, then your thread would be on-topic.
I replied off-list because I didn't want to contribute to the off-topic
posting, but if posting on-list is required for you to pay attention, so be
it.
- Josiah
On Nov 12, 2013 2:51 PM, "Victor Stinner" wrote:
> 2013/11/12 Josiah Carlson :
&g
Hopping in to give my take on this, which I've expressed to Antoine
off-list.
When I first built the functionality about 8.5-9 years ago, I personally
just wanted to be able to build something that could replace some of
Expect: http://expect.sourceforge.net/ . The original and perhaps current
API
io. And it could spawn a
larger library for offering a more fleshed-out subprocess-related API,
though that is probably more wishful thinking on my part than anything.
- Josiah
On Thu, Mar 27, 2014 at 4:24 PM, Victor Stinner wrote:
> 2014-03-27 22:52 GMT+01:00 Josiah Carlson :
> > * Becaus
ve you alone.
- Josiah
On Thu, Mar 27, 2014 at 7:18 PM, Terry Reedy wrote:
> On 3/27/2014 9:16 PM, Josiah Carlson wrote:
>
>> You don't understand the point because you don't understand the feature
>> request or PEP. That is probably my fault for not communicating
*This* is the type of conversation that I wanted to avoid. But I'll answer
your questions because I used to do exactly the same thing.
On Fri, Mar 28, 2014 at 3:20 AM, Victor Stinner wrote:
> 2014-03-28 2:16 GMT+01:00 Josiah Carlson :
> > def do_login(...):
> > pro
On Fri, Mar 28, 2014 at 10:46 AM, Guido van Rossum wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 28, 2014 at 9:45 AM, Josiah Carlson
> wrote:
>
>>
>> If it makes you feel any better, I spent an hour this morning building a
>> 2-function API for Linux and Windows, both tested, not using ctypes
On Fri, Mar 28, 2014 at 12:42 PM, Terry Reedy wrote:
> On 3/28/2014 12:45 PM, Josiah Carlson wrote:
>
>> If it makes you feel any better, I spent an hour this morning building a
>> 2-function API for Linux and Windows, both tested, not using ctypes, and
>> not even using
/0LpyQtU5
- Josiah
On Fri, Mar 28, 2014 at 1:09 AM, Paul Moore wrote:
> On 28 March 2014 05:09, Josiah Carlson wrote:
> > So yeah. Someone want to make a decision? Tell me to write the docs, I
> will.
> > Tell me to go take a long walk off a short pier, I'll thank you for
'd like to continue following this issue and participate in the
discussion, I'll see you over on http://bugs.python.org/issue1191964 .
- Josiah
On Fri, Mar 28, 2014 at 11:35 AM, Josiah Carlson
wrote:
>
> On Fri, Mar 28, 2014 at 10:46 AM, Guido van Rossum wrote:
>
>&
back up to python-dev to offer a slightly wider audience
for commentary/concerns, and hopefully to get a stamp of approval that it
is ready.
Thank you,
- Josiah
On Sat, Mar 29, 2014 at 11:58 PM, Josiah Carlson
wrote:
> I've got a patch with partial tests and documentation that I&
And as I was writing the "thank you" to folks, I hit send too early. Also
thank you to Victor Stinner, Guido, Terry Reedy, and everyone else on this
thread :)
- Josiah
On Thu, May 29, 2014 at 5:34 PM, Josiah Carlson
wrote:
> Pinging this thread 2 months later with a progress/
I'm sure that only 1 or 2 people cares about my opinion on this, but I will
say that PEP 572 is taking one of my least favorite features of C/C++ and
adding it to Python. About the only good thing I can say about it is that
it might make some things more convenient to write. Worse to read, worse to
Recently I found the need to generate some constants inside a class
body. What I discovered was a bit unintuitive, and may not be
intended...
In 2.5 and 2.6:
>>> class foo:
... x = {}
... x.update((i, x.get(i, None)) for i in xrange(10))
...
Traceback (most recent call last):
File "", l
On Fri, Feb 20, 2009 at 3:14 PM, Nick Coghlan wrote:
> Josiah Carlson wrote:
>> The behavior of 3.0 WRT list comprehensions behaving the same way as
>> generator expressions is expected, but why generator expressions
>> (generally) don't keep a reference to the cl
On Wed, Mar 4, 2009 at 1:31 PM, Guido van Rossum wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 4, 2009 at 1:27 PM, Chris McDonough wrote:
>> Daniel Stutzbach wrote:
>>> On Wed, Mar 4, 2009 at 12:54 PM, Guido van Rossum wrote:
>>>
The same as always. We don't change APIs in bugfix releases.
>>>
>>> This questio
On Sun, Mar 1, 2009 at 10:45 AM, Hirokazu Yamamoto
wrote:
> I uploaded the patch with choice (a)
> http://bugs.python.org/file13215/py3k_mmap_and_bytes.patch
> If (b) is suitable, I'll rewrite the patch.
> ___
> Python-Dev mailing list
> Python-Dev@pytho
On Thu, Mar 5, 2009 at 12:46 PM, Greg Ewing wrote:
> Daniel Stutzbach wrote:
>
>> If you have a working select(), it will tell you the sockets on which
>> read() and write() won't block, so non-blocking reads and writes are not
>> necessary.
>
> No, but there should be an interface that lets you s
On Thu, Mar 5, 2009 at 1:09 PM, Bill Janssen wrote:
> Josiah Carlson wrote:
>
>> On Thu, Mar 5, 2009 at 12:46 PM, Greg Ewing
>> wrote:
>> > Daniel Stutzbach wrote:
>> >
>> >> If you have a working select(), it will tell you the sockets on wh
On Thu, Mar 5, 2009 at 3:11 PM, wrote:
>
> On 07:30 pm, n...@arctrix.com wrote:
>>
>> Chris McDonough wrote:
>>>
>>> As far as I can tell, asyncore/asynchat is all "undocumented
>>> internals". Any use of asyncore in anger will use internals;
>>> there never was any well-understood API to these
On Tue, Jun 9, 2009 at 7:46 AM, Kálmán
Gergely wrote:
> Hello, my name is Greg.
>
> I've just started using python after many years of C programming, and I'm
> also new to the list. I wanted to clarify this
> first, so that maybe I will get a little less beating for my stupidity :)
>
> I use python
On Wed, Jul 1, 2009 at 6:48 PM, Benjamin Peterson wrote:
> 2009/7/1 Eric Pruitt :
>> Hello,
>>
>> I am working on the subprocess.Popen module for Python 2.7 and am now moving
>> my changes over to Python 3.1 however I am having trouble with the whole
>> byte situation and I can't quite seem to unde
Having read the entirety of the thread (which is a rare case these
days, I need more spare time), and being that I'm feeling particularly
snarky today, I'm going to agree 100% with everything that Raymond has
said in this message and his few subsequent messages. Snarky comments
to follow.
I would
If one doesn't care about slicing, the obvious implementation using a
dictionary and two counters works great for a deque with random
indexing. Well... except for the doubling in memory usage.
- Josiah
On Wed, Jan 27, 2010 at 4:15 PM, Raymond Hettinger
wrote:
>
> On Jan 27, 2010, at 3:55 PM, M
On Thu, Jan 28, 2010 at 8:57 PM, Steve Howell wrote:
> --- On Thu, 1/28/10, Josiah Carlson wrote:
>> [...] in the decade+ that I've been using
>> Python and
>> needed an ordered sequence; lists were the right solution
>> 99% of the
>> time [...]
>
On Thu, Jan 28, 2010 at 9:48 PM, Terry Reedy wrote:
> On 1/28/2010 6:30 PM, Josiah Carlson wrote:
>
>> I would also point out that the way these things are typically done is
>> that programmers/engineers have use-cases that are not satisfied by
>> existing structures, they
On Fri, Jan 29, 2010 at 11:25 PM, Stephen J. Turnbull
wrote:
> Josiah Carlson writes:
>
> > Lisp lists are really stacks
>
> No, they're really (ie, concretely) singly-linked lists.
>
> Now, stacks are an abstract data type, and singly-linked lists provide
> an ef
On Fri, Jan 29, 2010 at 11:31 PM, Stephen J. Turnbull
wrote:
> Josiah Carlson writes:
> > On Thu, Jan 28, 2010 at 8:57 PM, Steve Howell wrote:
>
> > > What do you think of LISP, and "car" in particular (apart from
> > > the stupidly cryptic name)?
Thomas Heller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> But that was not the question. What about the status of the buffer function?
>From what I understand, it is relatively safe as long as you don't
mutate an object while there is a buffer attached to it.
That is:
import array
a = array.array(...
Thomas Heller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> AFAIK, the buffer object now does not hold a pointer into the object
> it has been constructed from, it only gets it when its needed.
>
> IMO Objects/bufferobject.c, revision 35400 is considered safe.
>
> The checkin comment (by nascheme) was, more than
Gregor Lingl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I have posted the following message to idle-dev,
> but no reply yet. Just a suggestion:
>
> The firewall warning message in the Pythonshell window
> was introduced in Python 2.3 (IDLE 1.0 or something similar?)
Speaking of 'features that would have been
Andrew Bennetts <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Sat, Jul 15, 2006 at 03:38:04PM -0300, Johan Dahlin wrote:
> > In an effort to reduce the memory usage used by GTK+ applications
> > written in python I've recently added a feature that allows attributes
> > to be lazy loaded in a module namespace.
Boris Borcic <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Guido van Rossum wrote:
> > You must be misunderstanding.
>
> I don't think so. You appeared to say that the language changes too much
> because
> everyone wants different changes - that accumulate. I suggested a mechanism
> allowing people to see only
Boris Borcic <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Josiah Carlson wrote:
> > Invariably user X and Y would have different sets of changes that they
> > want to use. Presumably, if the features were nontrivial, then they
> > would no longer be able to exchange code because it w
"Charles Vaughn" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I'm looking for a way of modifying the compiler to eliminate any loops and
> recursion from code. It's for a high speed data processing application.
> The alternative is a custom language that is little more than gloryfied
> assembly. I'd like to be
Tony Nelson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> I'm trying to write a test for my Socket Timeouts patch [1], which fixes
> signal handling (notably Ctl-C == SIGINT == KeyboarInterrupt) on socket
> operations using a timeout. I don't see a portable way to send a signal,
> and asking the test runner to
Jean-Paul Calderone <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On Sat, 29 Jul 2006 14:38:38 -0700, Josiah Carlson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> >If someone is looking for a project for 2.6 that digs into all sorts of
> >platform-specific nastiness, they could add ac
Bob Ippolito <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Aug 3, 2006, at 6:51 PM, Greg Ewing wrote:
>
> > M.-A. Lemburg wrote:
> >
> >> Perhaps we ought to add an exception to the dict lookup mechanism
> >> and continue to silence UnicodeErrors ?!
> >
> > Seems to be that comparison of unicode and non-unicod
There's one problem with generating a warning for 2.5, and that is the
same problem as generating a warning for possible packages that lack an
__init__.py; users may start to get a bunch of warnings, and be unaware
of how to suppress them.
All in all though, I'm +0 on the warning, and +1 on it no
Jean-Paul Calderone <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Fri, 04 Aug 2006 11:23:10 -0700, Josiah Carlson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >There's one problem with generating a warning for 2.5, and that is the
> >same problem as generating a warning for possible packages th
Georg Brandl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Is this considered a bug? Sure, deleting modules from sys.modules
> isn't quite common, but it happened to me on one occasion.
>
> Python 2.4.3 (#1, Jul 29 2006, 10:52:20)
> >>> import logging
> >>> import sys
> >>> del logging
> >>> del sys.module
Neal Becker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> class X (object):
> pass
>
> X() += 2
>
> > SyntaxError: can't assign to function call
[snip]
> Does anyone else think this would be a good addition to Python?
No. += implies assignment. As the syntax error states, "can't assign
to function call
"Neal Norwitz" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On 8/9/06, Josiah Carlson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > 2.4 performed these imports silently, while 2.5 complains "SystemError:
> > Parent module 'x' not loaded", which is actually a u
"Michael Urman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On 8/9/06, Michael Hudson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > The question doesn't make sense: in Python, you assign to a name,
> > an attribute or a subscript, and that's it.
>
> Just to play devil's advocate here, why not to a function call via a
> new
"Phillip J. Eby" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> At 09:24 AM 8/10/2006 -0700, Guido van Rossum wrote:
> >On 8/10/06, James Y Knight <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > It makes just as much sense as assigning to an array access, and the
> > > semantics would be pretty similar.
> >
> >No. Array reference
Dino Viehland <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> We've been working on fixing some exception handling bugs in
> IronPython where we differ from CPython. Along the way we ran into
> this issue which causes CPython to crash when the code below is run.
> It crashes on both 2.4 and 2.5 beta 3. The code
Talin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
[snip]
> I've been thinking about the transition to unicode strings, and I want
> to put forward a notion that might allow the transition to be done
> gradually instead of all at once.
>
> The idea would be to temporarily introduce a new name for 8-bit strings
Barry Warsaw <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I am considering producing a Python 2.3.6 release, which would of
> course only be a bug fix maintenance release. The primary reason is
> that not all OS distributions have upgraded to Python 2.4 and I think
> it's worthwhile for us to bless a relea
Barry Scott <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> I have the tool chains to build extensions against your binary python
> 2.2, 2.3 and 2.4 on windows.
>
> What are the tool chain requirements for building extensions against
> python 2.5 on windows?
The compiler requirements for 2.5 on Windows is t
Barry Warsaw <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Well, there certainly hasn't been an overwhelming chorus of support
> for the idea, so I think I'll waste my time elsewhere ;). Consider
> the offer withdrawn.
I hope someone tries to fix one of the two bugs I listed that were
problems for 2.3 and 2.
"Adam Olsen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On 9/12/06, Greg Ewing <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Adam Olsen wrote:
> >
> > > That brings you back to how you access the flags variable.
> >
> > The existing signal handler sets a flag, doesn't it?
> > So it couldn't be any more broken than the curr
"Martin v. Löwis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Out of curiosity: how do the current universal binaries deal with this
> issue?
If I remember correctly, usually you do two completely independant
compile runs (optionally on the same machine with different configure or
macro definitions, then use a
Greg Ewing <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Armin Rigo wrote:
> > there
> > is no clean way from a test module 'foo.bar.test.test_hello' to import
> > 'foo.bar.hello': the top-level directory must first be inserted into
> > sys.path magically.
>
> I've felt for a long time that problems like this
> w
Martin Devera <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
[snip]
> Even if you can do fast atomic inc/dec, it forces cacheline with
> refcounter to ping-pong between caches of referencing cpus (for read only
> class dicts for example) so that you can probably never get good SMP
> scalability.
That's ok. Why? Be
Greg Ewing <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Gustavo Niemeyer wrote:
>
> > >>> print set.discard.__doc__
> > Remove an element from a set if it is a member.
>
> Actually I'd like this for lists. Often I find myself
> writing
>
>if x not in somelist:
> somelist.remove(x)
>
> A single me
Greg Ewing <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Guido van Rossum wrote:
>
> > Eek? If there are two third-party top-level packages A and B, by
> > different third parties, and A depends on B, how should A find B if
> > not via sys.path or something that is sufficiently equivalent as to
> > have the sa
"Phillip J. Eby" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> At 08:44 PM 9/21/2006 -0700, Josiah Carlson wrote:
> >This can be implemented with a fairly simple package registry, contained
> >within a (small) SQLite database (which is conveniently shipped in
> >
Michael Foord <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Hello all,
>
> I have a suggestion for a new Python built in function: 'flatten'.
This has been brought up many times. I'm -1 on its inclusion, if only
because it's a fairly simple 9-line function (at least the trivial
version I came up with), and n
"Phillip J. Eby" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> At 12:08 AM 9/22/2006 -0700, Josiah Carlson wrote:
> >"Phillip J. Eby" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > At 08:44 PM 9/21/2006 -0700, Josiah Carlson wrote:
[snip]
> You misunderstood me: I mea
"Bob Ippolito" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 9/22/06, Brian Harring <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On Fri, Sep 22, 2006 at 12:05:19PM -0700, Bob Ippolito wrote:
> > > I think instead of adding a flatten function perhaps we should think
> > > about adding something like Erlang's "iolist" support.
"Phillip J. Eby" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> At 12:42 PM 9/22/2006 -0700, Josiah Carlson wrote:
[snip]
> Measure it. Be sure to include the time to import SQLite vs. the time to
> import the zipimport module.
[snip]
> Again, seriously, compare this against a zipfil
xah lee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> There are a lot reports on the lousy state of python docs. I'm not
> much in the python community so i don't know what the developers are
> doing anything about it.
I don't know about everyone else, but when I recieve comments like "the
docs are lousy, fix
"BJörn Lindqvist" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > If there are "rampant criticisms" of the Python docs, then those that
> > are complaining should take specific examples of their complaints to the
> > sourceforge bug tracker and submit documentation patches for the
> > relevant sections. And perso
Michael Hudson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> "Martin v. Löwis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > Kristján V. Jónsson schrieb:
> >> I can't see how this situation is any different from the re-use of
> >> low ints. There is no fundamental law that says that ints below 100
> >> are more common than oth
Alastair Houghton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 3 Oct 2006, at 17:47, James Y Knight wrote:
>
> > On Oct 3, 2006, at 8:30 AM, Martin v. Löwis wrote:
> >> As Michael Hudson observed, this is difficult to implement, though:
> >> You can't distinguish between -0.0 and +0.0 easily, yet you should.
Steve Holden <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Josiah Carlson wrote:
> [yet more on this topic]
>
> If the brainpower already expended on this issue were proportional to
> its significance then we'd be reading about it on CNN news.
Goodness, I wasn't aware that poin
"Gregory P. Smith" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > I've never liked the "".join([]) idiom for string concatenation; in my
> > opinion it violates the principles "Beautiful is better than ugly." and
> > "There should be one-- and preferably only one --obvious way to do it.".
> > (And perhaps s
Fredrik Lundh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Ron Adam wrote:
>
> > I think what may be missing is a larger set of higher level string
> > functions
> > that will work with lists of strings directly. Then lists of strings can
> > be
> > thought of as a mutable string type by its use, and the
Nicko van Someren <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> It's not like having this patch is going to force anyone to change
> the way they write their code. As far as I can tell it simply offers
> better performance if you choose to express your code in some common
> ways. If it speeds up pystone by
"Calvin Spealman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> I know I can not do this, but what are the chances on changing the
> rules so that we can? Basically, since the if __debug__: lines are
> processed before runtime, would it be possible to allow them to be
> used to control the inclusion or omission
"Richard Oudkerk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I am not sure how sensible the idea is, but I have had a first stab at
> writing a module processing.py which is a near clone of threading.py
> but uses processes and sockets for communication. (It is one way of
> avoiding the GIL.)
On non-windows p
Fredrik Lundh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Josiah Carlson wrote:
>
> > Presumably with this library you have created, you have also written a
> > fast object encoder/decoder (like marshal or pickle). If it isn't any
> > faster than cPickle or marshal, th
"M.-A. Lemburg" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Josiah Carlson wrote:
> > Fredrik Lundh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> Josiah Carlson wrote:
> >>
> >>> Presumably with this library you have created, you have also written a
> >
"Richard Oudkerk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 10/10/06, Josiah Carlson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > the really interesting thing here is a ready-made threading-style API, I
> > > think. reimplementing queues, locks, and semaphores can be a rea
Fredrik Lundh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Josiah Carlson wrote:
>
> > It would basically be something along the lines of cPickle, but would
> > only support the basic types of: int, long, float, str, unicode, tuple,
> > list, dictionary.
>
> if you're
Larry Hastings <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
[snip]
> The machine is dual-core, and was quiescent at the time. XP's scheduler
> is hopefully good enough to just leave the process running on one core.
It's not. Go into the task manager (accessable via Ctrl+Alt+Del by
default) and change the proces
"Martin v. Löwis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Thomas Heller schrieb:
> > Yes. But I've switched machines since I last build an installer, and I do
> > not
> > have all of the needed software installed any longer, for example the Wise
> > Installer.
>
> Ok. So we are technically incapable o
Larry Hastings <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> I've significantly enhanced my string-concatenation patch, to the point
> where that name is no longer accurate. So I've redubbed it the "lazy
> strings" patch.
[snip]
Honestly, I don't believe that pure strings should be this complicated.
The im
Larry Hastings <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> It was/is my understanding that the early days of a new major revision
> was the most judicious time to introduce big changes. If I had offered
> these patches six months ago for 2.5, they would have had zero chance of
> acceptance. But 2.6 is in it
"Paul Moore" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I had picked up on this comment, and I have to say that I had been a
> little surprised by the resistance to the change based on the "code
> would break" argument, when you had made such a thorough attempt to
> address this. Perhaps others had missed this
"M.-A. Lemburg" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Travis E. Oliphant wrote:
> > M.-A. Lemburg wrote:
> >> Travis E. Oliphant wrote:
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> PEP:
> >>> Title: Adding data-type objects to the standard library
> >>> A
"Paul Moore" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 10/29/06, "Martin v. Löwis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Travis E. Oliphant schrieb:
> > > Remember the context that the data-format object is presented in. Two
> > > packages need to share a chunk of memory (the package authors do not
> > > know eac
"Martin v. Löwis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Josiah Carlson schrieb:
> > One could also toss wxPython, VTK, or any one of the other GUI libraries
> > into the mix for visualizing those images, of which wxPython just
> > acquired no-copy display of PIL
"Paul Moore" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 10/31/06, Travis Oliphant <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Martin v. Löwis wrote:
> > > [...] because I still don't quite understand what the PEP
> > > wants to achieve.
> > >
> >
> > Are you saying you still don't understand after having read the extende
Larry Hastings <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> But I'm open
> to suggestions, on this or any other aspect of the patch.
As Martin, I, and others have suggested, direct the patch towards Python
3.x unicode text. Also, don't be surprised if Guido says no...
http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-30
"Martin v. Löwis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Paul Chiusano schrieb:
> > To support this, the insert method needs to return a reference to an
> > object which I can then pass to adjust_key() and delete() methods.
> > It's extremely difficult to have this functionality with array-based
> > heaps b
ess memory overall (if there exists a list "free list"), but this
should give you something to start with.
- Josiah
> Paul
>
> On 11/4/06, Josiah Carlson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > "Martin v. Löwis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > &
Talin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Guido van Rossum wrote:
> > I don't know how you define simple. In order to be able to have
> > separate GILs you have to remove *all* sharing of objects between
> > interpreters. And all other data structures, too. It would probably
> > kill performance too,
Armin Rigo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi Martin,
> On Sat, Nov 04, 2006 at 04:47:37PM +0100, "Martin v. L?wis" wrote:
> > Patch #1346572 proposes to also search for .pyc when OptimizeFlag
> > is set, and for .pyo when it is not set. The author argues this is
> > for consistency, as the zipimport
Ben Wing <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> sorry to be casting multiple ideas at once to the list. i've been
> looking into other languages recently and reading the recent PEP's and
> such and it's helped crystallize ideas about what could be better about
> python.
>
> i see in PEP 3101 that th
Neil Toronto <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> compresses quite well. Can Python import modules from encrypted ZIP
> files? That'd be an interesting way to protect a trade secret, and
> probably safer (in the courts) than distributing bytecode.
An import hook would do it.
- Josiah
___
Alastair Houghton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 5 Dec 2006, at 15:51, Fredrik Lundh wrote:
> > Alastair Houghton wrote:
> >> or
> >>
> >>m[3:4]
> >>
> >> fail to do what they expect.
> >
> > the problem with slicing is that people may 1) expect a slice to
> > return
> > a new object *of th
Alastair Houghton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 6 Dec 2006, at 20:29, Josiah Carlson wrote:
>
> > The problem is that either we return a list (easy), or we return
> > something that is basically another match object (not quite so easy).
> > Either way, we would be
Alastair Houghton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 7 Dec 2006, at 01:01, Josiah Carlson wrote:
> > *We* may not be confused, but it's not about us (I'm personally
> > happy to
> > use the .group() interface); it's about relative newbies who,
> >
"Michael Urman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 12/6/06, Josiah Carlson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > *We* may not be confused, but it's not about us (I'm personally happy to
> > use the .group() interface); it's about relative newbies who, gen
"Michael Urman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 12/7/06, Fredrik Lundh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > (and while you guys are waiting, I suggest you start a new thread where
> > you discuss some other inconsistency that would be easy to solve with
> > more code in the interpreter, like why "-", "/
Alastair Houghton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 7 Dec 2006, at 02:01, Josiah Carlson wrote:
> > Alastair Houghton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> On 7 Dec 2006, at 01:01, Josiah Carlson wrote:
> >>> If we don't want
> >>> sl
"Michael Urman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 12/6/06, Josiah Carlson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Special cases aren't special enough to break the rules.
>
> Sure, but where is this rule that would be broken? I've seen it
> invoked, but
"Alexey Borzenkov" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> It can even be simpler and more powerful:
>
> class evallookup:
>def __init__(self, nsg, nsl):
> self.nsg = nsg
> self.nsl = nsl
>def __getitem__(self, name):
> return eval(name, self.nsg, self.nsl)
Never use eval in any c
a Fred <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> I'm looking for advice on stripping down Python for an SBC to run Numpy
> and Scipy. I have the following notes on the system
>
> We have code that requires recent versions of Numpy and Scipy.
> The processor is a 32 bit Sharp ARM Sharp LH7A404 32 bit ARM9
Alastair Houghton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 7 Dec 2006, at 21:47, Josiah Carlson wrote:
> > If we were going to go with slicing, then it would be fairly
> > trivial to
> > include the whole match range. Some portion of the underlying
> > structure
>
1 - 100 of 548 matches
Mail list logo
