On 04/01/2011 01:02, Guido van Rossum wrote:
On Mon, Jan 3, 2011 at 9:52 AM, David Malcolmdmalc...@redhat.com wrote:
On Sun, 2011-01-02 at 19:18 -0800, Guido van Rossum wrote:
On Sun, Jan 2, 2011 at 5:50 PM, Alex Gaynoralex.gay...@gmail.com wrote:
No, it's singularly impossible to prove
On Tue, 04 Jan 2011 03:44:53 +0100
Victor Stinner victor.stin...@haypocalc.com wrote:
def wsgi_string(u):
# Convert an environment variable to a WSGI bytes-as-unicode
string
return u.encode(enc, esc).decode('iso-8859-1')
def run_with_cgi(application):
environ = {k:
Le mardi 04 janvier 2011 à 13:20 +0100, Antoine Pitrou a écrit :
On Tue, 04 Jan 2011 03:44:53 +0100
Victor Stinner victor.stin...@haypocalc.com wrote:
def wsgi_string(u):
# Convert an environment variable to a WSGI bytes-as-unicode
string
return u.encode(enc,
On Tue, 04 Jan 2011 14:33:37 +0100
Victor Stinner victor.stin...@haypocalc.com wrote:
Le mardi 04 janvier 2011 à 13:20 +0100, Antoine Pitrou a écrit :
On Tue, 04 Jan 2011 03:44:53 +0100
Victor Stinner victor.stin...@haypocalc.com wrote:
def wsgi_string(u):
# Convert an environment
On Dec 30, 2010, at 02:50 AM, R. David Murray wrote:
You are welcome; thanks for the feedback. (I sometimes feel
like I'm working in a bit of a vacuum, though Barry does chime in
occasionally...but I do realize that people are busy; that's
why I inherited this job in the first place, after all
On Tue, Jan 4, 2011 at 8:49 PM, Michael Foord fuzzy...@voidspace.org.uk wrote:
I think someone else pointed this out, but replacing builtins externally to
a module is actually common for testing. In particular replacing the open
function, but also other builtins, is often done temporarily to
On Tue, Jan 4, 2011 at 2:49 AM, Michael Foord fuzzy...@voidspace.org.uk wrote:
I think someone else pointed this out, but replacing builtins externally to
a module is actually common for testing. In particular replacing the open
function, but also other builtins, is often done temporarily to
On Mon, Jan 3, 2011 at 7:47 PM, Guido van Rossum gu...@python.org wrote:
Given the rule garbage in - garbage out, I'd do the most useful
thing, which would be to produce a longer output string (and update
the docs).
I did not know that GIGO was a design rule, but after thinking about
it some
On Wed, Jan 5, 2011 at 1:58 AM, Guido van Rossum gu...@python.org wrote:
On Tue, Jan 4, 2011 at 2:49 AM, Michael Foord fuzzy...@voidspace.org.uk
wrote:
I think someone else pointed this out, but replacing builtins externally to
a module is actually common for testing. In particular replacing
On Tue, Jan 4, 2011 at 10:20 AM, Nick Coghlan ncogh...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Jan 5, 2011 at 1:58 AM, Guido van Rossum gu...@python.org wrote:
On Tue, Jan 4, 2011 at 2:49 AM, Michael Foord fuzzy...@voidspace.org.uk
wrote:
I think someone else pointed this out, but replacing builtins
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 01/03/2011 09:44 PM, Victor Stinner wrote:
Hi,
In the PEP , I read:
--
import os, sys
enc, esc = sys.getfilesystemencoding(), 'surrogateescape'
def wsgi_string(u):
# Convert an environment variable to a WSGI
At 03:44 AM 1/4/2011 +0100, Victor Stinner wrote:
Hi,
In the PEP , I read:
--
import os, sys
enc, esc = sys.getfilesystemencoding(), 'surrogateescape'
def wsgi_string(u):
# Convert an environment variable to a WSGI bytes-as-unicode
string
return u.encode(enc,
On Tue, Jan 4, 2011 at 8:21 AM, Alex Gaynor alex.gay...@gmail.com wrote:
Ugh, I can't be the only one who finds these special cases to be a little
nasty?
Special cases aren't special enough to break the rules.
Alex
+1, I don't think nailing down a few builtins is that helpful for
optimizing
On Jan 04, 2011, at 10:21 AM, Alex Gaynor wrote:
Ugh, I can't be the only one who finds these special cases to be a little
nasty?
Special cases aren't special enough to break the rules.
Yeah, I agree. Still it would be interesting to see what kind of performance
improvement this would result
On 04/01/2011 16:54, Barry Warsaw wrote:
On Jan 04, 2011, at 10:21 AM, Alex Gaynor wrote:
Ugh, I can't be the only one who finds these special cases to be a little
nasty?
Special cases aren't special enough to break the rules.
Yeah, I agree. Still it would be interesting to see what kind of
Doesnt this all boil down to being able to monitor PyDict for changes
to it's key-space?
The keys are immutable anyway so the instances of PyDict could manage
a opaque value (in fact, a counter) that changes every time a new
value is written to any key. Once we get a reference out of the dict,
we
Barry Warsaw ba...@python.org wrote:
On Jan 04, 2011, at 10:21 AM, Alex Gaynor wrote:
Ugh, I can't be the only one who finds these special cases to be a little
nasty?
Special cases aren't special enough to break the rules.
Yeah, I agree. Still it would be interesting to see what kind of
On Tue, Jan 4, 2011 at 8:22 AM, Tres Seaver tsea...@palladion.com wrote:
Note that Guido just recently wrote on that list that he considers that
PEP to be de facto accepted.
That was conditional on there not being any objections in the next 24
hours. There have been plenty, so I'm retracting
Guido van Rossum wrote:
On Tue, Jan 4, 2011 at 2:49 AM, Michael Foord fuzzy...@voidspace.org.uk wrote:
I think someone else pointed this out, but replacing builtins externally to
a module is actually common for testing. In particular replacing the open
function, but also other builtins, is
On Tue, Jan 4, 2011 at 1:50 PM, Steven D'Aprano st...@pearwood.info wrote:
I've been known to monkey-patch builtins in the interactive interpreter and
in test code. One example that comes to mind is that I had some
over-complicated recursive while loop (!), and I wanted to work out the Big
Oh
On Tue, Jan 4, 2011 at 9:33 AM, Lukas Lueg lukas.l...@googlemail.comwrote:
The keys are immutable anyway so the instances of PyDict could manage
a opaque value (in fact, a counter) that changes every time a new
value is written to any key. Once we get a reference out of the dict,
we can can
On Tue, Jan 4, 2011 at 2:15 PM, Daniel Stutzbach stutzb...@google.com wrote:
On Tue, Jan 4, 2011 at 9:33 AM, Lukas Lueg lukas.l...@googlemail.com
wrote:
The keys are immutable anyway so the instances of PyDict could manage
a opaque value (in fact, a counter) that changes every time a new
Guido van Rossum wrote:
On Tue, Jan 4, 2011 at 1:50 PM, Steven D'Aprano st...@pearwood.info wrote:
I've been known to monkey-patch builtins in the interactive interpreter and
in test code. One example that comes to mind is that I had some
over-complicated recursive while loop (!), and I wanted
I very much like the fact that python has *very* little black magic
revealed to the user. Strong -1 on optimizing picked builtins in a
picked way.
2011/1/4 Steven D'Aprano st...@pearwood.info:
Guido van Rossum wrote:
On Tue, Jan 4, 2011 at 2:49 AM, Michael Foord fuzzy...@voidspace.org.uk
On Tue, Jan 4, 2011 at 3:13 PM, Steven D'Aprano st...@pearwood.info wrote:
Guido van Rossum wrote:
But why couldn't you edit the source code?
Because there was no source code -- I was experimenting in the interactive
interpreter. I could have just re-created the function by using the readline
On Tue, Jan 4, 2011 at 2:13 PM, Lukas Lueg lukas.l...@googlemail.com wrote:
I very much like the fact that python has *very* little black magic
revealed to the user. Strong -1 on optimizing picked builtins in a
picked way.
That's easy for you to say.
--
--Guido van Rossum (python.org/~guido)
On 04/01/2011 23:29, Guido van Rossum wrote:
On Tue, Jan 4, 2011 at 3:13 PM, Steven D'Apranost...@pearwood.info wrote:
Guido van Rossum wrote:
But why couldn't you edit the source code?
Because there was no source code -- I was experimenting in the interactive
interpreter. I could have just
On 04/01/2011 23:29, Guido van Rossum wrote:
On Tue, Jan 4, 2011 at 3:13 PM, Steven D'Apranost...@pearwood.info wrote:
Guido van Rossum wrote:
But why couldn't you edit the source code?
Because there was no source code -- I was experimenting in the interactive
interpreter. I could have just
On Tue, Jan 4, 2011 at 3:36 PM, Michael Foord fuzzy...@voidspace.org.uk wrote:
The only examples I could find from a quick search (using the patch
decorator from my mock module which is reasonably well used) patch
__builtins__.open and raw_input.
Steven I've been known to monkey-patch builtins in the interactive
Steven interpreter and in test code.
Me too. I use a slightly beefed up dir() funcion which identifies modules
within a package which haven't been imported yet. Handy for quick-n-dirty
introspection.
import email
For those of you who don't know, the PSF has given me a two month
grant to work on the core. It's mostly focused on the long overdue
overhaul of the dev docs (now being called the devguide) and writing a
HOWTO on porting Python 2 code to Python 3. If I have time left over
it will be spent on the
On Jan 4, 2011, at 4:36 PM, Brett Cannon wrote:
For those of you who don't know, the PSF has given me a two month
grant to work on the core. It's mostly focused on the long overdue
overhaul of the dev docs (now being called the devguide) and writing a
HOWTO on porting Python 2 code to Python
On Wed, Jan 5, 2011 at 5:55 AM, brett.cannon python-check...@python.org wrote:
brett.cannon pushed 72a286c3452d to devguide:
http://hg.python.org/devguide/rev/72a286c3452d
changeset: 13:72a286c3452d
user: Brett Cannon br...@python.org
date: Tue Jan 04 11:48:38 2011 -0800
On Wed, Jan 5, 2011 at 04:13, Nick Coghlan ncogh...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Jan 5, 2011 at 5:55 AM, brett.cannon python-check...@python.org
wrote:
brett.cannon pushed 72a286c3452d to devguide:
http://hg.python.org/devguide/rev/72a286c3452d
changeset: 13:72a286c3452d
user:
Hello,
I am quite new to development in python, and as a first contribution to the
community, I have provided a patch to the issue 8033 (quite trivial). I then
ran the test suite an everything was ok. However, the status has not
changed, and nobody has answered so far (patch provided one month
35 matches
Mail list logo
