[Python-Dev] Second betas tomorrow
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Wow, I bet this one crept up on you as quickly as it did me! We have our second planned beta releases for 2.6 and 3.0 tomorrow. As usual I will start looking at blockers and buildbots tomorrow afternoon (UTC-4 time) with a plan to start building things at about 6pm. Also, I will of course be in #python-dev on freenode to answer any questions, or get second opinions. PEP 361 claims that these will be the last betas. Whether that's true or not depends on how well the beta2's go. Please help review code or fix bugs. If you know of things that absolutely must go into beta2, be sure there is an open release-blocker bug on the issue. Thanks, - -Barry -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (Darwin) iQCVAwUBSGqQpnEjvBPtnXfVAQLdagP/VooK8+AoPrb1bR7xAxGqg0vC1HOKw5qZ 8VQArzgldz1OnoG24PuKGdaEw7PbHjCMkD0/CyZWjH8/yWawcxV7hKl6RYHJ3GX9 keroo7wz3/NaptJtA9ldoKA5ekV8WVVC5OElgtjKr+v6HorPQSHzUgJiDHYUS1FW A8fdHipyZds= =vwYy -END PGP SIGNATURE- ___ Python-Dev mailing list [email protected] http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
Re: [Python-Dev] [Python-3000] Second betas tomorrow
I think we should put this one off. The previous betas were done on June 18, and IMO the next beta should be about a month afterwards, not 2 weeks. On Tue, Jul 1, 2008 at 1:16 PM, Barry Warsaw <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- > Hash: SHA1 > > Wow, I bet this one crept up on you as quickly as it did me! > > We have our second planned beta releases for 2.6 and 3.0 tomorrow. As > usual I will start looking at blockers and buildbots tomorrow afternoon > (UTC-4 time) with a plan to start building things at about 6pm. Also, I > will of course be in #python-dev on freenode to answer any questions, or get > second opinions. > > PEP 361 claims that these will be the last betas. Whether that's true or > not depends on how well the beta2's go. Please help review code or fix > bugs. If you know of things that absolutely must go into beta2, be sure > there is an open release-blocker bug on the issue. > > Thanks, > - -Barry > > -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- > Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (Darwin) > > iQCVAwUBSGqQpnEjvBPtnXfVAQLdagP/VooK8+AoPrb1bR7xAxGqg0vC1HOKw5qZ > 8VQArzgldz1OnoG24PuKGdaEw7PbHjCMkD0/CyZWjH8/yWawcxV7hKl6RYHJ3GX9 > keroo7wz3/NaptJtA9ldoKA5ekV8WVVC5OElgtjKr+v6HorPQSHzUgJiDHYUS1FW > A8fdHipyZds= > =vwYy > -END PGP SIGNATURE- > ___ > Python-3000 mailing list > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-3000 > Unsubscribe: > http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-3000/guido%40python.org > -- --Guido van Rossum (home page: http://www.python.org/~guido/) ___ Python-Dev mailing list [email protected] http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
Re: [Python-Dev] [Python-3000] Second betas tomorrow
On Tue, Jul 1, 2008 at 4:23 PM, Georg Brandl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Barry Warsaw schrieb: >> >> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- >> Hash: SHA1 >> >> Wow, I bet this one crept up on you as quickly as it did me! >> >> We have our second planned beta releases for 2.6 and 3.0 tomorrow. As >> usual I will start looking at blockers and buildbots tomorrow afternoon >> (UTC-4 time) with a plan to start building things at about 6pm. Also, I >> will of course be in #python-dev on freenode to answer any questions, or >> get second opinions. >> >> PEP 361 claims that these will be the last betas. Whether that's true or >> not depends on how well the beta2's go. Please help review code or fix >> bugs. If you know of things that absolutely must go into beta2, be sure >> there is an open release-blocker bug on the issue. > > May I ask if it really makes sense to release the beta tomorrow? Looking > at the Misc/NEWS files for 2.6 and 3.0, there are around 3-5 entries > for each release. I know it's good to follow the release plan, but it > also may save you, the release manager, work for the third beta (which > I think will be necessary if beta2 is released tomorrow). > > Georg > Speaking from my minor perspective - I've been sick and MIA, so there has not been a lot of movement on the pep 371 issues / multiprocessing bugs since Beta 1, there's still a fair amount of issues to close out. -jesse ___ Python-Dev mailing list [email protected] http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
Re: [Python-Dev] [Python-3000] Second betas tomorrow
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Jul 1, 2008, at 4:25 PM, Guido van Rossum wrote: I think we should put this one off. The previous betas were done on June 18, and IMO the next beta should be about a month afterwards, not 2 weeks. I will not be able to make releases the weeks of July 21st and 28th. The next scheduled beta is August 6th. There are two options. I could shift everything forward 2 weeks and do the next betas on July 16th. Or we could wait until August 6th. That would mean 6 weeks between betas. It's fine with me either way. - -Barry -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (Darwin) iQCVAwUBSGqWQ3EjvBPtnXfVAQK5owP/Yd1pwWtwelbstnb6xh/dEtILirAyhfyo kcfQSSFBX+GgkDIx99cxgmJ7nB+xSNSy1MlkXukDj41O2m+dCqcQaxhyim4yqBYC r/Zc7IIiPT/nNQ/l97z8w0FqBoS/bmk9pqckBzrJfRRW14LZD8m2E/aU+OZeGi6z 0GZn/zwQbYk= =yC2a -END PGP SIGNATURE- ___ Python-Dev mailing list [email protected] http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
Re: [Python-Dev] [Python-3000] Second betas tomorrow
On Tue, Jul 1, 2008 at 3:40 PM, Barry Warsaw <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > There are two options. I could shift everything forward 2 weeks and do the > next betas on July 16th. Or we could wait until August 6th. That would > mean 6 weeks between betas. It's fine with me either way. I vote for shifting things 2 weeks forward. -- Cheers, Benjamin Peterson "There's no place like 127.0.0.1." ___ Python-Dev mailing list [email protected] http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
Re: [Python-Dev] [Python-3000] Second betas tomorrow
From: "Barry Warsaw" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> There are two options. I could shift everything forward 2 weeks and do the next betas on July 16th. Or we could wait until August 6th. That would mean 6 weeks between betas. It's fine with me either way. +1 for six weeks to allow the code to be more thoroughly exercised. Raymond ___ Python-Dev mailing list [email protected] http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
Re: [Python-Dev] [Python-3000] Second betas tomorrow
On Tue, Jul 1, 2008 at 1:51 PM, Raymond Hettinger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > From: "Barry Warsaw" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >> There are two options. I could shift everything forward 2 weeks and do >> the next betas on July 16th. Or we could wait until August 6th. That >> would mean 6 weeks between betas. It's fine with me either way. >> > > +1 for six weeks to allow the code to be more thoroughly exercised. > In that case I'd rather insert an extra beta -- one in 2 weeks and one in 6 weeks. -- --Guido van Rossum (home page: http://www.python.org/~guido/) ___ Python-Dev mailing list [email protected] http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
Re: [Python-Dev] [Python-3000] Second betas tomorrow
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Jul 1, 2008, at 4:54 PM, Guido van Rossum wrote: On Tue, Jul 1, 2008 at 1:51 PM, Raymond Hettinger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: From: "Barry Warsaw" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> There are two options. I could shift everything forward 2 weeks and do the next betas on July 16th. Or we could wait until August 6th. That would mean 6 weeks between betas. It's fine with me either way. +1 for six weeks to allow the code to be more thoroughly exercised. In that case I'd rather insert an extra beta -- one in 2 weeks and one in 6 weeks. Okay. I can't actually do it on July 16th, so the revised schedule will be: 15-Jul-2008 beta 2 23-Aug-2008 beta 3 03-Sep-2008 rc1 17-Sep-2008 rc2 01-Oct-2008 final releases I will update PEP 361 now. - -Barry -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (Darwin) iQCVAwUBSGq11HEjvBPtnXfVAQJdYgP8DFVvCHeDzIDliY0bQuw+DXxMuGAxHWFO BZR2b4sEGFzMRfbGCJOi7wVubc4imwYDIpFXgzFHpWFMfUdBHGaSpnZJhGDxURqp 0vQQ3/nJLy7lpWfDYBy0Sps6XjANQF5SaqeW8KMVsa3X6Spw0fHTmF4xBIjiUaBy MvydyLNszY4= =9/s1 -END PGP SIGNATURE- ___ Python-Dev mailing list [email protected] http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
Re: [Python-Dev] [Python-3000] Second betas tomorrow
On Tue, Jul 1, 2008 at 3:55 PM, Barry Warsaw <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Jul 1, 2008, at 4:54 PM, Guido van Rossum wrote: >> On Tue, Jul 1, 2008 at 1:51 PM, Raymond Hettinger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> From: "Barry Warsaw" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> >> There are two options. I could shift everything forward 2 weeks and do >> the next betas on July 16th. Or we could wait until August 6th. That >> would mean 6 weeks between betas. It's fine with me either way. >> >> +1 for six weeks to allow the code to be more thoroughly exercised. >> >> In that case I'd rather insert an extra beta -- one in 2 weeks and one in >> 6 weeks. > > Okay. I can't actually do it on July 16th, so the revised schedule will be: > > 15-Jul-2008 beta 2 > 23-Aug-2008 beta 3 > 03-Sep-2008 rc1 > 17-Sep-2008 rc2 > 01-Oct-2008 final releases > > I will update PEP 361 now. +1 Thanks for being flexible! -- --Guido van Rossum (home page: http://www.python.org/~guido/) ___ Python-Dev mailing list [email protected] http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
Re: [Python-Dev] [Python-3000] Second betas tomorrow
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Jul 1, 2008, at 7:04 PM, Guido van Rossum wrote: On Tue, Jul 1, 2008 at 3:55 PM, Barry Warsaw <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: On Jul 1, 2008, at 4:54 PM, Guido van Rossum wrote: On Tue, Jul 1, 2008 at 1:51 PM, Raymond Hettinger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: From: "Barry Warsaw" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> There are two options. I could shift everything forward 2 weeks and do the next betas on July 16th. Or we could wait until August 6th. That would mean 6 weeks between betas. It's fine with me either way. +1 for six weeks to allow the code to be more thoroughly exercised. In that case I'd rather insert an extra beta -- one in 2 weeks and one in 6 weeks. Okay. I can't actually do it on July 16th, so the revised schedule will be: 15-Jul-2008 beta 2 23-Aug-2008 beta 3 03-Sep-2008 rc1 17-Sep-2008 rc2 01-Oct-2008 final releases I will update PEP 361 now. +1 Thanks for being flexible! Anything for a great release! - -Barry -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (Darwin) iQCVAwUBSGq6NnEjvBPtnXfVAQKOlQP/RYlj6vxHEmlW/mVNIWqBYy/SmmMA6Qw4 hE3Bhb9QYGC5F0kEKyY5BmBVwETe70ahE1X3AOgmLrnHh5XwvGh8sNrFka/3s9sh vt6XAZh9IoXekZBIOGO4Gz0EtcURVUvAbCzCSXkHCQyL3qoV1r+mxsXVLRV2S4q0 UifMzkOm6WI= =wDrk -END PGP SIGNATURE- ___ Python-Dev mailing list [email protected] http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
Re: [Python-Dev] [Python-3000] Second betas tomorrow
On Tue, Jul 1, 2008 at 3:55 PM, Barry Warsaw <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- > Hash: SHA1 > > On Jul 1, 2008, at 4:54 PM, Guido van Rossum wrote: > >> On Tue, Jul 1, 2008 at 1:51 PM, Raymond Hettinger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> From: "Barry Warsaw" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> >> There are two options. I could shift everything forward 2 weeks and do >> the next betas on July 16th. Or we could wait until August 6th. That >> would mean 6 weeks between betas. It's fine with me either way. >> >> +1 for six weeks to allow the code to be more thoroughly exercised. >> >> In that case I'd rather insert an extra beta -- one in 2 weeks and one in >> 6 weeks. > > Okay. I can't actually do it on July 16th, so the revised schedule will be: > > 15-Jul-2008 beta 2 > 23-Aug-2008 beta 3 > 03-Sep-2008 rc1 > 17-Sep-2008 rc2 > 01-Oct-2008 final releases > > I will update PEP 361 now. Is a Google Calendar kept by anyone that lists stuff like planned release dates, etc.? -Brett ___ Python-Dev mailing list [email protected] http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
Re: [Python-Dev] [Python-3000] Second betas tomorrow
On Tue, Jul 1, 2008 at 6:27 PM, Brett Cannon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Is a Google Calendar kept by anyone that lists stuff like planned > release dates, etc.? It's on my personal one. :) -- Cheers, Benjamin Peterson "There's no place like 127.0.0.1." ___ Python-Dev mailing list [email protected] http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
Re: [Python-Dev] [Python-3000] Second betas tomorrow
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Jul 1, 2008, at 7:27 PM, Brett Cannon wrote: On Tue, Jul 1, 2008 at 3:55 PM, Barry Warsaw <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Jul 1, 2008, at 4:54 PM, Guido van Rossum wrote: On Tue, Jul 1, 2008 at 1:51 PM, Raymond Hettinger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: From: "Barry Warsaw" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> There are two options. I could shift everything forward 2 weeks and do the next betas on July 16th. Or we could wait until August 6th. That would mean 6 weeks between betas. It's fine with me either way. +1 for six weeks to allow the code to be more thoroughly exercised. In that case I'd rather insert an extra beta -- one in 2 weeks and one in 6 weeks. Okay. I can't actually do it on July 16th, so the revised schedule will be: 15-Jul-2008 beta 2 23-Aug-2008 beta 3 03-Sep-2008 rc1 17-Sep-2008 rc2 01-Oct-2008 final releases I will update PEP 361 now. Is a Google Calendar kept by anyone that lists stuff like planned release dates, etc.? http://www.google.com/calendar/ical/b6v58qvojllt0i6ql654r1vh00%40group.calendar.google.com/public/basic.ics - -Barry -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (Darwin) iQCVAwUBSGrdcHEjvBPtnXfVAQJYxgQAh/+j8pF21H0k1vp+1znOh57MohU7gVP6 7fMnLSzOoA+9w7+pVvJVzWbr09vg41kO6OzqEAoMUPV2BK8ZHePuHZkLDwhCAAYk nixu2vRZZEGmT6aC0jejwOCY7vy5giTHelX442drKZcuSdNl4x1kvyohBnm0flIH 6B7HRL3Oo2Q= =5yqD -END PGP SIGNATURE- ___ Python-Dev mailing list [email protected] http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
Re: [Python-Dev] [Python-3000] Second betas tomorrow
On Tue, Jul 1, 2008 at 6:44 PM, Barry Warsaw <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- > Hash: SHA1 > > On Jul 1, 2008, at 7:27 PM, Brett Cannon wrote: > >> On Tue, Jul 1, 2008 at 3:55 PM, Barry Warsaw <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >>> >>> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- >>> Hash: SHA1 >>> >>> On Jul 1, 2008, at 4:54 PM, Guido van Rossum wrote: >>> On Tue, Jul 1, 2008 at 1:51 PM, Raymond Hettinger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: From: "Barry Warsaw" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> There are two options. I could shift everything forward 2 weeks and do the next betas on July 16th. Or we could wait until August 6th. That would mean 6 weeks between betas. It's fine with me either way. +1 for six weeks to allow the code to be more thoroughly exercised. In that case I'd rather insert an extra beta -- one in 2 weeks and one in 6 weeks. >>> >>> Okay. I can't actually do it on July 16th, so the revised schedule will >>> be: >>> >>> 15-Jul-2008 beta 2 >>> 23-Aug-2008 beta 3 >>> 03-Sep-2008 rc1 >>> 17-Sep-2008 rc2 >>> 01-Oct-2008 final releases >>> >>> I will update PEP 361 now. >> >> Is a Google Calendar kept by anyone that lists stuff like planned >> release dates, etc.? > > http://www.google.com/calendar/ical/b6v58qvojllt0i6ql654r1vh00%40group.calendar.google.com/public/basic.ics Thanks, Barry! -Brett ___ Python-Dev mailing list [email protected] http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
[Python-Dev] Can someone check my lib2to3 change for fix_imports?
I just committed r64651 which is my attempt to add support to fix_imports so that modules that have been split up in 3.0 can be properly fixed. 2to3's test suite passes and all, but I am not sure if I botched it somehow since I did the change slightly blind. Can someone just do a quick check to make sure I did it properly? Also, what order should renames be declared to give priority to certain renames (e.g., urllib should probably be renamed to urllib.requeste over urllib.error when not used in a ``from ... import`` statement). -Brett ___ Python-Dev mailing list [email protected] http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
Re: [Python-Dev] Can someone check my lib2to3 change for fix_imports?
On Tue, Jul 1, 2008 at 9:04 PM, Brett Cannon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I just committed r64651 which is my attempt to add support to > fix_imports so that modules that have been split up in 3.0 can be > properly fixed. 2to3's test suite passes and all, but I am not sure if > I botched it somehow since I did the change slightly blind. Can > someone just do a quick check to make sure I did it properly? Also, > what order should renames be declared to give priority to certain > renames (e.g., urllib should probably be renamed to urllib.requeste > over urllib.error when not used in a ``from ... import`` statement). Well for starters, you know the test for fix_imports is disabled, right? -- Cheers, Benjamin Peterson "There's no place like 127.0.0.1." ___ Python-Dev mailing list [email protected] http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
Re: [Python-Dev] [Python-3000] Second betas tomorrow
On Tue, Jul 1, 2008 at 8:44 PM, Barry Warsaw <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- > Hash: SHA1 > > On Jul 1, 2008, at 7:27 PM, Brett Cannon wrote: >> >> Is a Google Calendar kept by anyone that lists stuff like planned >> release dates, etc.? > > http://www.google.com/calendar/ical/b6v58qvojllt0i6ql654r1vh00%40group.calendar.google.com/public/basic.ics Can I get the non-iCal version? -- Cheers, Benjamin Peterson "There's no place like 127.0.0.1." ___ Python-Dev mailing list [email protected] http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
Re: [Python-Dev] [Python-3000] Second betas tomorrow
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Jul 1, 2008, at 10:42 PM, Benjamin Peterson wrote: On Tue, Jul 1, 2008 at 8:44 PM, Barry Warsaw <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Jul 1, 2008, at 7:27 PM, Brett Cannon wrote: Is a Google Calendar kept by anyone that lists stuff like planned release dates, etc.? http://www.google.com/calendar/ical/b6v58qvojllt0i6ql654r1vh00%40group.calendar.google.com/public/basic.ics Can I get the non-iCal version? http://www.google.com/calendar/feeds/b6v58qvojllt0i6ql654r1vh00%40group.calendar.google.com/public/basic http://www.google.com/calendar/embed?src=b6v58qvojllt0i6ql654r1vh00%40group.calendar.google.com&ctz=America/New_York - -Barry -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (Darwin) iQCVAwUBSGr2BnEjvBPtnXfVAQJKBQP/bme7XNFS74SSmNNYX6Wz7Dq83VSQ8J6A hZf6k7tTx6I3qv0Xgc2jD9NnNuLmqG+Rw8Ag5CjBtZXgzAoyszluzddJfz3G0032 zPofZx/ekp22u4XJo9iQyrDKinp+qTlDqlQntsscY5l+KXR5P9ahWeWWM9aQw707 VYkxQ2yAA7g= =fzdc -END PGP SIGNATURE- ___ Python-Dev mailing list [email protected] http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
Re: [Python-Dev] Can someone check my lib2to3 change for fix_imports?
On Tue, Jul 1, 2008 at 7:38 PM, Benjamin Peterson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Tue, Jul 1, 2008 at 9:04 PM, Brett Cannon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> I just committed r64651 which is my attempt to add support to >> fix_imports so that modules that have been split up in 3.0 can be >> properly fixed. 2to3's test suite passes and all, but I am not sure if >> I botched it somehow since I did the change slightly blind. Can >> someone just do a quick check to make sure I did it properly? Also, >> what order should renames be declared to give priority to certain >> renames (e.g., urllib should probably be renamed to urllib.requeste >> over urllib.error when not used in a ``from ... import`` statement). > > Well for starters, you know the test for fix_imports is disabled, right? > Nope, I forgot and turning it on has it failing running under 2.5. -Brett ___ Python-Dev mailing list [email protected] http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
[Python-Dev] py3k branch still using -fno-strict-aliasing
Hi,
I remember discussing this before and coming to conclusion that
-fno-strict-aliasing would be removed from py3k CFLAGS. But as of now
its still used.
I tested with gcc 4.3.1 on Linux x86_64 and there is no strict
aliasing warning when this flag is removed. Also make testall passes.
Is there any reason to keep this flag? If not see the attached patch.
Regards,
ismail
--
Programmer Excuses number 45: I do object-oriented programming - if
the customer objects, I do more programming.
Index: configure.in
===
--- configure.in (revision 64653)
+++ configure.in (working copy)
@@ -785,23 +785,6 @@
# tweak BASECFLAGS based on compiler and platform
case $GCC in
yes)
-# Python violates C99 rules, by casting between incompatible
-# pointer types. GCC may generate bad code as a result of that,
-# so use -fno-strict-aliasing if supported.
-AC_MSG_CHECKING(whether $CC accepts -fno-strict-aliasing)
- ac_save_cc="$CC"
- CC="$CC -fno-strict-aliasing"
- AC_TRY_RUN([int main() { return 0; }],
- ac_cv_no_strict_aliasing_ok=yes,
- ac_cv_no_strict_aliasing_ok=no,
- ac_cv_no_strict_aliasing_ok=no)
- CC="$ac_save_cc"
-AC_MSG_RESULT($ac_cv_no_strict_aliasing_ok)
-if test $ac_cv_no_strict_aliasing_ok = yes
-then
- BASECFLAGS="$BASECFLAGS -fno-strict-aliasing"
-fi
-
# if using gcc on alpha, use -mieee to get (near) full IEEE 754
# support. Without this, treatment of subnormals doesn't follow
# the standard.
___
Python-Dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe:
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
[Python-Dev] [issue3214] Suggest change to glossary explanation: "Duck Typing"
Hi, I'd like extra opinions on this issue please: http://bugs.python.org/issue3214 It's about changing the definition of Duck typing to remove hasattr and leave just EAFP in the enablers - more detail is in the issue log. Thanks, Paddy. ___ Python-Dev mailing list [email protected] http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
Re: [Python-Dev] Can someone check my lib2to3 change for fix_imports?
On Tue, Jul 1, 2008 at 8:36 PM, Brett Cannon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Tue, Jul 1, 2008 at 7:38 PM, Benjamin Peterson > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> On Tue, Jul 1, 2008 at 9:04 PM, Brett Cannon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >>> I just committed r64651 which is my attempt to add support to >>> fix_imports so that modules that have been split up in 3.0 can be >>> properly fixed. 2to3's test suite passes and all, but I am not sure if >>> I botched it somehow since I did the change slightly blind. Can >>> someone just do a quick check to make sure I did it properly? Also, >>> what order should renames be declared to give priority to certain >>> renames (e.g., urllib should probably be renamed to urllib.requeste >>> over urllib.error when not used in a ``from ... import`` statement). >> >> Well for starters, you know the test for fix_imports is disabled, right? >> > > Nope, I forgot and turning it on has it failing running under 2.5. > And refactor.py cannot be run directly from 2.5 because of a relative import and in 2.6 (where runpy has extra smarts) it still doesn't work thanks to main() not being passed an argument is needs (Issue3131). Looks like 2to3 needs some TLC. -Brett ___ Python-Dev mailing list [email protected] http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
