Bill Janssen wrote:
Thomas Wouters [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Allow me to paraphrase glyph (with whom I'm in complete agreement, for what
it's worth): many newbies will be disappointed by Python if they start with
Python 3.0 and discover that most of the cool possibilities they had heard
On Sat, Dec 6, 2008 at 02:47, Guido van Rossum [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
In the mean time, I don't mind if people learn 3.0 first and 2.6
second. It's probably easier that way than the other way around. :-)
It may be easier in a vacuum -- although I don't think it is. 3.0 is more
logical than
On Fri, Dec 05, 2008 at 08:37:45PM -0500, James Y Knight wrote:
On Dec 5, 2008, at 7:48 PM, Nick Coghlan wrote:
You can't display a non-decodable filename to the user, hence the user
will have no idea what they're working on. Non-filesystem related apps
have no business trying to deal with
On Sat, Dec 06, 2008 at 12:03:55PM +1100, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
I'd rather have the Python API report errors then silence them, at least
by default.
+1 for encoding errors by default.
Oleg.
--
Oleg Broytmannhttp://phd.pp.ru/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Sat, Dec 06, 2008 at 02:22:29AM +0100, Martin v. L?wis wrote:
And environment variables, command line arguments, and file names
are not bytes, but characters.
There is no such thing as plain text! If you say these are
characters you must also name the encoding for them.
I have a change to check in from this issue:
http://bugs.python.org/issue4483
It is a build error for _dbmmodule.c which was reported against Python 3.0
involving a change to the layout of symbols in libgdbm. (There is now a
libgdbm_compat in some systems which holds the dbm_* symbols.)
Nick Coghlan wrote:
Toshio Kuratomi wrote:
Nonsense. A program can do tons of things with a non-decodable
filename. Where it's limited is non-decodable filedata.
You can't display a non-decodable filename to the user, hence the user
will have no idea what they're working on.
On Fri, Dec 5, 2008 at 10:18 PM, Bugbee, Larry [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
There has been some discussion here that users should use the str or
byte function variant based on what is relevant to their system, for
example when getting a list of file names or opening a file. That
thought process
On Fri, Dec 5, 2008 at 8:57 PM, Tres Seaver [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Amen! the idea that paths, environment varioables, and stuff pulled off
of sockets can be treated as text rather than strings is just wishful
thinking.
Unfortunately most of the programmers of the world *do* think that
Bugbee, Larry wrote:
There has been some discussion here that users should use the str or
byte function variant based on what is relevant to their system, for
example when getting a list of file names or opening a file. That
thought process really doesn't do much for those of us that write
On Sat, Dec 6, 2008 at 2:12 AM, Thomas Wouters [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Sat, Dec 6, 2008 at 02:47, Guido van Rossum [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
In the mean time, I don't mind if people learn 3.0 first and 2.6
second. It's probably easier that way than the other way around. :-)
It may be
On Fri, Dec 5, 2008 at 10:03 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The best thing for 3.0 adoption would be a 3.0 welcoming committee. A
group of hackers wandering from one popular open source library to another,
writing patches for 3.x compatibility issues. There must be lots of people
who care
On 10:12 am, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
When he learned he had to go
back and relearn and fix them by hand, his actual words were if thats
the
case, I'm gonna be forced to use another language. I hope that isn't a
typical example of such a case, but I can partly understand the
sentiment.
This
On 02:34 pm, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Fri, Dec 05, 2008 at 08:37:45PM -0500, James Y Knight wrote:
On Dec 5, 2008, at 7:48 PM, Nick Coghlan wrote:
You can't display a non-decodable filename to the user, hence the
user
will have no idea what they're working on. Non-filesystem related
apps
On Sat, Dec 6, 2008 at 10:48 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 10:12 am, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
When he learned he had to go
back and relearn and fix them by hand, his actual words were if thats the
case, I'm gonna be forced to use another language. I hope that isn't a
typical example of
On Sat, Dec 6, 2008 at 10:53 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 02:34 pm, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I agree 100%. Russian Unix users use at least 5 different encodings
(koi8-r, cp1251 and utf-8 are the most frequent in use, cp866 and
iso-8859-5 are less frequent). I have an FTP server with some
On Sat, Dec 06, 2008 at 06:03:55AM -, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
- On 01:47 am, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
- In spite of Python being a programming language, there is a difference
- between 'casual user of the language' and 'library developer'; 3.0 is
- certainly a must for all actual library
Date: Fri, 05 Dec 2008 22:22:38 -0800
From: Dennis Lee Bieber [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: as keyword woes
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Message-ID: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
I'm still in the dark as to what type of data could
even inspire the
use of as as an object name... A collection of a
Warren DeLano wrote:
There, I assert that 'object.as(class_reference)' is the simplest and
most elegant generalization of this widely-used convention. Indeed, it
is the only obvious concise answer, if you are limited to using methods
for casting.
How about to? Almost every language I have
As far as the original point of this thread, I started off just
defending the cautionary text already present in the announcements and
on the website. Since I'm not advocating any changes to that (the brief
caveat on the download page is fine), we'll just have to agree to
disagree on the
On Sat, Dec 6, 2008 at 11:38 AM, Warren DeLano [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
[...]
There, I assert that 'object.as(class_reference)' is the simplest and
most elegant generalization of this widely-used convention. Indeed, it
is the only obvious concise answer, if you are limited to using methods
On 06:16 pm, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Fri, Dec 5, 2008 at 10:03 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I do think that in many cases *some* support from the regular
maintainers of a library would be needed -- for example if you (in
particular) were to express a negative attitude towards porting
On Sat, Dec 6, 2008 at 12:19 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I also don't think 3.0 is perfect, and five years on, there will be a
temptation to make more just this once incompatible changes. Of course,
you've promised these changes won't be made, and *this* set of design
mistakes will be with
On Sat, Dec 6, 2008 at 12:37 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Of course. Grumpy as we are, we're preparing for the 3.0 migration, and
have been for a while. There are tickets open in the tracker, a buildslave
reporting 2.6's -3 warnings, and soon, apparently, a buildslave that will
attempt to
On 08:51 pm, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Sat, Dec 6, 2008 at 12:19 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I also don't think 3.0 is perfect, and five years on, there will be a
temptation to make more just this once incompatible changes. Of
course,
you've promised these changes won't be made, and
On Fri, Dec 5, 2008 at 22:03, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 01:47 am, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
In spite of Python being a programming language, there is a difference
between 'casual user of the language' and 'library developer'; 3.0 is
certainly a must for all actual library developers, and
On Thu, Dec 4, 2008 at 17:02, Frank Wierzbicki [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Thu, Dec 4, 2008 at 3:16 PM, Brett Cannon [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Thu, Dec 4, 2008 at 12:05, Frank Wierzbicki [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wed, Dec 3, 2008 at 10:31 AM, A.M. Kuchling [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
14:00 -
On Dec 6, 2008 5:42pm, Brett Cannon [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Thu, Dec 4, 2008 at 17:02, Frank Wierzbicki wrote:
On Thu, Dec 4, 2008 at 3:16 PM, Brett Cannon wrote:
On Thu, Dec 4, 2008 at 12:05, Frank Wierzbicki wrote:
On Wed, Dec 3, 2008 at 10:31 AM, AM Kuchling wrote:
14:00 - 15:30
On 06 Dec 2008, at 20:38, Warren DeLano wrote:
Date: Fri, 05 Dec 2008 22:22:38 -0800
From: Dennis Lee Bieber [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: as keyword woes
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Message-ID: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
I'm still in the dark as to what type of data could
even inspire the
use of
Hello people,
Looking at http://www.python.org/dev/buildbot/, we are still missing buildbots
for the release26-maint and release30-maint branches. Is someone working on
that?
Regards
Antoine.
___
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python.org
Since the release of 3.0, several critical issues have come to our
attention. Namely, the builtin cmp function wasn't removed [1] and the
new IO library proved to be (as expected) abysmally slow [2][3][4].
Christian proposed that we release 3.0.1 within the next week to patch
up this critical
BTW, 3.0 went out the door with test_binascii failing on windows.
Was surprised that some buildbot wasn't complaining.
- Original Message -
From: Antoine Pitrou [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: python-dev@python.org
Sent: Saturday, December 06, 2008 3:15 PM
Subject: [Python-Dev] Buildbots for 2.6
Strong +1
Are the RMs on board?
- Original Message -
From: Benjamin Peterson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: python-dev@python.org
Sent: Saturday, December 06, 2008 3:18 PM
Subject: [Python-Dev] 3.0.1 possibilities
Since the release of 3.0, several critical issues have come to our
attention.
+1
On Sat, Dec 6, 2008 at 3:18 PM, Benjamin Peterson
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Since the release of 3.0, several critical issues have come to our
attention. Namely, the builtin cmp function wasn't removed [1] and the
new IO library proved to be (as expected) abysmally slow [2][3][4].
Christian
Benjamin Peterson musiccomposition at gmail.com writes:
Since the release of 3.0, several critical issues have come to our
attention. Namely, the builtin cmp function wasn't removed [1] and the
new IO library proved to be (as expected) abysmally slow [2][3][4].
Christian proposed that we
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Dec 6, 2008, at 6:25 PM, Guido van Rossum wrote:
On Sat, Dec 6, 2008 at 3:18 PM, Benjamin Peterson
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Since the release of 3.0, several critical issues have come to our
attention. Namely, the builtin cmp function wasn't
On Sat, Dec 06, 2008, Guido van Rossum wrote:
But I do *not* think it is a good idea to emphasize elsewhere that
most people shouldn't use Python 3.0. Py3k will have a hard enough
time gaining mindshare without the very developers who created
it discouraging its use. If you can't find it in
On Sat, Dec 06, 2008, Benjamin Peterson wrote:
Since the release of 3.0, several critical issues have come to our
attention. Namely, the builtin cmp function wasn't removed [1] and the
new IO library proved to be (as expected) abysmally slow [2][3][4].
Christian proposed that we release 3.0.1
Hello,
On Sun, Dec 7, 2008 at 00:19, Raymond Hettinger [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
BTW, 3.0 went out the door with test_binascii failing on windows.
Was surprised that some buildbot wasn't complaining.
They were complaining. But not loud enough to stop the release.
(see bottom of
On Sat, Dec 6, 2008 at 15:41, Barry Warsaw [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Dec 6, 2008, at 6:25 PM, Guido van Rossum wrote:
On Sat, Dec 6, 2008 at 3:18 PM, Benjamin Peterson
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Since the release of 3.0, several critical
Toshio Kuratomi wrote:
Note 2: If there isn't a parallel API on all platforms, for instance,
Guido's proposal to not have os.environb on Windows, then you'll still
have to have a platform specific check. (Likely you should try to access
os.evironb in this instance and if it doesn't exist, use
Nick Coghlan ncoghlan at gmail.com writes:
If the binary APIs are missing from a major platform (i.e. Windows) then
the choice to use them brings with it a major cross-platform portability
problem that should really be handled by the standard library.
+1
I might also add that providing
Warren DeLano wrote:
In other words we have lost the ability to refer to as as the
generalized OOP-compliant/syntax-independent method name for casting:
Other possible spellings:
# Use the normal Python idiom for avoiding keyword clashes
# and append a trailing underscore
new_object =
* Nick Coghlan wrote:
Toshio Kuratomi wrote:
Note 2: If there isn't a parallel API on all platforms, for instance,
Guido's proposal to not have os.environb on Windows, then you'll still
have to have a platform specific check. (Likely you should try to
access os.evironb in this instance
Aahz wrote:
I believe that it would be a shame and a disservice to Python if there
were a large proportion of the Python community that discouraged the use
of 3.0; I also believe it would be a shame and a disservice to Python if
you (and other people) tell conservatives like me that we should
André Malo wrote:
While on Windows:
- underlying OS API uses Unicode
- Unicode API just passes values straight through
- binary API uses the system encoding to decode bytes names and values
to be passed to the OS API and to encode Unicode names and values
received from the OS API
Now that
Sorry, I don't think I can do that. It's difficult-to-impossible to leap
straight from Python 2.2 or 2.3 to 3.0
My experience is different. That is very well possible (of course, I
haven't heard in a long time of a project that needs to maintain
compatibility with 2.2).
Regards,
Martin
Looking at http://www.python.org/dev/buildbot/, we are still missing buildbots
for the release26-maint and release30-maint branches. Is someone working on
that?
Yes. I won't enable 2.6 build slaves until 2.5.3 is released, but will
afterwards.
Regards,
Martin
On Sun, Dec 07, 2008, Nick Coghlan wrote:
If the binary APIs are missing from a major platform (i.e. Windows) then
the choice to use them brings with it a major cross-platform portability
problem that should really be handled by the standard library.
+1
--
Aahz ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Date: Sat, 6 Dec 2008 12:13:16 -0800 (PST)
From: Carl Banks [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: as keyword woes
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Message-ID:
(snip)
If you write a PEP, I advise you to try to sound less whiny and than
you have in this thread.
(snip)
Ehem, well, such comments
On Sat, Dec 6, 2008 at 5:45 PM, Nick Coghlan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Aahz wrote:
I believe that it would be a shame and a disservice to Python if there
were a large proportion of the Python community that discouraged the use
of 3.0; I also believe it would be a shame and a disservice to
On 06:07 am, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Guido van Rossum wrote:
On Sat, Dec 6, 2008 at 10:53 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I find it interesting to note that the only users in this discussion
who
actually have these problems in real life all have this attitude.
For file managers and
52 matches
Mail list logo
