh, so I guess the answer is "yes."
>
> BTW, how does the concept of AST transformation
On 5/26/05, Chad Whitacre <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> chad: Hmmm ... I don't follow python-dev closely but hasn't there been
> resistance to macros in Python? Are we saying macros may be a good idea
> after all?
>
> ?!ng: resistance -> Yes.
> ?!ng: good idea -> Not really. AST transformations ar
It sounds like the right answer for Python is to change the signature
of PyArg_ParseTupleAndKeywords() back. We'll fix it when C fixes its
const rules .
Jeremy
On 2/13/06, Guido van Rossum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 2/12/06, Greg Ewing <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > [A large head-explodi
On 2/10/06, "Martin v. Löwis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Jeremy Hylton wrote:
> > Ok. I reviewed the original problem and you're right, the problem was
> > not that it failed outright but that it produced a warning about the
> > deprecated conversio
On 2/13/06, Fred L. Drake, Jr. <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Monday 13 February 2006 15:40, Guido van Rossum wrote:
> > Shouldn't docs.python.org be removed? It seems to add mroe confusion
> > than anything, especially since most links on python.org continue to
> > point to python.org/doc/.
>
On 2/14/06, M.-A. Lemburg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Martin v. Löwis wrote:
> > M.-A. Lemburg wrote:
> >>> It's the consequences: nobody complains about tacking "const" on to a
> >>> former honest-to-God "char *" argument that was in fact not modified,
> >>> because that's not only helpful for C
On 2/14/06, "Martin v. Löwis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Jeremy Hylton wrote:
> > The compiler in question is gcc and the warning can be turned off with
> > -Wno-write-strings. I think we'd be better off leaving that option
> > on, though. This
I am still -1 on the ast-objects branch. It adds a lot of boilerplate
code and its makes complicated what is now simple. I'll see if I can
get a rough cut of the marshal code ready today, so there will be a
complete implementation of my original plan.
I also think we should keep the transformati
As I said in an earlier message, there's no need to have a separate
domain to restrict queries to just the doc/current part of python.org.
Just type
"site:python.org/doc/current your query here"
If there isn't any other rationale, maybe we can redirects
docs.python.org back to www.python.org?
Je
I don't think this message is on-topic for python-dev. There are lots
of great places to discuss the design of the python web site, but the
list for developers doesn't seem like a good place for it. Do we need
a different list for people to gripe^H^H^H^H^H discuss the web site?
Jeremy
On 2/15/0
On 2/16/06, Greg Ewing <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Whereas if there weren't any funky coding style in the
> first place, more potential compiler hackers might be
> encouraged to have a go.
I'm trying to make the code simple. The style of code is different
than other parts of Python, but a compil
It is critical, but I hadn't seen the bug report. Feel free to assign
AST bugs to me and assign them a > 5 priority.
Jeremy
On 2/17/06, Armin Rigo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Tue, Feb 14, 2006 at 09:24:57PM -0800, Neal Norwitz wrote:
> > http://www.python.org/peps/pep-0356.html
>
> T
Actually, it might be easier to assign separate bugs. A number of the
old bugs appear to have been fixed. It's hard to track individual
items within a bug report.
Jeremy
On 2/17/06, Jeremy Hylton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> It is critical, but I hadn't seen the bug re
Almann,
The lack of support for rebinding names in enclosing scopes is
certainly a wart. I think option one is a better fit for Python,
because it more closely matches the existing naming semantics. Namely
that assignment in a block creates a new name unless a global
statement indicates otherwis
I had to lookup top-post :-).
On 2/21/06, Bengt Richter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Tue, 21 Feb 2006 08:02:08 -0500, "Jeremy Hylton" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >Jeremy
> Hey, only Guido is allowed to top-post. He said so ;-)
The Gmail UI makes it really ea
On 2/21/06, Jeremy Hylton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I had to lookup top-post :-).
>
> On 2/21/06, Bengt Richter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On Tue, 21 Feb 2006 08:02:08 -0500, "Jeremy Hylton" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > wrote:
> > >Jer
On 2/21/06, Terry Reedy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> "Almann T. Goo" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> > I certainly hope that an initiative like this doesn't get stymied by
> > the lack of a good name for such a keyword. Maybe something like
> > "outer"?
>
> Addi
On 2/22/06, Greg Ewing <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Mark Russell wrote:
>
> > PEP 227 mentions using := as a rebinding operator, but rejects the
> > idea as it would encourage the use of closures.
>
> Well, anything that facilitates rebinding in outer scopes
> is going to encourage the use of closu
On 2/24/06, James Y Knight <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Feb 24, 2006, at 1:54 AM, Greg Ewing wrote:
> > Thomas Wouters wrote:
> >> On Thu, Feb 23, 2006 at 05:25:30PM +1300, Greg Ewing wrote:
> >>
> >>> As an aside, is there any chance that this could be
> >>> changed in 3.0? I.e. have the for-lo
I made a few more minor revisions to the AST on the plane this
afternoon. I'll check them in tomorrow when I get a chance to do a
full test run.
* Remove asdl_seq_APPEND. All uses replaced with set
* Fix set_context() comments and check return value every where.
* Reimplement real arena for pyar
On 3/3/06, Raymond Hettinger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> The double underscore convention is appropriate where the method is always
> invoked magically in normal code and not called directly. The next() method
> is
> differenct because it is a mixed case, sometimes called magically and
> someti
On 3/3/06, Phillip J. Eby <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> At 04:09 PM 3/3/2006 -0500, Jeremy Hylton wrote:
> >I think it is a little odd that next is not spelled __next__, but I
> >appreciate the reasons given here in particular. Every time I right
> >.next(), I&#
On 3/6/06, Thomas Wouters <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
>
> On 3/6/06, Barry Warsaw <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > Didn't we set up a "security swat team" some time ago? If not, we
> > > should. Regardless, since I have more free time these days, I'd like
> > > to be on it.
> >
> > Yep, it's c
On 3/6/06, Alex Martelli <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On Mar 6, 2006, at 9:17 AM, Jim Jewett wrote:
> ...
> > I think that adding parentheses would help, by at least signalling
> > that the logic is longer than just the next (single) expression.
> >
> > level = (0 if "absolute_import" in
On 3/8/06, Georg Brandl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I know, PyCon's just been, but not many bugs were closed and
> there really ought to be some issues resolved before 2.4.3 happens.
> The number of open bugs is again crawling to 900.
>
> I myself are looking at many bugs and patches over time, bu
1 - 100 of 174 matches
Mail list logo
