[Python-Dev] Help/advice needed with JyNI issue #4 (Tkinter on OSX)

[Stefan Richthofer]

Hey everybody,

I need help/advice for this JyNI-related issue: 
https://github.com/Stewori/JyNI/issues/4
Especially I need advice from someone familiar with TCL and TK internals, 
preferably also Tkinter.
The issue is rather strange in the sense that it works well on Linux, while the 
program hangs on OSX. Everything we found out so far was collected in the 
thread linked above. Briefly speaking, on OSX TCL/TK does not produce a 
particular event the loop is waiting for and does not display the window. 
However logging suggests that calls to TCL/TK API are identical between Linux 
and OSX runs, so we are really stuck here in finding out what is different on 
Linux (our current logging does not cover function argument values though).
Any advise how I can debug interaction with TCL/TK to find the reason for the 
missing event would be helpful.

(Sorry if you might regard this off-topic for Python-dev; since JyNI is 
somewhat a crossover-project (also containing lots of CPython 2.7 code) I am 
asking in various locations. Starting here, because in this list I see best 
chances to find someone who can help within the Python ecosystem. Next I would 
look for a TCL/TK forum or something.)

Thanks!

Stefan
___
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python.org
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe: 
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com

Re: [Python-Dev] Not receiving bug tracker emails

[Brett Cannon]

On Mon, 4 Apr 2016 at 14:05 Terry Reedy  wrote:

> On 3/29/2016 7:30 PM, Martin Panter wrote:
> > For the last ~36 hours I have stopped receiving emails for messages
> > posted in the bug tracker. Is anyone else having this problem? Has
> > anything changed recently?
>
> My udel dot edu account is handled by google.  I am also not getting
> anything at all, not even in spam, since at least 3/31 when I was added
> to https://bugs.python.org/issue26673  I only discovered it in the
> Friday weekly New Issues report.  More emails were missing on Friday.
> The problem continues.  I just added a question to
> https://bugs.python.org/issue19944 and got nothing.
>

I have reached out to Upfront -- our Roundup host -- to see if the fix
proposed in http://psf.upfronthosting.co.za/roundup/meta/issue568 will
solve the issue to make sure this gets resolved. When I know something I
will post here.


>
> > I have had it set to send to my gmail.com address since the beginning.
> > At the moment the last bug message email is
> >  with “Date: Mon, 28 Mar
> > 2016 12:19:49 +”. I have checked spam and they are not going
> > there.
>
> Since at least last summer, Rietveld reviews have consistently gone to
> Junk.  Normal tracker emails sometimes went to Inbox, sometimes to Junk.
>   Since normal emails (but not reviews, unfortunately) are tagged in the
> subject line, I added a rule to Thunderbird to move tracker email to
> Inbox when I open Junk.  This is no longer happening at they do not even
> get to Junk.
>
> I tried changing my tracker email to verizon.net and posted a message on
> on issue where I am the only nosy person.  After half an hour, nothing.
>   I am not surprised as Verizon rarely delivers anything it considers
> junk.  I had this confirmed by a game site that said that its emails are
> deleted unless one contacts Verizon to whitelist their site.  I will see
> if I can again find the page to do that.
>
> I do get checkins and core-mentorship mail.  I have not seen anything on
> core-developers since the discussion of new commits privileges a month ago.
>

Do you mean python-committers? I don't know of any core-developers mailing
list. If you do mean python-committers just let me know and I will see what
address you're subscribed under.
___
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python.org
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe: 
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com

Re: [Python-Dev] Not receiving bug tracker emails

[Terry Reedy]

On 3/29/2016 7:30 PM, Martin Panter wrote:

For the last ~36 hours I have stopped receiving emails for messages
posted in the bug tracker. Is anyone else having this problem? Has
anything changed recently?


My udel dot edu account is handled by google.  I am also not getting 
anything at all, not even in spam, since at least 3/31 when I was added 
to https://bugs.python.org/issue26673  I only discovered it in the 
Friday weekly New Issues report.  More emails were missing on Friday. 
The problem continues.  I just added a question to 
https://bugs.python.org/issue19944 and got nothing.



I have had it set to send to my gmail.com address since the beginning.
At the moment the last bug message email is
 with “Date: Mon, 28 Mar
2016 12:19:49 +”. I have checked spam and they are not going
there.


Since at least last summer, Rietveld reviews have consistently gone to 
Junk.  Normal tracker emails sometimes went to Inbox, sometimes to Junk. 
 Since normal emails (but not reviews, unfortunately) are tagged in the 
subject line, I added a rule to Thunderbird to move tracker email to 
Inbox when I open Junk.  This is no longer happening at they do not even 
get to Junk.


I tried changing my tracker email to verizon.net and posted a message on 
on issue where I am the only nosy person.  After half an hour, nothing. 
 I am not surprised as Verizon rarely delivers anything it considers 
junk.  I had this confirmed by a game site that said that its emails are 
deleted unless one contacts Verizon to whitelist their site.  I will see 
if I can again find the page to do that.


I do get checkins and core-mentorship mail.  I have not seen anything on 
core-developers since the discussion of new commits privileges a month ago.


--
Terry Jan Reedy


___
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python.org
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe: 
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com

Re: [Python-Dev] Py_SETREF vs. Py_XSETREF

[Guido van Rossum]

Agreed, let's go with two macros. The time discussing this further
could be spent more productively.

On Mon, Apr 4, 2016 at 2:35 AM, Victor Stinner  wrote:
> If some dev don't want to use the single macro for good or bad reasons, it's
> maybe better to have two macros to generalize their usage. The macro makes
> to C code shorter and easier to review.
>
> Victor
>
>
> ___
> Python-Dev mailing list
> Python-Dev@python.org
> https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
> Unsubscribe:
> https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/guido%40python.org
>



-- 
--Guido van Rossum (python.org/~guido)
___
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python.org
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe: 
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com

Re: [Python-Dev] thoughts on backporting __wrapped__ to 2.7?

[Nick Coghlan]

On 4 April 2016 at 20:04, Robert Collins  wrote:
> I'm working on teaching funcsigs - the backport of inspect.signature -
> better handling for wrapped functions, and the key enabler to do that
> is capturing the wrapped function in __wrapped__. I'm wondering what
> folks thoughts are on backporting that to 2.7 - seems cleaner than
> monkeypatching functools.wraps, which would tend to be subject to
> import ordering races and general ick. I'll likely prep such a
> monkeypatch for folk that are stuck on older versions of 2.7 anyhow...
> so its not a huge win...

Right, the baseline there is really 2.7.5 + selected backports, and
the backport set is small for RHEL 7.x, and even smaller for Debian
stable and Ubuntu LTS. Even getting the network security enhancements
backported has proven to be challenging - other feature updates have
next to no chance.

Given that, I don't see a compelling reason to change the existing
policy - the "no new features in point releases" restriction only gets
waived in cases that have implications beyond the Python 2.7 process
itself (which pretty much restricts potential waivers to network
security enhancements).

Cheers,
Nick.

-- 
Nick Coghlan   |   ncogh...@gmail.com   |   Brisbane, Australia
___
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python.org
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe: 
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com

[Python-Dev] thoughts on backporting __wrapped__ to 2.7?

[Robert Collins]

I'm working on teaching funcsigs - the backport of inspect.signature -
better handling for wrapped functions, and the key enabler to do that
is capturing the wrapped function in __wrapped__. I'm wondering what
folks thoughts are on backporting that to 2.7 - seems cleaner than
monkeypatching functools.wraps, which would tend to be subject to
import ordering races and general ick. I'll likely prep such a
monkeypatch for folk that are stuck on older versions of 2.7 anyhow...
so its not a huge win...

-Rob

-- 
Robert Collins 
Distinguished Technologist
HP Converged Cloud
___
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python.org
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe: 
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com

Re: [Python-Dev] Py_SETREF vs. Py_XSETREF

[Victor Stinner]

If some dev don't want to use the single macro for good or bad reasons,
it's maybe better to have two macros to generalize their usage. The macro
makes to C code shorter and easier to review.

Victor
___
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python.org
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe: 
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com

Re: [Python-Dev] Py_SETREF vs. Py_XSETREF

[Nick Coghlan]

On 3 April 2016 at 17:32, Serhiy Storchaka  wrote:
> Originally I proposed a pair of macros for safe reference replacing to
> reflects the duality of Py_DECREF/Py_XDECREF. [1], [2]  The one should use
> Py_DECREF and the other should use Py_XDECREF.
>
> But then I got a number of voices for the single name [3], and no one voice
> (except mine) for the pair of names. Thus in final patches the single name
> Py_SETREF that uses Py_XDECREF is used. Due to adding some overhead in
> comparison with using Py_DECREF, this macros is not used in critical
> performance code such as PyDict_SetItem().

I was one of those arguing for the single macro, and I think Alexander
raises a good point in http://bugs.python.org/issue26200#msg262204
that I don't recall seeing in the original discussion: the "X" in the
macro serves as a good shorthand for indicating that the code in
question isn't closely tracking whether or not manipulated reference
might be NULL, and hence may be a good candidate for additional
micro-optimisations that keep better track of whether or not the
pointer is NULL.

> Should we rename Py_SETREF to Py_XSETREF and introduce new Py_SETREF that
> uses Py_DECREF?

With the single-macro design put into effect and concrete problems
arising from that, I'm now more persuaded by the consistency argument
than I was originally, so +1 from me for reverting to your original
dual-macro proposal.

Cheers,
Nick.

-- 
Nick Coghlan   |   ncogh...@gmail.com   |   Brisbane, Australia
___
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python.org
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe: 
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com