Raymond Hettinger wrote:
[Reinhold Birkenfeld]
would anybody mind if I was given permissions on the tracker and CVS,
for
fixing small
things like bug #1202475. I feel that I can help you others out a bit
with
this and
I promise I won't change the interpreter to accept braces...
Let's
Brett C. wrote:
Facundo Batista wrote:
On 5/30/05, Fred L. Drake, Jr. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
While we can't (and shouldn't) delete categories, we can change the text used
to describe them. So Python 2.2.2 can become Python 2.2.2
(unmaintained). Whether this is desirable or not, I'm not
[Brett C.]
Been rather quite around here lately so I just wanted to do a quick check to
see what the status is on PEPs 342 and 343. I noticed Nick's PEP is still
not
up. Probably too busy with that fix for genexps in the AST branch, huh,
Nick? =)
[Nick Coghlan]
Something like
At 11:12 AM 5/31/2005 -0700, Guido van Rossum wrote:
uncertainty of the possibility to call close() from the
destructor may have slowed that down.
If you're talking about the bit about __del__ not working when hanging off
a cycle, my apologies for creating that confusion, I misunderstood Tim's
[Guido]
uncertainty of the possibility to call close() from the
destructor may have slowed that down.
[Phillip]
If you're talking about the bit about __del__ not working when hanging off
a cycle, my apologies for creating that confusion, I misunderstood Tim's post.
No, I'm not talking about
At 12:03 PM 5/31/2005 -0700, Guido van Rossum wrote:
Yes, the generator does clear its f_back when it's suspended.
I realize this won't fix all your worries; I just want to rule out this one
*particular* form of cycle as a possibility; i.e., to show that mere
reference to a generator-iterator
If Raymond would rather defer to me, I can give it a shot in a revised
version of PEP 343,
Thanks, that would be great. The decimal conversation used up a lot of
my available cycles.
Raymond
___
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python.org
[Guido]
Yes, the generator does clear its f_back when it's suspended.
[Phillip]
I realize this won't fix all your worries; I just want to rule out
this one *particular* form of cycle as a possibility; i.e., to show
that mere reference to a generator-iterator in a frame does not
create a
