Re: [Python-Dev] The lazy strings patch

2006-10-23 Thread Fredrik Lundh
Josiah Carlson wrote: It would be a radical change for Python 2.6, and really the 2.x series, likely requiring nontrivial changes to extension modules that deal with strings, and the assumptions about strings that have held for over a decade. the assumptions hidden in everyone's use of the

Re: [Python-Dev] The lazy strings patch

2006-10-23 Thread Nick Coghlan
Josiah Carlson wrote: Want my advice? Aim for Py3k text as your primary target, but as a wrapper, not as the core type (I put the odds at somewhere around 0 for such a core type change). If you are good, and want to make guys like me happy, you could even make it support the buffer interface

Re: [Python-Dev] The lazy strings patch

2006-10-23 Thread skip
Anyway, it was my intent to post the patch and see what happened. Being a first-timer at this, and not having even read the core development mailing lists for very long, I had no idea what to expect. Though I genuinely didn't expect it to be this brusque. Martin I could

Re: [Python-Dev] The lazy strings patch

2006-10-23 Thread Steve Holden
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Anyway, it was my intent to post the patch and see what happened. Being a first-timer at this, and not having even read the core development mailing lists for very long, I had no idea what to expect. Though I genuinely didn't expect it to be this

Re: [Python-Dev] The lazy strings patch

2006-10-23 Thread Larry Hastings
Steve Holden wrote: But it seems to me that the only major issue is the inability to provide zero-byte terminators with this new representation. I guess I wasn't clear in my description of the patch; sorry about that. Like "lazy concatenation objects", "lazy slices" render when you

Re: [Python-Dev] The lazy strings patch

2006-10-23 Thread Jean-Paul Calderone
On Mon, 23 Oct 2006 07:58:25 -0700, Larry Hastings [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: [snip] If external Python extension modules are as well-behaved as the shipping Python source tree, there simply wouldn't be a problem. Python source is delightfully consistent about using the macro

Re: [Python-Dev] The lazy strings patch

2006-10-23 Thread Paul Moore
On 10/23/06, Larry Hastings [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Steve Holden wrote: But it seems to me that the only major issue is the inability to provide zero-byte terminators with this new representation. I guess I wasn't clear in my description of the patch; sorry about that. Like lazy

Re: [Python-Dev] The lazy strings patch

2006-10-23 Thread skip
Larry The only function that *might* return a non-terminated char * is Larry PyString_AsUnterminatedString(). This function is static to Larry stringobject.c--and I would be shocked if it were ever otherwise. If it's static to stringobject.c it doesn't need a PyString_ prefix. In

Re: [Python-Dev] The lazy strings patch

2006-10-23 Thread Fredrik Lundh
Larry Hastings wrote: Am I correct in understanding that changing the Python minor revision number (2.5 - 2.6) requires external modules to recompile? not, in general, on Unix. it's recommended, but things usually work quite well anyway. /F ___

Re: [Python-Dev] The lazy strings patch

2006-10-23 Thread Josiah Carlson
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 point,

Re: [Python-Dev] The lazy strings patch

2006-10-23 Thread Jean-Paul Calderone
On Mon, 23 Oct 2006 09:07:51 -0700, Josiah Carlson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: 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

Re: [Python-Dev] The lazy strings patch

2006-10-23 Thread Martin v. Löwis
[EMAIL PROTECTED] schrieb: Anyway, it was my intent to post the patch and see what happened. Being a first-timer at this, and not having even read the core development mailing lists for very long, I had no idea what to expect. Though I genuinely didn't expect it to be this

Re: [Python-Dev] The lazy strings patch

2006-10-23 Thread Martin v. Löwis
Larry Hastings schrieb: Am I correct in understanding that changing the Python minor revision number (2.5 - 2.6) requires external modules to recompile? (It certainly does on Windows.) There is an ongoing debate on that. The original intent was that you normally *shouldn't* have to recompile

[Python-Dev] __str__ bug?

2006-10-23 Thread Mike Krell
Is this a bug? If not, how do I override __str__ on a unicode derived class? class S(str): def __str__(self): return '__str__ overridden' class U(unicode): def __str__(self): return '__str__ overridden' def __unicode__(self): return u'__unicode__ overridden' s = S() u = U() print

[Python-Dev] RELEASED Python 2.3.6, release candidate 1

2006-10-23 Thread Anthony Baxter
On behalf of the Python development team and the Python community, I'm announcing the release of Python 2.3.6 (release candidate 1). Python 2.3.6 is a security bug-fix release. While Python 2.5 is the latest version of Python, we're making this release for people who are still running Python 2.3.