Re: [Python-Dev] PEP 384 status

2010-08-29 Thread Antoine Pitrou
On Sun, 29 Aug 2010 09:20:56 +1000 Nick Coghlan ncogh...@gmail.com wrote: Four options come to mind: - just leave it out of the limited API, extensions can do their own thing to print objects - leave PyObject_Print out of the limited API, but create a PyObject_PrintEx that takes a Python

Re: [Python-Dev] PEP 384 status

2010-08-29 Thread Nick Coghlan
On Sun, Aug 29, 2010 at 6:24 PM, Antoine Pitrou solip...@pitrou.net wrote: On Sun, 29 Aug 2010 09:20:56 +1000 Nick Coghlan ncogh...@gmail.com wrote: Four options come to mind: - just leave it out of the limited API, extensions can do their own thing to print objects - leave PyObject_Print

Re: [Python-Dev] PEP 384 status

2010-08-29 Thread Antoine Pitrou
On Sun, 29 Aug 2010 18:41:45 +1000 Nick Coghlan ncogh...@gmail.com wrote: On Sun, Aug 29, 2010 at 6:24 PM, Antoine Pitrou solip...@pitrou.net wrote: On Sun, 29 Aug 2010 09:20:56 +1000 Nick Coghlan ncogh...@gmail.com wrote: Four options come to mind: - just leave it out of the limited

Re: [Python-Dev] PEP 384 status

2010-08-29 Thread Nick Coghlan
On Sun, Aug 29, 2010 at 7:10 PM, Antoine Pitrou solip...@pitrou.net wrote: On Sun, 29 Aug 2010 18:41:45 +1000 Nick Coghlan ncogh...@gmail.com wrote: I believe both that option, and my third option, would run into trouble due to the potential for errno confusion. I don't understand. What's

Re: [Python-Dev] PEP 384 status

2010-08-29 Thread Antoine Pitrou
On Sun, 29 Aug 2010 22:16:57 +1000 Nick Coghlan ncogh...@gmail.com wrote: However, since even platforms other than Windows aren't immune to version upgrades of the standard C runtime, I'm still more comfortable with the idea that the strict ABI should refuse to pass FILE* pointers across

Re: [Python-Dev] PEP 384 status

2010-08-29 Thread James Y Knight
On Aug 29, 2010, at 8:16 AM, Nick Coghlan wrote: However, since even platforms other than Windows aren't immune to version upgrades of the standard C runtime Aren't they? I don't know of any other platform that lets you have two versions of libc linked into a single address space. Linux has

Re: [Python-Dev] r84355 - python/branches/py3k/Lib/test/test_ssl.py

2010-08-29 Thread Antoine Pitrou
On Sun, 29 Aug 2010 22:56:56 +0200 (CEST) giampaolo.rodola python-check...@python.org wrote: +with self.assertRaises(IOError) as err: +ssl.wrap_socket(socket.socket(), certfile=WRONGCERT) +self.assertEqual(err.errno, errno.ENOENT) The assertEqual will never get

Re: [Python-Dev] r84355 - python/branches/py3k/Lib/test/test_ssl.py

2010-08-29 Thread Michael Foord
On 30/08/2010 00:23, Antoine Pitrou wrote: On Sun, 29 Aug 2010 22:56:56 +0200 (CEST) giampaolo.rodolapython-check...@python.org wrote: +with self.assertRaises(IOError) as err: +ssl.wrap_socket(socket.socket(), certfile=WRONGCERT) +self.assertEqual(err.errno,

Re: [Python-Dev] PEP 384 status

2010-08-29 Thread Nick Coghlan
On Mon, Aug 30, 2010 at 1:43 AM, Antoine Pitrou solip...@pitrou.net wrote: On Sun, 29 Aug 2010 22:16:57 +1000 Nick Coghlan ncogh...@gmail.com wrote: (actually, I'm baffled that Windows has such problems, and I would suggest that it's not Python's job to shield Windows application developers

Re: [Python-Dev] PEP 384 status

2010-08-29 Thread Antoine Pitrou
On Mon, 30 Aug 2010 07:31:34 +1000 Nick Coghlan ncogh...@gmail.com wrote: Since part of the point of PEP 384 is to support multiple versions of the C runtime in a single process, [...] I think that's quite a maximalist goal. The point of PEP 384 should be to define a standard API for Python,

Re: [Python-Dev] r84355 - python/branches/py3k/Lib/test/test_ssl.py

2010-08-29 Thread Giampaolo Rodolà
Sorry, I didn't get how the context-manager actually worked. Fixed in r84356. 2010/8/29 Michael Foord fuzzy...@voidspace.org.uk:  On 30/08/2010 00:23, Antoine Pitrou wrote: On Sun, 29 Aug 2010 22:56:56 +0200 (CEST) giampaolo.rodolapython-check...@python.org  wrote: +        with

Re: [Python-Dev] PEP 384 status

2010-08-29 Thread David Cournapeau
On Mon, Aug 30, 2010 at 6:43 AM, Antoine Pitrou solip...@pitrou.net wrote: On Mon, 30 Aug 2010 07:31:34 +1000 Nick Coghlan ncogh...@gmail.com wrote: Since part of the point of PEP 384 is to support multiple versions of the C runtime in a single process, [...] I think that's quite a