On Monday 20 March 2006 00:49, Anthony Baxter wrote:
> I'd still like to push 2.4.3rc1 out in a couple of days time, with
> 2.4.3 final next week, and then maybe aim for 2.5a1 a week or two
> later? How does that work for everyone?
I should be fine to build the documentation Wednesday night (US
Guido van Rossum wrote:
...
> Please don't respond with answers to these questions -- each of them
> is worth several threads. Instead, ponder them, and respond with a +1
> or -1 on the creation of the python-3000 mailing list. We'll start
> discussing the issues there -- or here, if the general s
On Friday 2006-03-17 05:04, Alex Martelli wrote:
> Hmmm, if we allowed '( as )' for generic expr's we'd make
> a lot of people pining for 'assignment as an expression' very happy,
> wouldn't we...?
I hope not. It looks a lot more like a binding construct
than an assigning one. But what about
On Saturday 18 March 2006 18:48, Neal Norwitz wrote:
> Just in case anybody here's been snoozing, 2.5 alpha 1 is coming up
> real quick, hopefully within a couple of weeks. If you have any
> *major* features (particularly implemented in C) that you want to
> see in 2.5, bring it up now. I want to
On 3/15/06, Georg Brandl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Neil Schemenauer wrote:
> > I think it would be a good idea to follow the Plone project and try
> > to encourage new developers by offering assistance to get them up
> > and running. AFAIK, we've done that for the other bug days but it
> > migh
On 3/19/06, Barry Warsaw <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Sun, 2006-03-19 at 19:45 -0800, Guido van Rossum wrote:
>
> > -1. See my response in the other thread. The focus on 'Error' is
> > mistaken, and we have a large body of existing code that derives from
> > Exception.
>
> Just to be clear, are
I see increased activity related to Python 3000. This is great, but
there is some danger involved. Some of the dangers are: overloading
developers; setting unrealistic expectations for what can be
accomplished; scaring the more conservative user community; paralyzing
developers who can't decide whe
On Mar 19, 2006, at 7:42 PM, Guido van Rossum wrote:
...
>> There seem to be other places where Python is beginning to require
>> parens
>> even though they aren't strictly necessary to resolve syntactic
>> ambiguity.
>
> In the style guide only, I hope. The parens that are mandatory in a
On Sun, 2006-03-19 at 19:45 -0800, Guido van Rossum wrote:
> -1. See my response in the other thread. The focus on 'Error' is
> mistaken, and we have a large body of existing code that derives from
> Exception.
Just to be clear, are you saying -1 only for Python 2.5 or -1 also for
Python 3.0? If
On 3/18/06, Barry Warsaw <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Fri, 2006-03-17 at 23:48 -0800, Neal Norwitz wrote:
>
> > Just in case anybody here's been snoozing, 2.5 alpha 1 is coming up
> > real quick, hopefully within a couple of weeks. If you have any
> > *major* features (particularly implemented
On 3/18/06, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> The comma and "as" have different precedence in your proposed except clause
> than they currently do in the import statement. I think that can lead to
> confusion. In particular, if someone is used to
>
> from foo import bar, baz as f
On 3/19/06, Greg Ewing <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Have we really being telling them to derive *directly*
> from Exception, or just that deriving somehow from
> Exception will become mandatory?
It doesn't matter. Most code that tries to be a good citizen today
derives its exceptions from Exceptio
On Sat, 2006-03-18 at 19:22 -0500, Raymond Hettinger wrote:
> > [Barry Warsaw]
> >> Oh, also, we have a couple of additions to the PySet C API.
> >> I'll work on putting together an SF patch for them over the weekend.
>
> What are you proposing to add to the PySet API?
PySet_Clear(), PySet_Next()
On 3/19/06, Tim Peters <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > If anyone sees spurious failures with the buildbot (one time failures,
> > crashes, etc), please report the problems to python-dev. It would be
> > great to see if you can reproduce the results with the same tests that
> > failed. We need to
Giovanni Bajo wrote:
> OTOH, I also understand that people have been told that deriving from
> Exception
> is the right thing to do forever now.
Have we really being telling them to derive *directly*
from Exception, or just that deriving somehow from
Exception will become mandatory?
For the pur
Sigh. Enough already. PEP 352 was chosen to minimize incompatibilities
and maximize gain with minimal changes in the tree. Also note that
Warnings can sometimes be raised and should then treated as errors, so
Warning would have to inherit from Error.
I vote for the status quo in HEAD, except I've
[Tim Peters]
>> ...
>> test_socket_ssl
>> test test_socket_ssl crashed --
>> exceptions.TypeError: 'NoneType' object is not callable
[Neal Norwitz]
> For closure, I believe this problem was addressed by revs 42842 and
> 42844 to Lib/test/test_importhooks.py.
Amazingly, the same thing popped u
Just van Rossum wrote:
> Greg Ewing wrote:
>
> > Also maybe start issuing warnings whenever you inherit
> > directly from Exception.
>
> Ugh. I hate it when it's made (virtually) impossible to write code that
> runs warnings-free on both Python X.Y and X.(Y+1).
Yes, that could be a problem. Maybe
Travis E. Oliphant wrote:
> The purpose of the C-object would be so that all extension writers to
> Python can rely on a simple but general-purpose description of an array
> that Numeric has established over the past decade.
I'm not sure that this is the right direction to approach
things from.
I was sort of hoping that Python would approach Py3K asymptotically... :-).
PEP 328, for instance, talks about Python 2.5, 2.6, 2.7.
Bill
___
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe:
John J Lee wrote:
> a. Drop 2.x right away to concentrate on developing and maintaining the
> 3.0 stdlib (and/or the 3.0 interpreter)?
I expect the same to happen as with all previous releases: the
current and the previous release (say, 3.0 and 2.5) are maintained;
anything older is unmaint
On 3/19/06, John J Lee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Fri, 17 Mar 2006, Brett Cannon wrote:
>
> > On 3/17/06, A.M. Kuchling <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> Thought: We should drop all of httplib, urllib, urllib2, and ftplib,
> >> and instead adopt some third-party library for HTTP/FTP/whatever,
>
On Sun, Mar 19, 2006, Brett Cannon wrote:
>
> I guess we need to decide if we want to promote the copying of
> metadata from the decorated function into the decorator or not.
Short answer: absolutely yes
I had to deal with a related issue recently, where embedded doctests no
longer worked on the
On 3/17/06, Nick Coghlan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Josiah Carlson wrote:
> > "Brett Cannon" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> With the discussion of a possible @decorator to help set the metadata
> >> of the decorator to that of what the wrapped function has, I had an
> >> idea that I wanted to to
Hi,
On Sat, Mar 18, 2006 at 06:57:12PM +0100, Georg Brandl wrote:
> >> >>> class D(object):
> >> ... __dict__ = {}
> >> ...
> >> >>> d = D()
> >> >>> d.a = 1
> >> >>> d.__dict__
> >> {}
> >> >>> d.__dict__ = {}
> >> >>> d.a
> >> 1
> >
> > Yep, that's the bug, fully reproducible in 2.3 and 2.4
On Fri, 17 Mar 2006, Brett Cannon wrote:
> On 3/17/06, A.M. Kuchling <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Thought: We should drop all of httplib, urllib, urllib2, and ftplib,
>> and instead adopt some third-party library for HTTP/FTP/whatever,
>> write a Python wrapper, and use it instead. (The only suc
On 18-mrt-2006, at 10:28, M.-A. Lemburg wrote:
> Ronald Oussoren wrote:
>> On 17-mrt-2006, at 22:14, M.-A. Lemburg wrote:
>>
>>> Martin v. Löwis wrote:
Thomas Heller wrote:
> I'm not sure if this is what Marc-Andre means, but maybe these
> definitions
> could go into a new includ
Terry Reedy wrote:
>> Buildbot URL: http://www.python.org:9010/
>
> Both links failed with Cannot Find Server (Winxp/IE).
Right. Buildbot doesn't know what its URL is; it is
http://www.python.org/dev/buildbot/
Regards,
Martin
___
Python-Dev mailing lis
wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> The Buildbot has detected a new failure of sparc solaris10 gcc trunk.
> Full details are available at:
> http://www.python.org:9010/sparc%20solaris10%20gcc%20trunk/builds/68
>
> Buildbot URL: http://www.python.org:9010/
Both links failed with Cannot Fin
"Neal Norwitz" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On 3/18/06, "Martin v. Löwis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Christos Georgiou wrote:
> > I would like to know if supplying a patch for it sometime in the next
> > couple
> > of weeks would be considered a patch (since the
Testing submission from dinsdale.
___
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
The Buildbot has detected a new failure of sparc solaris10 gcc trunk.
Full details are available at:
http://www.python.org:9010/sparc%20solaris10%20gcc%20trunk/builds/68
Buildbot URL: http://www.python.org:9010/
Build Reason: The web-page 'rebuild' button was pressed by '': Force compile
error
Nick Coghlan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Rather than trying to change course midstream, I *like* the fact that
> the PEP 352 hierarchy introduces BaseException to bring the language
> itself into line with what people have already been taught. Breaking
> things in Py3k is all well and good, but b
33 matches
Mail list logo
