Sent from my iPhone
> On 15 Sep 2019, at 23:25, Tim Peters wrote:
>
> [Tim]
>> While python-dev has several "official" moderators, best I can tell
>> I'm the only one who has reviewed these messages for years.
>
> I should clarify that! That's not meant to be a dig at the other
>
Sent from my iPhone
> On 22 Jun 2019, at 08:15, Karthikeyan Singaravelan
> wrote:
>
> From Python 3.6 the order of keyword arguments to a function is preserved. In
> https://bugs.python.org/issue21256 the order of keyword arguments for
> unittest.mock's repr were sorted to return
> On 28 Apr 2019, at 22:55, Chris Withers wrote:
>
>> On 28/04/2019 22:21, Robert Collins wrote:
>> Thank you!
>
> Thank me when we get there ;-) Currently in Dec 2018 with a wonderful Py2
> failure:
>
> ==
> ERROR:
On Wednesday, 15 July 2015, Robert Collins robe...@robertcollins.net
wrote:
On 15 July 2015 at 12:59, Nick Coghlan ncogh...@gmail.com wrote:
There is zero urgency here, so nothing needs to change for 3.5.
Robert's plan is a fine one to propose for 3.6 (and the PyPI mock
backport).
Right -
On Tuesday, 14 July 2015, Christie Wilson bobcatf...@gmail.com wrote:
If people do misspell it, I think they do learn not to in after it
happens a few times.
Unless the line silently executes and they don't notice the mistake for
years :'(
Indeed. This has been a problem with mock, misspelled
To: Michael Foord mich...@voidspace.org.uk
Cc: Frank Wierzbicki fwierzbi...@gmail.com
Recent changes to trunk (last 6 months)
* Recently tagged a soft beta 2!
* Java 7 JVM is now the minimum version, which gives a larger base of
functionality to work with (such as using Java 7's AutoCloseable
On 18/03/14 16:44, Antoine Pitrou wrote:
Hello Xavier,
It is not obvious your message is appropriate for python-dev. It looks
like mere advertising; if it is not, please explain.
To clarify what this mailing-list is about: On this list the key
Python developers discuss the future of the
On 10 Oct 2013, at 01:53, Eric Snow ericsnowcurren...@gmail.com wrote:
Registration is now open for PyCon US 2014. Are there any plans yet
for the language summit? Just the day (e.g. Thursday April 10) will
suffice. Then we can make arrangements appropriately. Thanks.
Sorry for the late
On 6 October 2013 11:45, georg.brandl python-check...@python.org wrote:
http://hg.python.org/cpython/rev/942b9420e7e9
changeset: 86065:942b9420e7e9
branch: 3.3
parent: 86062:6ced4fb4f711
user:Georg Brandl ge...@python.org
date:Sun Oct 06 12:46:13 2013 +0200
On 3 Oct 2013, at 12:05, Nick Coghlan ncogh...@gmail.com wrote:
On 3 Oct 2013 06:00, Victor Stinner victor.stin...@gmail.com wrote:
I don't remember where, but I remember that I also saw things like
str=str, len=len, So you keep the same name, but you use fast
local lookups
Sent from my iPhone
On 3 Aug 2013, at 19:07, R. David Murray rdmur...@bitdance.com wrote:
On Sat, 03 Aug 2013 10:27:30 -0400, Matt McClure matthewlmccl...@gmail.com
wrote:
Michael Foord fuzzyman at voidspace.org.uk writes:
On 2 Aug 2013, at 19:19, Antoine Pitrou solipsis at pitrou.net
Sent from my iPhone
On 2 Aug 2013, at 14:51, Matt McClure matthewlmccl...@gmail.com wrote:
It seems unittest.TestSuite holds references to unittest.TestCase instances
after the test runs, until the test suite finishes. In a large suite, where
the TestCase instances consume memory during
Sent from my iPhone
On 2 Aug 2013, at 19:19, Antoine Pitrou solip...@pitrou.net wrote:
Le Fri, 2 Aug 2013 18:13:13 +0300,
Michael Foord fuzzy...@voidspace.org.uk a écrit :
On 2 Aug 2013, at 14:51, Matt McClure matthewlmccl...@gmail.com
wrote:
It seems unittest.TestSuite holds
On 5 Jul 2013, at 12:26, Łukasz Langa luk...@langa.pl wrote:
On 5 lip 2013, at 12:07, Martin v. Löwis mar...@v.loewis.de wrote:
I wonder why you need to figure out the signatures in advance.
Can you just wait until the function is actually used, and then
process the parameters as you get
On 4 Jul 2013, at 19:00, Guido van Rossum gu...@python.org wrote:
Thanks for the code pointers. So it's all about monkeypatching. :-) I have
only a little sympathy, as there still seems to be a way to do this, it's
just less convenient. Too bad.
I've also lamented the death of bound
On 20 May 2013, at 18:26, Mark Janssen dreamingforw...@gmail.com wrote:
I'm hoping that core developers don't get caught-up in the doctests are bad
meme.
Instead, we should be clear about their primary purpose which is to test
the examples given in docstrings.
In other words, doctests
On 7 April 2013 14:44, andrew.svetlov python-check...@python.org wrote:
http://hg.python.org/cpython/rev/18fd64f1de2d
changeset: 83179:18fd64f1de2d
branch: 3.3
user:Andrew Svetlov andrew.svet...@gmail.com
date:Sun Apr 07 16:42:24 2013 +0300
summary:
Process DEFAULT
On 20 Mar 2013, at 00:09, Antoine Pitrou solip...@pitrou.net wrote:
On Tue, 19 Mar 2013 21:44:15 -0700
Michael Foord fuzzy...@voidspace.org.uk wrote:
mock_open makes it easy to put a StringIO in place if that's what you want.
It's just a simple helper function for providing some known data
On 20 Mar 2013, at 01:03, Antoine Pitrou solip...@pitrou.net wrote:
On Wed, 20 Mar 2013 00:50:27 -0700
Michael Foord fuzzy...@voidspace.org.uk wrote:
If you want to add support for additional functionality feel free to propose
a patch.
This isn't about additional functionality
On 19 Mar 2013, at 23:09, Gregory P. Smith g...@krypto.org wrote:
On Tue, Mar 19, 2013 at 9:44 PM, Michael Foord fuzzy...@voidspace.org.uk
wrote:
On 19 Mar 2013, at 17:26, Antoine Pitrou solip...@pitrou.net wrote:
On Wed, 20 Mar 2013 01:22:58 +0100 (CET)
michael.foord python
On 19 Mar 2013, at 17:26, Antoine Pitrou solip...@pitrou.net wrote:
On Wed, 20 Mar 2013 01:22:58 +0100 (CET)
michael.foord python-check...@python.org wrote:
http://hg.python.org/cpython/rev/684b75600fa9
changeset: 82811:684b75600fa9
user:Michael Foord mich...@voidspace.org.uk
On 5 Mar 2013, at 07:19, Antoine Pitrou solip...@pitrou.net wrote:
On Mon, 4 Mar 2013 15:47:37 -0800
Eli Bendersky eli...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Mar 4, 2013 at 1:28 PM, Antoine Pitrou solip...@pitrou.net wrote:
On Mon, 4 Mar 2013 13:26:57 -0800
Eli Bendersky eli...@gmail.com wrote:
On 5 Mar 2013, at 09:02, Glyph gl...@twistedmatrix.com wrote:
On Mar 4, 2013, at 11:13 PM, Robert Collins robe...@robertcollins.net wrote:
In principle maybe. Need to talk with the trial developers, nose
developers, py.test developers etc - to get consensus on a number of
internal API
On 5 Mar 2013, at 05:39, Jeff Hardy jdha...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Mar 4, 2013 at 4:39 PM, Michael Foord fuzzy...@voidspace.org.uk
wrote:
On 1 Mar 2013, at 18:38, Antoine Pitrou solip...@pitrou.net wrote:
On Fri, 1 Mar 2013 09:32:23 -0500
Barry Warsaw ba...@python.org wrote
On 3 Mar 2013, at 01:29, Trent Nelson tr...@snakebite.org wrote:
On Wed, Feb 27, 2013 at 08:51:16AM -0800, Michael Foord wrote:
If you have other items you'd like to discuss please let me know and I
can add them to the agenda.
Hmm, seems like this might be a good forum to introduce
On 4 Mar 2013, at 06:26, Robert Collins robe...@robertcollins.net wrote:
On 4 March 2013 18:54, Guido van Rossum gu...@python.org wrote:
On Sun, Mar 3, 2013 at 9:24 PM, Robert Collins
robe...@robertcollins.net wrote:
I'd like to talk about overhauling - not tweaking, overhauling - the
On 4 Mar 2013, at 19:26, Berker Peksağ berker.pek...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Mar 4, 2013 at 9:14 PM, Barry Warsaw ba...@python.org wrote:
On Mar 04, 2013, at 07:41 PM, Antoine Pitrou wrote:
$ python -m unittest discover
$ python setup.py test
$ python setup.py nosetests
$ python -m nose
On 28 Feb 2013, at 13:49, Brett Cannon br...@python.org wrote:
On Thu, Feb 28, 2013 at 6:34 AM, Michael Foord fuzzy...@voidspace.org.uk
wrote:
On 28 Feb 2013, at 07:36, Georg Brandl g.bra...@gmx.net wrote:
Am 27.02.2013 17:51, schrieb Michael Foord:
Hello all,
PyCon
On 4 Mar 2013, at 20:02, Daniel Holth dho...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Mar 4, 2013 at 2:26 PM, Berker Peksağ berker.pek...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Mar 4, 2013 at 9:14 PM, Barry Warsaw ba...@python.org wrote:
On Mar 04, 2013, at 07:41 PM, Antoine Pitrou wrote:
$ python -m unittest discover
On 1 Mar 2013, at 18:38, Antoine Pitrou solip...@pitrou.net wrote:
On Fri, 1 Mar 2013 09:32:23 -0500
Barry Warsaw ba...@python.org wrote:
On the other hand in some ways Jython is sort of like Python on a
weird virtual OS that lets the real OS bleed through some. This may
still need to be
On 5 Mar 2013, at 00:23, Robert Collins robe...@robertcollins.net wrote:
On 5 March 2013 13:21, Michael Foord fuzzy...@voidspace.org.uk wrote:
We can certainly talk about it - although as Guido says, something specific
may be easier to have a useful discussion about.
Reading through
On 4 Mar 2013, at 22:24, Barry Warsaw ba...@python.org wrote:
On Mar 04, 2013, at 05:04 PM, Brett Cannon wrote:
Sure, but that has nothing to do with programmatic package discovery.
That's something you will have to do as a person in making a qualitative
decision along the same lines as
On 4 Mar 2013, at 20:00, Robert Collins robe...@robertcollins.net wrote:
On 5 March 2013 05:34, Brett Cannon br...@python.org wrote:
On Mon, Mar 4, 2013 at 11:29 AM, Barry Warsaw ba...@python.org wrote:
On Mar 04, 2013, at 07:26 PM, Robert Collins wrote:
It is of course possible
On 28 Feb 2013, at 07:36, Georg Brandl g.bra...@gmx.net wrote:
Am 27.02.2013 17:51, schrieb Michael Foord:
Hello all,
PyCon, and the Python Language Summit, is nearly upon us. We have a good
number of people confirmed to attend. If you are intending to come to the
language summit
On 27 Feb 2013, at 18:50, Antoine Pitrou solip...@pitrou.net wrote:
On Wed, 27 Feb 2013 16:51:16 +
Michael Foord mich...@voidspace.org.uk wrote:
Hello all,
PyCon, and the Python Language Summit, is nearly upon us. We have a good
number of people confirmed to attend. If you
On 27 Feb 2013, at 19:01, fwierzbi...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Feb 27, 2013 at 8:51 AM, Michael Foord mich...@voidspace.org.uk
wrote:
If you have other items you'd like to discuss please let me know and I can
add them to the agenda.
I'd like to discuss merging Jython's standard Lib
On 28 Feb 2013, at 03:42, Barry Warsaw ba...@python.org wrote:
On Feb 27, 2013, at 04:51 PM, Michael Foord wrote:
If you have other items you'd like to discuss please let me know and I can
add them to the agenda.
I'd like to have some discussions around promotion of Python 3, how we can
On 27 Feb 2013, at 11:00, David Beazley d...@dabeaz.com wrote:
From: Eli Bendersky eli...@gmail.com
I'll be the first one to admit that pycparser is almost certainly not
generally useful enough to be exposed in the stdlib. So just using it as an
implementation detail is absolutely fine.
them to the agenda.
All the best,
Michael Foord
--
http://www.voidspace.org.uk/
May you do good and not evil
May you find forgiveness for yourself and forgive others
May you share freely, never taking more than you give.
-- the sqlite blessing
http://www.sqlite.org/different.html
Hey folks,
Likely the wrong place to report this, but I couldn't work out the best place
and figured this is only as bad as anywhere else.
A user has reported to webmaster that hgweb is misconfigured (or at least the
server configuration is interfering with hgweb).
The symptom is that this
There's a problem with the instructions for using Active TCL with Python for
the Mac.
Michael
Begin forwarded message:
From: Dr. Anthony G. Francis, Jr. cent...@dresan.com
Subject: Broken links on
http://www.python.org/download/mac/tcltk/#activetcl-8-5-11
Date: 19 December 2012 22:08:02
On 9 Nov 2012, at 09:57, Chris Withers ch...@simplistix.co.uk wrote:
Hi All,
I wanted to run the unit tests before checking in the patch for
http://bugs.python.org/issue16441, even though it's a trivial change, so I
was trying to follow the instructions at:
On 24 Jul 2012, at 10:30, Terry Reedy wrote:
On 7/24/2012 12:44 AM, anatoly techtonik wrote:
Python 3 check explicitly tells the reader that 2to3 should only be
used in Python 3. Otherwise everybody need to guess when this *_2to3
tools are triggered. As for me, I see no technical
On 24 Jul 2012, at 11:52, Devin Jeanpierre wrote:
On Tue, Jul 24, 2012 at 6:07 AM, Michael Foord
fuzzy...@voidspace.org.uk wrote:
This is not an ideal world and 2to3 is not good enough to convert files
without further intervention and testing.
It is if you design your code
On 23 Jul 2012, at 19:49, Serhiy Storchaka wrote:
On 23.07.12 19:38, Jesus Cea wrote:
The problem is that if we do =, then an unpatched python
interpreter could pass the test too. So we are not actually testing
the feature.
If the repeat counters are going to be optimized, the obvious
On 20 Jul 2012, at 17:50, Maciej Fijalkowski wrote:
On Fri, Jul 20, 2012 at 2:55 PM, Michael Foord fuzzy...@voidspace.org.uk
wrote:
On 17 Jul 2012, at 23:04, mar...@v.loewis.de wrote:
[snip...]
I would like to use a JIT to generate specialized functions for a
combinaison
On 17 Jul 2012, at 23:04, mar...@v.loewis.de wrote:
[snip...]
I would like to use a JIT to generate specialized functions for a
combinaison of arguments types.
I think history has moved past specializing JITs. Tracing JITs are the
status quo; they provide specialization as a side
On 6 Jun 2012, at 18:28, Yury Selivanov wrote:
On 2012-06-06, at 1:13 PM, Alexandre Zani wrote:
A question regarding the name. I have often seen the following pattern
in decorators:
def decor(f):
def some_func(a,b):
do_stuff using f
some_func.__name__ = f.__name__
return
On 5 Jun 2012, at 09:34, Mark Shannon wrote:
Steven D'Aprano wrote:
On Tue, Jun 05, 2012 at 10:20:58AM +0300, Eli Bendersky wrote:
Still, instance of type() is a bit too cryptic for mere mortals, IMHO.
I think that if somebody finds instance of type too cryptic, they won't
have any chance
On 5 Jun 2012, at 08:53, Nick Coghlan wrote:
[snip...]
Now, one minor annoyance with current class decorators is that they're
*not* inherited. This is sometimes what you want, but sometimes you
would prefer to automatically decorate all subclasses as well.
Currently, that means writing a
On 4 Jun 2012, at 16:10, Barry Warsaw wrote:
[snip...]
+ However, for a structured record type use
:func:`~collections.namedtuple`
What's with the ~?
I'm not sure, but it seems to result in a cross-reference, and I see tildes
used elsewhere, so I guess it's some reST/docutils
On 4 May 2012, at 09:44, Vinay Sajip wrote:
IIUC, the program name of the Python executable is set to whatever argv[0] is.
Is there a reason for this, rather than using one of the various OS-specific
APIs [1] for getting the name of the running executable? The reason I ask is
that in a
On 2 May 2012, at 18:06, Ezio Melotti wrote:
On 02/05/2012 19.33, Michael Foord wrote:
On 2 May 2012, at 16:55, Terry Reedy wrote:
I would send the above to webmas...@python.org (should be at the bottom of
pages). We develop CPython but do not directly manage the website.
Not true
On 2 May 2012, at 16:55, Terry Reedy wrote:
On 5/2/2012 10:16 AM, Carl Meyer wrote:
Hi all,
Are the download pages for older Python versions supposed to be kept up
to date at all? I just noticed that the 2.4.6 download page
(http://www.python.org/download/releases/2.4.6/) says things like
On 31 Mar 2012, at 07:32, Lennart Regebro wrote:
On Fri, Mar 30, 2012 at 12:38, Serhiy Storchaka storch...@gmail.com wrote:
I don't understand why Python may not include the pytz. The Olson tz
database is not part of pytz.
Yes it is.
Python can depend on a system tz database
That
On 27/03/2012 18:45, Victor Stinner wrote:
[snip...]
Straying from that is only going to create confusion. Besides that, the
one use case for time.steady() that you give (benchmarking) is better
served by a clock that follows the C++0x definition.
I added a time.hires() clock to the PEP for
On 26 Mar 2012, at 08:11, Georg Brandl wrote:
On 26.03.2012 00:13, michael.foord wrote:
http://hg.python.org/cpython/rev/adc1fc2dc872
changeset: 75938:adc1fc2dc872
user:Michael Foord mich...@voidspace.org.uk
date:Sun Mar 25 23:12:55 2012 +0100
summary:
Adding
On 16 Mar 2012, at 11:54, Nick Coghlan wrote:
On Thu, Mar 15, 2012 at 6:27 AM, Michael Foord
fuzzy...@voidspace.org.uk wrote:
On the topic of docs mock documentation is about eight pages long. My
intention was to strip this down to just the api documentation, along with a
link
On 17 Mar 2012, at 08:49, Georg Brandl wrote:
On 03/15/2012 01:17 AM, victor.stinner wrote:
http://hg.python.org/cpython/rev/27441e0d6a75
changeset: 75672:27441e0d6a75
user:Victor Stinner victor.stin...@gmail.com
date:Thu Mar 15 01:17:09 2012 +0100
summary:
Issue
On 17 Mar 2012, at 15:04, Georg Brandl wrote:
On 03/17/2012 09:47 PM, Michael Foord wrote:
On 17 Mar 2012, at 08:49, Georg Brandl wrote:
On 03/15/2012 01:17 AM, victor.stinner wrote:
http://hg.python.org/cpython/rev/27441e0d6a75 changeset:
75672:27441e0d6a75 user:Victor Stinner
) version in the
standard library. I'll be maintaining mock, so I'd like to be assigned any
issues on it and at least talked to before changes are made. I am maintaining a
backport still, but the Python standard library version is the canonical
version.
All the best,
Michael Foord
---
Terry
On 14 Mar 2012, at 12:33, Georg Brandl wrote:
On 14.03.2012 20:25, michael.foord wrote:
http://hg.python.org/cpython/rev/2fda048ee32a
changeset: 75632:2fda048ee32a
user:Michael Foordmich...@voidspace.org.uk
date:Wed Mar 14 12:24:34 2012 -0700
summary:
PEP 417: Adding
On 14 Mar 2012, at 13:46, Terry Reedy wrote:
On 3/14/2012 4:22 PM, Michael Foord wrote:
On 14 Mar 2012, at 13:08, Terry Reedy wrote:
On 3/14/2012 3:25 PM, michael.foord wrote:
+# mock.py +# Test tools for mocking and patching.
Should there be a note here about restrictions on editing
/ unpickling here. Binary data on
Python 2 being unpickled as Unicode on Python 3 is presumably for the
convenience of developers doing the *wrong thing* (and only works for ascii
anyway).
All the best,
Michael Foord
This issue suggests to add a flag to change the behaviour as follows
On 13 Mar 2012, at 16:57, Victor Stinner wrote:
Hi,
I added two functions to the time module in Python 3.3: wallclock()
and monotonic(). I'm unable to explain the difference between these
two functions, even if I wrote them :-) wallclock() is suppose to be
more accurate than time() but
Hello all,
At the Python Language Summit adding the mock library to the Python Standard
Library was discussed and agreed. Here is a very brief PEP covering the
decision and rationale.
All the best,
Michael Foord
PEP: 417
Title: Including mock in the Standard Library
Version: $Revision$
Last
of Python 2 compatibility code can also be
removed in the standard library version.
All the best,
Michael Foord
Good luck!
--Guido
On Mon, Mar 12, 2012 at 4:01 PM, Gregory P. Smith g...@krypto.org wrote:
+10 for the record. (given we all already agreed upon this in the summit :)
make
On 26 Feb 2012, at 17:45, Antoine Pitrou wrote:
Hi,
On Sat, 25 Feb 2012 20:23:39 +
Armin Ronacher armin.ronac...@active-4.com wrote:
I just uploaded PEP 414 which proposes am optional 'u' prefix for string
literals for Python 3.
You can read the PEP online:
Hey folks,
When we do security only releases of Python we regularly get emails to
webmas...@python.org asking where to find binary builds. If you want to find
the most recent binary builds of Python 2.5 2.6, it used to involve clicking
through quite a few links.
I've added links to the
On 08/02/2012 15:16, Mark Shannon wrote:
Hi,
Version 2 is now available.
Version 2 makes as few changes to tunable constants as possible, and
generally does not change iteration order (so repr() is unchanged).
All tests pass (the only changes to tests are for sys.getsizeof() ).
Repository:
be overridden by an instance attribute on *some*
instances.
All the best,
Michael Foord
Chris
--
http://www.voidspace.org.uk/
May you do good and not evil
May you find forgiveness for yourself and forgive others
May you share freely, never taking more than you give.
-- the sqlite blessing http
On 28/01/2012 13:04, Paul Moore wrote:
On 28 January 2012 09:18, Nick Coghlanncogh...@gmail.com wrote:
It's basically us saying to Python users We're explicitly flagging
this PyPI module for inclusion in the next major Python release. We've
integrated it into our build process, test suite and
On 27/01/2012 22:54, Barry Warsaw wrote:
On Jan 27, 2012, at 10:48 PM, Antoine Pitrou wrote:
On Fri, 27 Jan 2012 16:10:51 -0500
Barry Warsawba...@python.org wrote:
I'm -1 on this as well. It just feels like the completely wrong way to
stabilize an API, and I think despite the caveats that
On 28/01/2012 05:09, Scott Dial wrote:
On 1/27/2012 8:48 PM, Barry Warsaw wrote:
The thinking goes like this: if you would normally use an __preview__ module
because you can't get approval to download some random package from PyPI, well
then your distro probably could or should provide it, so
or versioned.
A separate proposal about standard library versioning has been floated
but is *much* more controversial and therefore much less likely to
happen. So I wouldn't hold your breath on it...
All the best,
Michael Foord
___
Python-Dev mailing list
On 28/01/2012 04:44, Stephen J. Turnbull wrote:
Michael Foord writes:
Assuming the module is then promoted to the the standard library
proper in
release ``3.X+1``, it will be moved to a permanent location in the
library::
import example
And importing
On 27/01/2012 14:37, Philippe Fremy wrote:
Hi,
A small comment from a user perspective.
Since a package in preview is strongly linked to a given version of
Python, any program taking advantage of it becomes strongly specific to
a given version of Python.
Such programs will of course break for
On 27/01/2012 15:09, Antoine Pitrou wrote:
On Fri, 27 Jan 2012 15:21:33 +0200
Eli Benderskyeli...@gmail.com wrote:
Following an earlier discussion on python-ideas [1], we would like to
propose the following PEP for review. Discussion is welcome. The PEP
can also be viewed in HTML form at
On 27/01/2012 15:34, Benjamin Peterson wrote:
2012/1/27 Eli Benderskyeli...@gmail.com:
Criteria for graduation
-
I think you also need Criteria for being placed in __preview__. Do
we just toss everything someone suggests in?
And given that permanently deleting
On 27/01/2012 15:35, Matt Joiner wrote:
A more normal incantation, as is often the way for packages that became
parts of the standard library after first being a third party library
(sometimes under a different name, e.g. simplejson - json):
try:
from __preview__ import thing
except
is for things that *need* previewing.
All the best,
Michael Foord
Even when there are candidates for inclusion with relatively stable
APIs, like regex, we should *assume* that there will be API
differences between __preview__.regex and regex, simply because it is
less harmful to expect changes
with XCode 4.1 have been reported
and discussed here:
http://bugs.python.org/issue13241
This invocation worked for me:
./configure CC=gcc-4.2 --prefix=/dev/null --with-pydebug
All the best,
Michael Foord
this allowed me to build the code but when ran test I got following
On 22 Jan 2012, at 17:43, Łukasz Langa wrote:
Wiadomość napisana przez Michael Foord w dniu 22 sty 2012, o godz. 14:14:
./configure CC=gcc-4.2 --prefix=/dev/null --with-pydebug
Why the phony prefix?
Heh, it's what I've always done - I think copied from other developers.
The dev
On 19/01/2012 17:46, Ethan Furman wrote:
Guido van Rossum wrote:
We should not encourage people to write code that works with a certain
bugfix release but not with the previous bugfix release of the same
feature release.
Then what's the point of a bug-fix release? If 3.2.1 had broken
Hello all,
A paper (well, presentation) has been published highlighting security problems
with the hashing algorithm (exploiting collisions) in many programming
languages Python included:
is the with statement, so it will be nice to drop 2.4 support.
The next releases of mock and unittest2 will still support 2.4, but the ones
after that will be 2.5+.
Thankfully tox makes testing across multiple versions (and implementations)
easy.
All the best,
Michael Foord
Cheers,
-Barry
be true. No-one is using Python 3 yet. ;-)
FWIW I heard a few days ago about a UK government department, HMGCC (Her
Majesty's Government Communication Centre - based in Milton Keynes), who use
Python for research projects. They switched to using Python 3 a while ago.
All the best,
Michael Foord
On 13/12/2011 13:33, Laurence Rowe wrote:
On Mon, 12 Dec 2011 22:18:40 +0100, Chris McDonough chr...@plope.com
wrote:
On Mon, 2011-12-12 at 09:50 -0500, PJ Eby wrote:
As someone who ported WebOb and other stuff built on top of it
to Python
3 without using from
, or something else?
Michael
--
Nick Coghlan (via Gmail on Android, so likely to be more terse than usual)
On Dec 13, 2011 11:46 PM, Michael Foord fuzzy...@voidspace.org.uk
mailto:fuzzy...@voidspace.org.uk wrote:
On 13/12/2011 13:33, Laurence Rowe wrote:
On Mon, 12 Dec 2011 22:18:40
On 13/12/2011 14:28, Laurence Rowe wrote:
On Tue, 13 Dec 2011 14:42:12 +0100, Michael Foord
fuzzy...@voidspace.org.uk wrote:
On 13/12/2011 13:33, Laurence Rowe wrote:
On Mon, 12 Dec 2011 22:18:40 +0100, Chris McDonough
chr...@plope.com wrote:
On Mon, 2011-12-12 at 09:50 -0500, PJ Eby
On 13/12/2011 21:10, Terry Reedy wrote:
On 12/13/2011 2:02 PM, PJ Eby wrote:
On Tue, Dec 13, 2011 at 11:24 AM, Antoine Pitrou solip...@pitrou.net
mailto:solip...@pitrou.net wrote:
On Tue, 13 Dec 2011 15:28:31 +0100
Laurence Rowe l...@lrowe.co.uk mailto:l...@lrowe.co.uk wrote:
The
not clear to me what needs to be done for it to be accepted (or rejected),
beyond a general it's a big change.
All the best,
Michael Foord
--
http://www.voidspace.org.uk/
May you do good and not evil
May you find forgiveness for yourself and forgive others
May you share freely, never taking more
On 9 Dec 2011, at 15:13, Barry Warsaw wrote:
On Dec 09, 2011, at 09:20 AM, Martin v. Löwis wrote:
One use case (and the only one I'm aware of) is to pass keyword
parameters. Python 2 insists that they are str (and doesn't accept
unicode), Python 3 insists that they are str (and doesn't
working and may actively *prevent* other changes / improvements.
All the best,
Michael Foord
So, I think we should have a clear and working deprecation policy, and
Ezio's suggestion sounds good to me. There should be a clean way to
state, in both code and documentation, that something
On 26/11/2011 07:46, Maciej Fijalkowski wrote:
On Sat, Nov 26, 2011 at 6:39 AM, Nick Coghlanncogh...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sat, Nov 26, 2011 at 8:14 AM, Michael Foord
fuzzy...@voidspace.org.uk wrote:
On 24 Nov 2011, at 04:06, Nick Coghlan wrote:
On Thu, Nov 24, 2011 at 10:28 AM, Guido van
On 25/11/2011 15:48, Paul Moore wrote:
On 25 November 2011 15:07, Amaury Forgeot d'Arcamaur...@gmail.com wrote:
2011/11/25 Paul Moorep.f.mo...@gmail.com
It would be nice to have the optimisation back if it's easy enough to
do so, for quick-and-dirty code, but it is not a good idea to rely on
On 24 Nov 2011, at 04:06, Nick Coghlan wrote:
On Thu, Nov 24, 2011 at 10:28 AM, Guido van Rossum gu...@python.org wrote:
Mea culpa for not keeping track, but what's the status of PEP 380? I
really want this in Python 3.3!
There are two relevant tracker issues (both with me for the moment).
On 25/11/2011 00:20, Jesus Cea wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
When mailing there, I get this error. Not sure where to report.
The address works fine. It would be nice if someone fixed the annoying
bounce however. :-)
Michael
Final-Recipient: rfc822;
On 20/11/2011 21:41, Guido van Rossum wrote:
On Sun, Nov 20, 2011 at 10:44 AM, Michael Foord
fuzzy...@voidspace.org.uk wrote:
On 20 Nov 2011, at 16:35, Guido van Rossum wrote:
Um, what?! __class__ *already* has a special meaning. Those examples
violate that meaning. No wonder they get
are great for allowing classes of objects to
pass isinstance checks (etc) - what proxy, lazy and mock objects need is to be
able to allow individual instances to pass different isinstance checks.
All the best,
Michael Foord
--Guido
On Sat, Nov 19, 2011 at 6:13 PM, Michael Foord
fuzzy
1 - 100 of 1031 matches
Mail list logo
