On Wed, Sep 3, 2008 at 7:39 AM, Curt Hagenlocher [EMAIL PROTECTED]wrote:
One other reason not to mess with the PATH -- at least by default --
is that the user may have multiple copies of Python installed. I know
I have at least one machine with 2.4.5, 2.5.2, 2.6b2 and 3.0b2
installed -- and
On 03 sep 2008 at 00:50:13, M.-A. Lemburg [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
There already is a menu entry that starts the Python interpreter
on Windows, so why not use that ?
Because i need to start Python from folders which have
files that define a specific environment.
I have several servers and
Greg Ewing wrote:
Steven D'Aprano wrote:
Why not expose the class directly, instead of making it private and
then exposing it via a factory function that does nothing else?
This option would also have the advantage of not
changing the API (unless there's code out there that
actually
On 2008-09-03 04:12, Greg Ewing wrote:
M.-A. Lemburg wrote:
The problem is: how to undo those changes without accidentally
undoing an explicit change made by the user ?
Is that really much of an issue? If the PATH contains an
entry corresponding to the Python installation that's
being
On 2008-09-03 10:15, Cesare Di Mauro wrote:
On 03 sep 2008 at 00:50:13, M.-A. Lemburg [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
There already is a menu entry that starts the Python interpreter
on Windows, so why not use that ?
Because i need to start Python from folders which have
files that define a
M.-A. Lemburg wrote:
On 2008-09-03 04:12, Greg Ewing wrote:
M.-A. Lemburg wrote:
The problem is: how to undo those changes without accidentally
undoing an explicit change made by the user ?
Is that really much of an issue? If the PATH contains an
entry corresponding to the Python
Perhaps we could have an option to place a python.bat
into C:\Windows\ or C:\Windows\System\.
Except you still have the last in wins issue, and you have to make a
decision on whether or not to delete the file.
If this is done the batch file should be named python25.bat or so
depending
On Wed, Sep 3, 2008 at 3:10 PM, Thomas Heller [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Perhaps we could have an option to place a python.bat
into C:\Windows\ or C:\Windows\System\.
If this is done the batch file should be named python25.bat or so
depending on the version.
Instead of having a .bat file
On 03/09/2008, Thomas Heller [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Perhaps we could have an option to place a python.bat
into C:\Windows\ or C:\Windows\System\.
Except you still have the last in wins issue, and you have to make a
decision on whether or not to delete the file.
If this is done
Paul Moore wrote:
On 03/09/2008, Thomas Heller [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Perhaps we could have an option to place a python.bat
into C:\Windows\ or C:\Windows\System\.
Except you still have the last in wins issue, and you have to make a
decision on whether or not to delete the file.
If this
Paul Moore schrieb:
Bat files don't work when called from another bat file. This hits me
regularly, when people supply wrapper bat files. Example:
myscript.bat:
@echo off
do some stuff
python my_py_script.py
do some more stuff
If python is a bat file, do some more stuff will never get
On 03/09/2008, Tim Golden [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
You can use CALL within one batch file to chain
another, returning afterwards to the first.
Correct. Sorry, I forgot to mention that.
But this is obviously not the most transparent thing
on earth!
Indeed - and it certainly isn't a wrapper
On Wed, Sep 3, 2008 at 3:46 PM, Paul Moore [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
PS If anyone knows a *good* way of writing wrapper scripts on Windows
which doesn't suffer from the bat file nesting problem above, please
let me (and the rest of the world!) know!
You can use setuptools console scripts,
On 03 Sep 2008 at 13:34:18, M.-A. Lemburg [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Same here, but I usually have a env.bat that sets up whatever
environment I need (including the required Python version) and
run that when opening a prompt to work on a particular project.
IMHO, the only point of having the
Mark Hammond mhammond at skippinet.com.au writes:
I mean that many Windows use the PATH, and as such, may fail if a new
directory is added to the PATH that contains a DLL they indirectly use.
Then it's just a matter of not putting any DLLs in those directories, isn't it?
If I *did* expect
From this page:
http://docs.python.org/dev/index.html
I searched for csv and got just one hit:
http://docs.python.org/dev/contents.html?highlight=csv
Shouldn't it have at least matched the docs for the csv module itself, not
just the table of contents?
Thx,
Skip
SVN checkout over HTTPS protocol requires password. Is it intentional
or just temporary server issue? I am behind a proxy that doesn't
support PROPFIND requests and I can't test SVN+SSH, because 22 port is
closed.
Site docs keep silence about that HTTPS is used at all. Shouldn't
authentication be
techtonik techtonik at gmail.com writes:
SVN checkout over HTTPS protocol requires password. Is it intentional
or just temporary server issue? I am behind a proxy that doesn't
support PROPFIND requests and I can't test SVN+SSH, because 22 port is
closed.
As a workaround, if you only need
2008/9/2 Greg Ewing [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Steven D'Aprano wrote:
Why not expose the class directly, instead of making it private and then
exposing it via a factory function that does nothing else?
This option would also have the advantage of not
changing the API (unless there's code out there
On Wed, Sep 3, 2008 at 6:08 PM, Antoine Pitrou [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
As a workaround, if you only need read-only access, you can use the Mercurial
mirrors which should work through your proxy (AFAIK Mercurial only uses GET
and
POST).
Type hg clone http://code.python.org/hg/trunk/; or hg
On Wed, Sep 3, 2008 at 3:39 PM, techtonik [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wed, Sep 3, 2008 at 6:08 PM, Antoine Pitrou [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
As a workaround, if you only need read-only access, you can use the Mercurial
mirrors which should work through your proxy (AFAIK Mercurial only uses GET
techtonik techtonik at gmail.com writes:
I do not need the whole branch - only a small subset of files related
to distutils. I know that bazaar can't do partial checkouts - it can
only fetch the whole branch. What about mercurial?
Mercurial can't do it either. But I don't think it matters a
On Wed, Sep 3, 2008 at 6:08 PM, Brett Cannon [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wed, Sep 3, 2008 at 3:39 PM, techtonik [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wed, Sep 3, 2008 at 6:08 PM, Antoine Pitrou [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
As a workaround, if you only need read-only access, you can use the
Mercurial
I think this should be deferred to Py3.1.
This decision was not widely discussed and
I think it likely that some users will
be surprised and dismayed. The release
candidate seems to be the wrong time to
yank this out (in part because of the surprise
factor) and in part because I think the
On Wed, Sep 3, 2008 at 4:41 PM, Raymond Hettinger [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I think this should be deferred to Py3.1.
This decision was not widely discussed and I think it likely that some users
will
be surprised and dismayed.
Perhaps, but that could be said about almost any module that has
M.-A. Lemburg wrote:
However, always having the latest version on PATH is not
an option either, since e.g. I wouldn't want all .py scripts
to be run by Python 3.0 just because I installed it for
testing purposes.
Keep in mind that the normal installation process on
unix *does* make python
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Sep 3, 2008, at 7:01 PM, Jesus Cea wrote:
Barry Warsaw wrote:
and I know Brett agrees, so that's it. On IRC, I've just asked
Benjamin
to do the honors for 3.0 and Brett will add the deprecations for 2.6.
I just committed the fix for bsddb
On Wed, Sep 03, 2008 at 04:41:32PM -0700, Raymond Hettinger wrote:
- I think this should be deferred to Py3.1.
-
- This decision was not widely discussed and
- I think it likely that some users will
- be surprised and dismayed. The release
- candidate seems to be the wrong time to
- yank this
I was reading through the Dictionary views section:
http://docs.python.org/dev/3.0/library/stdtypes.html#dictionary-view-objects
Unless I am mistaken; the intersection at the end of the example usage
should be:
keys {'eggs', 'bacon', 'salad'}
{'bacon'}
Cheers,
~ro
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
I'm not going to release rc1 tonight. There are too many open release
blockers that I don't want to defer, and I'd like the buildbots to
churn through the bsddb removal on all platforms. Let me first thank
Benjamin, Brett, Mark and Antoine
On Wed, Sep 3, 2008 at 7:56 PM, C. Titus Brown [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wed, Sep 03, 2008 at 04:41:32PM -0700, Raymond Hettinger wrote:
- I think this should be deferred to Py3.1.
-
- This decision was not widely discussed and
- I think it likely that some users will
- be surprised and
[Barry]
I'm not going to release rc1 tonight.
Can I go ahead with some bug fixes and doc improvements
or should I wait until after Friday?
Raymond
___
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
thanks. in general report all issues even ones like this on
bugs.python.org rather than on a mailing list where they can get lost.
i've fixed this trivial one in py3k svn r66207.
On Wed, Sep 3, 2008 at 8:16 PM, Reed O'Brien [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I was reading through the Dictionary views
On Thu, Sep 4, 2008 at 1:41 AM, Raymond Hettinger [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The release
candidate seems to be the wrong time to
yank this out (in part because of the surprise
factor) and in part because I think the change
silently affects shelve performance so that the
impact may be
34 matches
Mail list logo
