Walter Dörwald wrote:
Raymond Hettinger wrote:
The most recent test_codecs check-in (1.19) is failing on a MSCV6.0
compilation running on WinMe:
--
Ran 35 tests in 1.430s
FAILED (failures=1)
Traceback (most recent call last):
@@ -399,9 +393,8 @@
del self[name] # Won't fail if it doesn't exist
self.dict[name.lower()] = value
text = name + : + value
-lines = text.split(\n)
-for line in lines:
-self.headers.append(line + \n)
+
On Tue, 8 Feb 2005 10:10:49 +0100, Fredrik Lundh [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
@@ -399,9 +393,8 @@
del self[name] # Won't fail if it doesn't exist
self.dict[name.lower()] = value
text = name + : + value
-lines = text.split(\n)
-for line in lines:
On Tue, 2005-02-08 at 10:35, Guido van Rossum wrote:
This would have been caught if there was a unit test validating what
the documentation says. Why aren't there unit tests for this code? I
think we need to raise the bar for wholistic improvements to a
module: first write a unit test if
Maybe some ambitious PSF activitst could contact Roskind and Steve
Kirsch and see if they know who at Disney to talk to... Or maybe the
Disney guys who were at PyCon last year could help.
Jeremy
On Tue, 8 Feb 2005 15:37:50 -0500, Tim Peters [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
[Matthias Klose]
A Debian
Anthony Baxter wrote:
I'm currently thinking about a 2.4.1 around the 23td of Feb - Martin and
Fred, does this work for you?
Yes. I will need to test whether my replacement of VB scripts in the
installer with native DLLs works even on W95; I'm confident to complete
this next week (already have the
On behalf of the Python development team and the Python community, I'm
happy to announce the release of Python 2.3.5 (final).
Python 2.3.5 is a bug-fix release. See the release notes at the website
(also available as Misc/NEWS in the source distribution) for details of
the bugs squished in this
