CrunchyFrog 0.3.0 released
I'm pleased to announce CrunchyFrog 0.3.0. CrunchyFrog is a database front-end for GNOME. Skip down for more information. Download: http://crunchyfrog.googlecode.com/files/crunchyfrog-0.3.0.tar.gz Changes in 0.3.0 New Features * Support for GNOME keyring. * Support for multiple statements in a SQL editor. * UI cleanups. Bug Fixes - * Removed obsolete dependencies (gtksourceview1, gdl). * Connection chooser doesn't get insensitive when a editor is closed. * Performance improvements. Translations * Danish * Dutch * French * German * Hebrew * Indonesian * Italian * Spanish * Swedish * Turkish Thanks to all Launchpad contributors! Complete change log: http://crunchyfrog.googlecode.com/svn/trunk/CHANGES What is CrunchyFrog === CrunchyFrog is a database navigator and query tool for GNOME. Currently PostgreSQL, MySQL, Oracle, SQLite3, MS-SQL databases and LDAP servers are supported for browsing and querying. More databases and features can be added using the plugin system. CrunchyFrog is licensed under the GPLv3 and is entirely written in Python/PyGTK. Homepage:http://cf.andialbrecht.de/ Screenshots: http://cf.andialbrecht.de/screenshots.html Download:http://cf.andialbrecht.de/download.html Development: http://crunchyfrog.googlecode.com/ Discussions: http://groups.google.com/group/crunchyfrog Issues/Bugs: http://code.google.com/p/crunchyfrog/issues/list Regards, Andi -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-announce-list Support the Python Software Foundation: http://www.python.org/psf/donations.html
Re: How to examine the inheritance of a class?
On Thu, 23 Oct 2008 20:53:03 -0700, John Ladasky wrote: On Oct 23, 6:59 pm, James Mills [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Developer. NOT User. For the foreseeable future, this program is for my use only. So the developer and the user are one and the same. And, thank you, __bases__ is what I was looking for. Though Chris Mills also pointed out that isinstance() handles the type checking nicely. issubclass() may be better than directly looking at __bases__. This may not matter if your only writing for yourself, but beware that the use of issubclass() and isinstance() will wreck duck-typing and prevent such things as delegation from working correctly. -- Steven -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Will Python 3 be stackless?
multiprocessing is good enough for now, On Fri, Oct 24, 2008 at 4:30 AM, Diez B. Roggisch [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Phillip B Oldham schrieb: On Thu, Oct 23, 2008 at 9:20 PM, Chris Rebert [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: No, it will definitely not. From your statement (and I'm terribly sorry if I've taken it out of context) it would seem that such features are frowned-upon. Is this correct? And if so, why? You got the wrong impression. It's not frowned upon. It just is a lot of extra effort to implemnt thus makes the development of normal features more complex. Diez -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: 2.6, 3.0, and truly independent intepreters
Andy wrote: 1) Independent interpreters (this is the easier one--and solved, in principle anyway, by PEP 3121, by Martin v. Löwis Something like that is necessary for independent interpreters, but not sufficient. There are also all the built-in constants and type objects to consider. Most of these are statically allocated at the moment. 2) Barriers to free threading. As Jesse describes, this is simply just the GIL being in place, but of course it's there for a reason. It's there because (1) doesn't hold and there was never any specs/ guidance put forward about what should and shouldn't be done in multi- threaded apps No, it's there because it's necessary for acceptable performance when multiple threads are running in one interpreter. Independent interpreters wouldn't mean the absence of a GIL; it would only mean each interpreter having its own GIL. -- Greg -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: 2.6, 3.0, and truly independent intepreters
You seem confused. PEP 3121 is for isolated interpreters (ie emulated processes), not threading. Just a small remark: this wasn't the primary objective of the PEP. The primary objective was to support module cleanup in a reliable manner, to allow eventually to get modules garbage-collected properly. However, I also kept the isolated interpreters feature in mind there. Regards, Martin -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: python3 - the hardest hello world ever ?
Many thanks, it works when setting the LANG environment variable. BTW: For Windows users, when running Python command-line programs, you can also modify the properties of the cmd.exe window and tell windows to use the TT Lucida Console font instead of the raster font. Then, before starting the Python program, do a CHCP 1252 This way the sys.stdout.encoding will be cp1252 (tested with Python 2.4.3 and 2.5.1). -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Logger / I get all messages 2 times
On Oct 23, 5:10 pm, Diez B. Roggisch [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: ASh wrote: Hi, I have this source: import logging import logging.config logging.config.fileConfig(logging.properties) log = logging.getLogger(qname) log.debug(message) --- OUTPUT DEBUG logger_test:8: message DEBUG logger_test:8: message --- FILE CONFIG [formatters] keys: detailed [handlers] keys: console [loggers] keys: root, engine [formatter_detailed] format: %(levelname)s %(module)s:%(lineno)d: %(message)s [handler_console] class: StreamHandler args: [] formatter: detailed [logger_root] level: ERROR handlers: console [logger_engine] level: DEBUG qualname: qname handlers: console --- Why do I get the log 2 times? Because you add the handler console two times, to logger_engine and logger_root. You should only add it to root, or set propagate to false. Diez What if I want to output only the specific logger to console and ignore every other? -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Question about scope
Pat a écrit : (snip) Stripping out the extra variables and definitions, this is all that there is. Whether or not this technique is *correct* programming is irrelevant. It's obviously relevant. If it was correct, it would work, and you wouldn't be asking here !-) I simply want to know why scoping doesn't work like I thought it would. --- myGlobals.py file: class myGlobals(): remote_device_enabled = bool irrelevant You're using the class as a bare namespace. FWIW, you could as well use the module itself - same effect, simplest code. /irrelevant --- my initialize.py file: from myGlobals import * def initialize(): myGlobals.remote_device_enabled = True --- my main.py file: import from myGlobals import * I assume the first import is a typo. But this sure means you didn't run that code. RDE = myGlobals.remote_device_enabled def main(): if RDE:# this will not give me the correct value For which definition of correct value ? You didn't import nor execute initialize() so far, so at this stage RDE is bound to the bool type object. FWIW, note that calling initialize *after* the assignement to RDE won't change the fact that RDE will be still bound to the the bool type object. irrelevant You may want to have a look at how other Python application manage application-wide settings. /irrelevant -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: File Upload Size
On Oct 13, 11:55 am, Diez B. Roggisch [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: rodmc wrote: On 13 Oct, 00:10, Mike Driscoll [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Oct 12, 9:34 am, rodmc [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi, Is there a way to get the size of a file on a remote machine before it is uploaded? I would like to write some form of status counter which is updated as a fie is uploaded, and also to use this feature to prevent files which are too big from being uploaded. Best, rod Looks like ftplib does that. Check the docs:http://www.python.org/doc/2.5.2/lib/module-ftplib.html Mike Hi Mike, Thanks for this information I will look at it. The only condition is that everything must run via a webpage. Which is crucial information and rules out Mike's suggestion. And the answer is: no, you can't access file-attributes on remote machines. HTTP does require a content-length header though. If that exceeds a certain size, you can terminate the connection. You need to do that also if the client actually pushes more data than announced. And progress-counting can be done by counting the already arrived data making e.g. an Ajax-Call to fetch that from the server. Diez Thanks. I have basic file uploading working, however is there a limit to what can be uploaded via form? It works perfectly for up to around 20MB then breaks. Also how do I retrieve the content-length header? I am quite new to HTTP programming so sorry for the naive questiomn. Best, rod -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
@property decorator doesn't raise exceptions
Hi, I've encountered a problem which is making debugging less obvious than it should be. The @property decorator doesn't always raise exceptions. It seems like it is bound to the class but ignored when called. I can see the attribute using dir(self.__class__) on an instance, but when called, python enters __getattr__. If I correct the bug, the attribute calls work as expected and do not call __getattr__. I can't seem to make a simple repro. Can anyone offer any clues as to what might cause this so I can try to prove it? Cheers, - Rafe -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
dictionary
what the wrong with the following code
d={server:mpilgrim,database:master,
... uid:sa,
... pwd:secret}
d
{'pwd': 'secret', 'database': 'master', 'uid': 'sa', 'server':
'mpilgrim'}
[%s=%s % (k,v) for k,v in d.items()]
File stdin, line 1
[%s=%s % (k,v) for k,v in d.items()]
^
SyntaxError: EOL while scanning single-quoted string
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: dictionary
asit [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: [%s=%s % (k,v) for k,v in d.items()] The first opens a string, the second terminates it, the third opens it again, and you don't have a fourth in your line to close it. Try using an editor which supports syntax colouring (even Idle does this) and the problem will be instantly apparent. -- Duncan Booth http://kupuguy.blogspot.com -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: substitution __str__ method of an instance
Steven D'Aprano [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
However, you can dispatch back to the instance if you really must:
class MyObj(object):
def __init__(self):
self.__str__ = lambda self: I'm an object!
def __str__(self):
return self.__str__(self)
But honestly, this sounds like a bad idea. If instances of the one
class
have such radically different methods that they need to be treated
like
this, I question whether they actually belong in the same class.
Another option would be to just change the class of the object:
class C(object):
pass
c = C()
print c
__main__.C object at 0x01180C70
def wrapstr(instance, fn=None):
if fn is None:
def fn(self): return I'm an object
Wrapper = type(instance.__class__.__name__, (instance.__class__,),
{'__str__':fn})
instance.__class__ = Wrapper
wrapstr(c)
print c
I'm an object
isinstance(c, C)
True
type(c)
class '__main__.C'
wrapstr(c, lambda s: object %s at %s % (type(s).__name__, id(s)))
print c
object C at 18353264
(I'll leave enhancing wrapstr so that it avoids multiple levels of
wrapping as an exercise for anyone who actually wants to use it.)
--
Duncan Booth http://kupuguy.blogspot.com
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: dictionary
[%s=%s % (k,v) for k,v in d.items()] File stdin, line 1 [%s=%s % (k,v) for k,v in d.items()] ^ SyntaxError: EOL while scanning single-quoted string You have three quotation marks... you want %s=%s not %s=%s -tkc -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Building truth tables
On 26 Set, 20:01, Aaron \Castironpi\ Brady [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Good idea. If you want prefixed operators: 'and( a, b )' instead of
'a and b', you'll have to write your own. ('operator.and_' is bitwise
only.) It may be confusing to mix prefix with infix: 'impl( a and b,
c )', so you may want to keep everything prefix, but you can still use
table( f, n ) like Tim said.
After a while I'm back, thanks a lot, the truth table creator works,
now I just want to parse some strings to make it easier to use.
Like
(P \/ Q) - S == S
Must return a truth table 2^3 lines...
I'm using pyparsing and this should be really simple, but it doesn't
allow me to recurse and that makes mu stuck.
The grammar BNF is:
Var :: = [A..Z]
Exp ::= Var | !Exp | Exp \/ Exp | Exp - Exp | Exp /\ Exp | Exp ==
Exp
I tried different ways but I don't find a smart way to get from the
recursive bnf grammar to the implementation in pyparsing...
Any hint?
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: File Upload Size
Thanks. I have basic file uploading working, however is there a limit to what can be uploaded via form? It works perfectly for up to around 20MB then breaks. There is no limit, but the larger the upload, the larger the chance of a failure. I'm currently not exactly sure if there is a way to overcome this with a continuous upload scheme for browsers - maybe google helps. Also how do I retrieve the content-length header? I am quite new to HTTP programming so sorry for the naive questiomn. That depends on your HTTP-framework/libraries of choice. Diez -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: @property decorator doesn't raise exceptions
Rafe wrote: Hi, I've encountered a problem which is making debugging less obvious than it should be. The @property decorator doesn't always raise exceptions. It seems like it is bound to the class but ignored when called. I can see the attribute using dir(self.__class__) on an instance, but when called, python enters __getattr__. If I correct the bug, the attribute calls work as expected and do not call __getattr__. I can't seem to make a simple repro. Can anyone offer any clues as to what might cause this so I can try to prove it? You must subclass from object to get a new style class. properties don't work correctly on old style classes. Christian -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: look-behind fixed width issue (package re)
On Oct 24, 6:29 am, Peng Yu [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi, It seem that the current python requires fixed-width pattern for look- behind. I'm wondering if there is any newly development which make variable-width pattern available for look-behind. The re module is currently being worked on, but unfortunately it won't appear until Python 2.7. Variable-width look-behind is one of the improvements. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: regexp in Python (from Perl)
Bruno Desthuilliers wrote:
MRAB a écrit :
On Oct 19, 5:47 pm, Bruno Desthuilliers
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Pat a écrit :
(snip)
ip = ip[ :-1 ]
ip =+ '9'
or:
ip = ip[:-1]+9
(snip)
re.sub(r'^(((\d+)\.){3})\d+$', \g19, 192.168.1.1)
'192.168.1.9'
re.sub(r'^(((\d+)\.){3})\d+$', \g19, 192.168.1.100)
'192.168.1.9'
The regular expression changes the last sequence of digits to
9 (192.168.1.100 = 192.168.1.9) but the other code replaces the
last digit (192.168.1.100 = 192.168.1.109).
Mmm - yes, true.
ip = ..join(ip.split('.')[0:3] + ['9'])
As I first stated, in my very particular case, I knew that the last
octet was always going to be a single digit.
But I did learn a lot from everyone else's posts for the more generic
cases. thx!
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: dictionary
On Oct 24, 3:06 pm, Tim Chase [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: [%s=%s % (k,v) for k,v in d.items()] File stdin, line 1 [%s=%s % (k,v) for k,v in d.items()] ^ SyntaxError: EOL while scanning single-quoted string You have three quotation marks... you want %s=%s not %s=%s -tkc Thanx -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Need some advice
alex23 wrote: On Oct 23, 3:15 pm, Larry Bates [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Bruno is correct, the protocol IS https, you don't type shttp into your browser get secure http connection. https[1] and shttp[2] are two entirely different protocols. [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Https [2] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Secure_hypertext_transfer_protocol Ok, I stand corrected on shttp. I've been a programmer for over 30 years and have been using python and web development for about 7 years and I've never seen any reference to it until now. IMHO it wouldn't be a good idea to implement any production code utilizing such an obscure protocol when https is available. You asked for advice in the Subject of OP, that's my advice. -Larry -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: look-behind fixed width issue (package re)
MRAB wrote: On Oct 24, 6:29 am, Peng Yu [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi, It seem that the current python requires fixed-width pattern for look- behind. I'm wondering if there is any newly development which make variable-width pattern available for look-behind. The re module is currently being worked on, but unfortunately it won't appear until Python 2.7. Variable-width look-behind is one of the improvements. Most probably a backport to Python 2.6 or even 2.5 under a different module name like re_ng wouldn't be too difficult to do for anybody that needs the new functionality and knows a bit about building extension modules. -- Gerhard -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: dictionary
On Fri, 24 Oct 2008 10:04:32 +, Duncan Booth wrote: asit [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: [%s=%s % (k,v) for k,v in d.items()] The first opens a string, the second terminates it, the third opens it again, and you don't have a fourth in your line to close it. Try using an editor which supports syntax colouring (even Idle does this) and the problem will be instantly apparent. Or just read the exception, which explained exactly what's wrong: EOL while scanning single-quoted string What are programmers coming to these days? When I was their age, we were expected to *read* the error messages our compilers gave us, not turn to the Interwebs for help as soon there was the tiniest problem. -- Steven who is having a you damn kids get off my lawn moment... -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: 2.6, 3.0, and truly independent intepreters
Instead of appdomains (one interpreter per thread), or free threading, you could use multiple processes. Take a look at the new multiprocessing module in Python 2.6. It has roughly the same interface as Python's threading and queue modules, but uses processes instead of threads. Processes are scheduled independently by the operating system. The objects in the multiprocessing module also tend to have much better performance than their threading and queue counterparts. If you have a problem with threads due to the GIL, the multiprocessing module with most likely take care of it. There is a fundamental problem with using homebrew loading of multiple (but renamed) copies of PythonXX.dll that is easily overlooked. That is, extension modules (.pyd) are DLLs as well. Even if required by two interpreters, they will only be loaded into the process image once. Thus you have to rename all of them as well, or you will get havoc with refcounts. Not to speak of what will happen if a Windows HANDLE is closed by one interpreter while still needed by another. It is almost guaranteed to bite you, sooner or later. There are other options as well: - Use IronPython. It does not have a GIL. - Use Jython. It does not have a GIL. - Use pywin32 to create isolated outproc COM servers in Python. (I'm not sure what the effect of inproc servers would be.) - Use os.fork() if your platform supports it (Linux, Unix, Apple, Cygwin, Windows Vista SUA). This is the standard posix way of doing multiprocessing. It is almost unbeatable if you have a fast copy-on- write implementation of fork (that is, all platforms except Cygwin). -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
using modules in destructors
Hi i have i have a class that makes temp folders to do work in. it keeps track of them, so that in the __del__() it can clean them up. ideally if the user of the module still has objects left at the end of their program, they should be automatically cleaned up. in my destructor i had a call to shutil.rmtree (which had been imported at the start of more module), however when the destructor is called shutil has been set to None. i have made a minimal case to reproduce #!/usr/bin/env python import shutil from math import * class Foo(object): def __init__(self): print shutil def __del__(self): print shutil if __name__ == '__main__': print shutil a = Foo() this outputs module 'shutil' from '/usr/lib/python2.5/shutil.pyc' module 'shutil' from '/usr/lib/python2.5/shutil.pyc' None the odd thing is that if i remove the line from math import * then i get the output module 'shutil' from '/usr/lib/python2.5/shutil.pyc' module 'shutil' from '/usr/lib/python2.5/shutil.pyc' module 'shutil' from '/usr/lib/python2.5/shutil.pyc' This seems inconsistent, and makes me wonder if it is a bug in the interpreter. As an ugly work around i have found that i can keep a reference to shutil in the class. class Foo(object): def __init__(self): self.shutil = shutil print self.shutil def __del__(self): print shutil print self.shutil But given the difference an import statement can make, i am not sure this is robust. I have been working with Python 2.5.2 (r252:60911, Oct 5 2008, 19:24:49) from ubuntu intrepid. (if google groups does bad things to the code formating, please see http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?p=6024623 ) Thanks Sam -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: File Upload Size
Hi Diez, Thanks, I will look on Google again, to date though all examples I have used come up against similar problems. As for HTTP framework and libraries, I will see what is currently supported. At present I am using standard Python libraries. Best, rod -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: 2.6, 3.0, and truly independent intepreters
On Oct 24, 9:35 am, sturlamolden [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Instead of appdomains (one interpreter per thread), or free threading, you could use multiple processes. Take a look at the new multiprocessing module in Python 2.6. That's mentioned earlier in the thread. There is a fundamental problem with using homebrew loading of multiple (but renamed) copies of PythonXX.dll that is easily overlooked. That is, extension modules (.pyd) are DLLs as well. Tell me about it--there's all kinds of problems and maintenance liabilities with our approach. That's why I'm here talking about this stuff. There are other options as well: - Use IronPython. It does not have a GIL. - Use Jython. It does not have a GIL. - Use pywin32 to create isolated outproc COM servers in Python. (I'm not sure what the effect of inproc servers would be.) - Use os.fork() if your platform supports it (Linux, Unix, Apple, Cygwin, Windows Vista SUA). This is the standard posix way of doing multiprocessing. It is almost unbeatable if you have a fast copy-on- write implementation of fork (that is, all platforms except Cygwin). This is discussed earlier in the thread--they're unfortunately all out. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: using modules in destructors
This is expected behavior (see http://www.python.org/doc/essays/cleanup) but it is definitely a wart of Python. The best advice I can give you is *never* use __del__. There are alternatives, such as the with statement, weak references or atexit. See for instance http://code.activestate.com/recipes/523007/ If you Google in this newsgroup for __del__ you will find a lot of discussion. Michele Simionato -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Logger / I get all messages 2 times
On Oct 24, 8:28 am, ASh [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Oct 23, 5:10 pm, Diez B. Roggisch [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: ASh wrote: Hi, I have this source: importlogging importlogging.config logging.config.fileConfig(logging.properties) log =logging.getLogger(qname) log.debug(message) --- OUTPUT DEBUG logger_test:8: message DEBUG logger_test:8: message --- FILE CONFIG [formatters] keys: detailed [handlers] keys: console [loggers] keys: root, engine [formatter_detailed] format: %(levelname)s %(module)s:%(lineno)d: %(message)s [handler_console] class: StreamHandler args: [] formatter: detailed [logger_root] level: ERROR handlers: console [logger_engine] level: DEBUG qualname: qname handlers: console --- Why do I get the log 2 times? Because you add the handler console two times, to logger_engine and logger_root. You should only add it to root, or set propagate to false. Diez What if I want to output only the specific logger to console and ignore every other? Just add the handler to the logger you want and to no other logger. Then, events logged with the logger you want (and its child loggers) will be sent to the console. If you don't want the child loggers to log to console, set their propagate value to 0. Regards, Vinay Sajip -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: 2.6, 3.0, and truly independent intepreters
Terry Reedy wrote: Everything in DLLs is compiled C extensions. I see about 15 for Windows 3.0. Ah, weren't that wonderful times back in the days of Win3.0, when DLL-hell was inhabited by only 15 libraries? *sigh* ... although ... wait, didn't Win3.0 have more than that already? Maybe you meant Windows 1.0? SCNR-ly, Stefan -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: How to get the actual address of a object
On 10月24日, 下午1时10分, James Mills [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Fri, Oct 24, 2008 at 2:58 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: maybe id(x) can get it ,but how to cast it back into a object You can't. Python is NOT C/C++/Java or whatever. If you have a variable, x, and you want to copy it to another variable, y. Use assignment. Most (if not all) objects in python a referenced. A lot of types are also immutable. Describe your problem, perhaps we may be able to provide you a better solution ? Can I statically re-cast an object into a different type by getting the address of another object is not a very good problem. If you're after, coercing one type into another, for example: x = 2 y = 2 z = int(y) x 2 y '2' z 2 cheers James -- -- -- Problems are solved by method Thank you,James. My original idea was to study all the contents of any object. I can do it by using module ctypes. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Python equivalent to SharePoint?
I have read about both Plone and Alfresco being considered as alternatives to Sharepoint and unfortunately they may not be enough if you require everything Sharepoint has too offer. Plone and Alfresco are both great applications but out of the box they are too focused to be complete replacements. Sharepoint is quite the Monolithic beast when it comes to both features and complexity. I have done some Sharepoint development and customization work in a former life err job and although I would not wish it on my worst competitor, it is very 'feature' rich. Either way, IMHO, these all-in-one, frameworks are not the way to go. They just get too large and encourage companies to keep their eggs all in one basket. Although I admit, I am very biased as I work on the Datasync Suite, which is a Sharepoint competitor. Our approach is to not re-invent the wheel but rather integrate open source applications that are very good for select business units under a single web based portal. The applications we integrate are written in various languages but our Suite that ties them all together is written entirely in Python. Which has served as a marvelous glue language and base for application extensions. I'll stop there because I don't want to turn my post into more of an advertisement then it has already become but if your interested, the link is in my sig. Good Luck, Ivan Ven Osdel http://www.datasyncsuite.com/ Joe Strout-2 wrote: We've got a client who has been planning to use SharePoint for managing their organization documents, but has recently dropped that idea and is looking for an alternative. Is there any Python package with similar functionality? I confess that I've never used SharePoint myself, and what I know about is mainly from these sources: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SharePoint http://discuss.joelonsoftware.com/default.asp?joel.3.66103.7 I found a reference to CPS, but its developers have dropped the Python source to rewrite it in Java. That's disturbing, and I don't want to recommend an abandoned platform. Anything else I should consider? Thanks, - Joe -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Python-equivalent-to-SharePoint--tp19995715p20151313.html Sent from the Python - python-list mailing list archive at Nabble.com. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: 2.6, 3.0, and truly independent intepreters
On Oct 24, 3:58 pm, Andy O'Meara [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: This is discussed earlier in the thread--they're unfortunately all out. It occurs to me that tcl is doing what you want. Have you ever thought of not using Python? That aside, the fundamental problem is what I perceive a fundamental design flaw in Python's C API. In Java JNI, each function takes a JNIEnv* pointer as their first argument. There is nothing the prevents you from embedding several JVMs in a process. Python can create embedded subinterpreters, but it works differently. It swaps subinterpreters like a finite state machine: only one is concurrently active, and the GIL is shared. The approach is fine, except it kills free threading of subinterpreters. The argument seems to be that Apache's mod_python somehow depends on it (for reasons I don't understand). -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: 2.6, 3.0, and truly independent intepreters
On Oct 24, 2:12 am, greg [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Andy wrote: 1) Independent interpreters (this is the easier one--and solved, in principle anyway, by PEP 3121, by Martin v. Löwis Something like that is necessary for independent interpreters, but not sufficient. There are also all the built-in constants and type objects to consider. Most of these are statically allocated at the moment. Agreed--I was just trying to speak generally. Or, put another way, there's no hope for independent interpreters without the likes of PEP 3121. Also, as Martin pointed out, there's the issue of module cleanup some guys here may underestimate (and I'm glad Martin pointed out the importance of it). Without the module cleanup, every time a dynamic library using python loads and unloads you've got leaks. This issue is a real problem for us since our software is loaded and unloaded many many times in a host app (iTunes, WMP, etc). I hadn't raised it here yet (and I don't want to turn the discussion to this), but lack of multiple load and unload support has been another painful issue that we didn't expect to encounter when we went with python. 2) Barriers to free threading. As Jesse describes, this is simply just the GIL being in place, but of course it's there for a reason. It's there because (1) doesn't hold and there was never any specs/ guidance put forward about what should and shouldn't be done in multi- threaded apps No, it's there because it's necessary for acceptable performance when multiple threads are running in one interpreter. Independent interpreters wouldn't mean the absence of a GIL; it would only mean each interpreter having its own GIL. I see what you're saying, but let's note that what you're talking about at this point is an interpreter containing protection from the client level violating (supposed) direction put forth in python multithreaded guidelines. Glenn Linderman's post really gets at what's at hand here. It's really important to consider that it's not a given that python (or any framework) has to be designed against hazardous use. Again, I refer you to the diagrams and guidelines in the QuickTime API: http://developer.apple.com/technotes/tn/tn2125.html They tell you point-blank what you can and can't do, and it's that's simple. Their engineers can then simply create the implementation around those specs and not weigh any of the implementation down with sync mechanisms. I'm in the camp that simplicity and convention wins the day when it comes to an API. It's safe to say that software engineers expect and assume that a thread that doesn't have contact with other threads (except for explicit, controlled message/object passing) will run unhindered and safely, so I raise an eyebrow at the GIL (or any internal helper sync stuff) holding up an thread's performance when the app is designed to not need lower-level global locks. Anyway, let's talk about solutions. My company looking to support python dev community endeavor that allows the following: - an app makes N worker threads (using the OS) - each worker thread makes its own interpreter, pops scripts off a work queue, and manages exporting (and then importing) result data to other parts of the app. Generally, we're talking about CPU-bound work here. - each interpreter has the essentials (e.g. math support, string support, re support, and so on -- I realize this is open-ended, but work with me here). Let's guesstimate about what kind of work we're talking about here and if this is even in the realm of possibility. If we find that it *is* possible, let's figure out what level of work we're talking about. From there, I can get serious about writing up a PEP/spec, paid support, and so on. Regards, Andy -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: look-behind fixed width issue (package re)
Most probably a backport to Python 2.6 or even 2.5 under a different module name like re_ng wouldn't be too difficult to do for anybody that needs the new functionality and knows a bit about building extension modules. I did a google a search. But I don't find any document that describe it. Does it have almost the same functionality as the re package that will be in Python 2.7? Where is the decumentation of it? If I just need variable width look-behind, I just replace re with re_ng on python 2.5 or 2.6, right? Is re_ng available on python 2.4? Thanks, Peng -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: More efficient array processing
On Oct 23, 8:11 pm, John [H2O] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: datagrid = numpy.zeros(360,180,3,73,20) On a 32 bit system, try this instead: datagrid = numpy.zeros((360,180,3,73,20), dtype=numpy.float32) (if you can use single precision that is.) -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: dictionary
On 24 Oct 2008 13:17:45 GMT, Steven D'Aprano wrote: What are programmers coming to these days? When I was their age, we were expected to *read* the error messages our compilers gave us, not turn to the Interwebs for help as soon there was the tiniest problem. Yes, and what's more, the text of the error message was IEH208. After reading it several times, one looked it up in a big fat set of books, where one found the explanation: IEH208: Your program contains an error. Correct the error and resubmit your job. An excellent system for purging the world of the weak and timid. -- To email me, substitute nowhere-spamcop, invalid-net. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: look-behind fixed width issue (package re)
On Fri, 24 Oct 2008 07:43:16 -0700, Peng Yu wrote: Most probably a backport to Python 2.6 or even 2.5 under a different module name like re_ng wouldn't be too difficult to do for anybody that needs the new functionality and knows a bit about building extension modules. I did a google a search. But I don't find any document that describe it. Does it have almost the same functionality as the re package that will be in Python 2.7? Where is the decumentation of it? If I just need variable width look-behind, I just replace re with re_ng on python 2.5 or 2.6, right? Is re_ng available on python 2.4? re_ng doesn't exist yet, because Python 2.7 doesn't exist yet. 2.6 has only just come out -- it will probably be at least a year before 2.7 is out, and only then might people start back-porting the new re engine to 2.5 or 2.6. -- Steven -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: 2.6, 3.0, and truly independent intepreters
That aside, the fundamental problem is what I perceive a fundamental design flaw in Python's C API. In Java JNI, each function takes a JNIEnv* pointer as their first argument. There is nothing the prevents you from embedding several JVMs in a process. Python can create embedded subinterpreters, but it works differently. It swaps subinterpreters like a finite state machine: only one is concurrently active, and the GIL is shared. Bingo, it seems that you've hit it right on the head there. Sadly, that's why I regard this thread largely futile (but I'm an optimist when it comes to cool software communities so here I am). I've been afraid to say it for fear of getting mauled by everyone here, but I would definitely agree if there was a context (i.e. environment) object passed around then perhaps we'd have the best of all worlds. *winces* This is discussed earlier in the thread--they're unfortunately all out. It occurs to me that tcl is doing what you want. Have you ever thought of not using Python? Bingo again. Our research says that the options are tcl, perl (although it's generally untested and not recommended by the community--definitely dealbreakers for a commercial user like us), and lua. Also, I'd rather saw off my own right arm than adopt perl, so that's out. :^) As I mentioned, we're looking to either (1) support a python dev community effort, (2) make our own high-performance python interpreter (that uses an env object as you described), or (3) drop python and go to lua. I'm favoring them in the order I list them, but the more I discuss the issue with folks here, the more people seem to be unfortunately very divided on (1). Andy -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: dictionary
On Fri, 24 Oct 2008 14:53:19 +, Peter Pearson wrote: On 24 Oct 2008 13:17:45 GMT, Steven D'Aprano wrote: What are programmers coming to these days? When I was their age, we were expected to *read* the error messages our compilers gave us, not turn to the Interwebs for help as soon there was the tiniest problem. Yes, and what's more, the text of the error message was IEH208. After reading it several times, one looked it up in a big fat set of books, where one found the explanation: IEH208: Your program contains an error. Correct the error and resubmit your job. An excellent system for purging the world of the weak and timid. You had reference books? You were lucky! When I was lad, we couldn't afford reference books. If we wanted to know what an error code meant, we had to rummage through the bins outside of compiler vendors' offices looking for discarded documentation. -- Steven -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: python extensions: including project local headers
Philip Semanchuk [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: On Oct 23, 2008, at 3:18 PM, J Kenneth King wrote: Philip Semanchuk [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: On Oct 23, 2008, at 11:36 AM, J Kenneth King wrote: Hey everyone, I'm working on a python extension wrapper around Rob Hess' implementation of a SIFT feature detector. I'm working on a computer-vision based project that requires interfacing with Python at the higher layers, so I figured the best way to handle this would be in C (since my initial implementation in python was ungodly and slow). I can get distutils to compile the extension and install it in the python path, but when I go to import it I get the wonderful exception: ImportError: /usr/lib/python2.5/site-packages/pysift.so: undefined symbol: _sift_features Kenneth, You're close but not interpreting the error quite correctly. This isn't an error from the compiler or preprocessor, it's a library error. Assuming this is dynamically linked, your OS is reporting that, at runtime, it can't find the library that contains _sift_features. Make sure that it's somewhere where your OS can find it. This is basically what I was looking for help with. So far the project directory is: /pysift /sift .. /include .. sift.h /src .. sift.c /src pysift.c setup.py I thought I could just #include sift.h in pysift.c as long as distutils passed the right -I path to gcc. That's true, and it sounds like you've got that part working. Maybe I should compile the sift code as a shared object and link it to my extension? How would I get distutils to build the makefile and tell gcc how to link it? Thanks for the reply. Python has spoiled me and my C is rather rusty. :) I don't know how to get setup.py to build a shared object separately. I am in the same Python/C situation as you. I'm scrubbing the rust off of my C skills and I'm also a n00b at developing extensions. I've learned a lot from looking at other people's setup code, so maybe I can help you there. My posix_ipc module links to the realtime lib rt and here's the relevant snippets of setup.py: -- import distutils.core as duc libraries = [ ] libraries.append(rt) source_files = [posix_ipc_module.c] ext_modules = [ duc.Extension(posix_ipc, source_files, define_macros=define_macros, libraries=libraries ) ] duc.setup(name=posix_ipc, version=VERSION, ext_modules=ext_modules) -- You can download the whole thing here if you want to examine all the code: http://semanchuk.com/philip/posix_ipc/ HTH Philip I'll take a look, thanks! :) -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: 2.6, 3.0, and truly independent intepreters
I'm not finished reading the whole thread yet, but I've got some things below to respond to this post with. On Thu, Oct 23, 2008 at 9:30 AM, Glenn Linderman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On approximately 10/23/2008 12:24 AM, came the following characters from the keyboard of Christian Heimes: Andy wrote: 2) Barriers to free threading. As Jesse describes, this is simply just the GIL being in place, but of course it's there for a reason. It's there because (1) doesn't hold and there was never any specs/ guidance put forward about what should and shouldn't be done in multi- threaded apps (see my QuickTime API example). Perhaps if we could go back in time, we would not put the GIL in place, strict guidelines regarding multithreaded use would have been established, and PEP 3121 would have been mandatory for C modules. Then again--screw that, if I could go back in time, I'd just go for the lottery tickets!! :^) I've been following this discussion with interest, as it certainly seems that multi-core/multi-CPU machines are the coming thing, and many applications will need to figure out how to use them effectively. I'm very - not absolute, but very - sure that Guido and the initial designers of Python would have added the GIL anyway. The GIL makes Python faster on single core machines and more stable on multi core machines. Other language designers think the same way. Ruby recently got a GIL. The article http://www.infoq.com/news/2007/05/ruby-threading-futures explains the rationales for a GIL in Ruby. The article also holds a quote from Guido about threading in general. Several people inside and outside the Python community think that threads are dangerous and don't scale. The paper http://www.eecs.berkeley.edu/Pubs/TechRpts/2006/EECS-2006-1.pdf sums it up nicely, It explains why modern processors are going to cause more and more trouble with the Java approach to threads, too. Reading this PDF paper is extremely interesting (albeit somewhat dependent on understanding abstract theories of computation; I have enough math background to follow it, sort of, and most of the text can be read even without fully understanding the theoretical abstractions). I have already heard people talking about Java applications are buggy. I don't believe that general sequential programs written in Java are any buggier than programs written in other languages... so I had interpreted that to mean (based on some inquiry) that complex, multi-threaded Java applications are buggy. And while I also don't believe that complex, multi-threaded programs written in Java are any buggier than complex, multi-threaded programs written in other languages, it does seem to be true that Java is one of the currently popular languages in which to write complex, multi-threaded programs, because of its language support for threads and concurrency primitives. These reports were from people that are not programmers, but are field IT people, that have bought and/or support software and/or hardware with drivers, that are written in Java, and seem to have non-ideal behavior, (apparently only) curable by stopping/restarting the application or driver, or sometimes requiring a reboot. The paper explains many traps that lead to complex, multi-threaded programs being buggy, and being hard to test. I have worked with parallel machines, applications, and databases for 25 years, and can appreciate the succinct expression of the problems explained within the paper, and can, from experience, agree with its premises and conclusions. Parallel applications only have been commercial successes when the parallelism is tightly constrained to well-controlled patterns that could be easily understood. Threads, especially in cooperation with languages that use memory pointers, have the potential to get out of control, in inexplicable ways. Python *must* gain means of concurrent execution of CPU bound code eventually to survive on the market. But it must get the right means or we are going to suffer the consequences. This statement, after reading the paper, seems somewhat in line with the author's premise that language acceptability requires that a language be self-contained/monolithic, and potentially sufficient to implement itself. That seems to also be one of the reasons that Java is used today for threaded applications. It does seem to be true, given current hardware trends, that _some mechanism_ must be provided to obtain the benefit of multiple cores/CPUs to a single application, and that Python must either implement or interface to that mechanism to continue to be a viable language for large scale application development. Andy seems to want an implementation of independent Python processes implemented as threads within a single address space, that can be coordinated by an outer application. This actually corresponds to the model promulgated in the paper as being most likely to succeed.
Re: Py2exe and Module Error...
On Oct 23, 5:02 pm, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Oct 22, 8:33 pm, Gabriel Genellina [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
En Wed, 22 Oct 2008 20:34:39 -0200, [EMAIL PROTECTED] escribió:
I am using py2exe and everything is working fine except one module,
ClientCookie, found here:
http://wwwsearch.sourceforge.net/ClientCookie/
Keeps coming up as not found no matter what I do. I have tried all
these combinations from the command line:
Add `import ClientCookie` to your setup.py (to make sure you actually
*can* import it in your development environment).
Also declare it as a required *package* (not module):
setup(windows=[C:\\exe\\pos_final2.py],
...
options={'py2exe': {
'packages': ['ClientCookie',]
})
--
Gabriel Genellina
Ok, thank you for your reply Gabriel. I did as you said, including
adding 'import ClientCookie' to setup.py and that worked fine when
running the script it found it. However, when actually running it
through py2exe after adding the package as you have said, it still
says 'No module named ClientCookie'
Any help would be greatly appreciated.
Vince
Try asking at the py2exe mailing list as well. They can probably give
you some pointers.
Mike
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: 2.6, 3.0, and truly independent intepreters
Glenn, great post and points! Andy seems to want an implementation of independent Python processes implemented as threads within a single address space, that can be coordinated by an outer application. This actually corresponds to the model promulgated in the paper as being most likely to succeed. Yeah, that's the idea--let the highest levels run and coordinate the show. It does seem simpler and more efficient to simply copy data from one memory location to another, rather than send it in a message, especially if the data are large. That's the rub... In our case, we're doing image and video manipulation--stuff not good to be messaging from address space to address space. The same argument holds for numerical processing with large data sets. The workers handing back huge data sets via messaging isn't very attractive. One thing Andy hasn't yet explained (or I missed) is why any of his application is coded in a language other than Python. Our software runs in real time (so performance is paramount), interacts with other static libraries, depends on worker threads to perform real-time image manipulation, and leverages Windows and Mac OS API concepts and features. Python's performance hits have generally been a huge challenge with our animators because they often have to go back and massage their python code to improve execution performance. So, in short, there are many reasons why we use python as a part rather than a whole. The other area of pain that I mentioned in one of my other posts is that what we ship, above all, can't be flaky. The lack of module cleanup (intended to be addressed by PEP 3121), using a duplicate copy of the python dynamic lib, and namespace black magic to achieve independent interpreters are all examples that have made using python for us much more challenging and time-consuming then we ever anticipated. Again, if it turns out nothing can be done about our needs (which appears to be more and more like the case), I think it's important for everyone here to consider the points raised here in the last week. Moreover, realize that the python dev community really stands to gain from making python usable as a tool (rather than a monolith). This fact alone has caused lua to *rapidly* rise in popularity with software companies looking to embed a powerful, lightweight interpreter in their software. As a python language fan an enthusiast, don't let lua win! (I say this endearingly of course--I have the utmost respect for both communities and I only want to see CPython be an attractive pick when a company is looking to embed a language that won't intrude upon their app's design). Andy -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
print statements not sent to nohup.out
Just a quick question.. what do I need to do so that my print statements are caught by nohup?? Yes, I should probably be 'logging'... but hey.. Thanks! -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/print-statements-not-sent-to-nohup.out-tp20152780p20152780.html Sent from the Python - python-list mailing list archive at Nabble.com. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: 2.6, 3.0, and truly independent intepreters
We are in the same position as Andy here. I think that something that would help people like us produce something in code form is a collection of information outlining the problem and suggested solutions, appropriate parts of the CPython's current threading API, and pros and cons of the many various proposed solutions to the different levels of the problem. The most valuable information I've found is contained in the many (lengthy!) discussions like this one, a few related PEP's, and the CPython docs, but has anyone condensed the state of the problem into a wiki or something similar? Maybe we should start one? For example, Guido's post here http://www.artima.com/weblogs/viewpost.jsp?thread=214235describes some possible solutions to the problem, like interpreter-specific locks, or fine-grained object locks, and he also mentions the primary requirement of not harming from the performance of single-threaded apps. As I understand it, that requirement does not rule out new build configurations that provide some level of concurrency, as long as you can still compile python so as to perform as well on single-threaded apps. To add to the heap of use cases, the most important thing to us is to simple have the python language and the sip/PyQt modules available to us. All we wanted to do was embed the interpreter and language core as a local scripting engine, so had we patched python to provide concurrent execution, we wouldn't have cared about all of the other unsuppported extension modules since our scripts are quite application-specific. It seems to me that the very simplest move would be to remove global static data so the app could provide all thread-related data, which Andy suggests through references to the QuickTime API. This would suggest compiling python without thread support so as to leave it up to the application. Anyway, I'm having fun reading all of these papers and news postings, but it's true that code talks, and it could be a little easier if the state of the problems was condensed. This could be an intense and fun project, but frankly it's a little tough to keep it all in my head. Is there a wiki or something out there or should we start one, or do I just need to read more code? On Fri, Oct 24, 2008 at 6:40 AM, Andy O'Meara [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Oct 24, 2:12 am, greg [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Andy wrote: 1) Independent interpreters (this is the easier one--and solved, in principle anyway, by PEP 3121, by Martin v. Löwis Something like that is necessary for independent interpreters, but not sufficient. There are also all the built-in constants and type objects to consider. Most of these are statically allocated at the moment. Agreed--I was just trying to speak generally. Or, put another way, there's no hope for independent interpreters without the likes of PEP 3121. Also, as Martin pointed out, there's the issue of module cleanup some guys here may underestimate (and I'm glad Martin pointed out the importance of it). Without the module cleanup, every time a dynamic library using python loads and unloads you've got leaks. This issue is a real problem for us since our software is loaded and unloaded many many times in a host app (iTunes, WMP, etc). I hadn't raised it here yet (and I don't want to turn the discussion to this), but lack of multiple load and unload support has been another painful issue that we didn't expect to encounter when we went with python. 2) Barriers to free threading. As Jesse describes, this is simply just the GIL being in place, but of course it's there for a reason. It's there because (1) doesn't hold and there was never any specs/ guidance put forward about what should and shouldn't be done in multi- threaded apps No, it's there because it's necessary for acceptable performance when multiple threads are running in one interpreter. Independent interpreters wouldn't mean the absence of a GIL; it would only mean each interpreter having its own GIL. I see what you're saying, but let's note that what you're talking about at this point is an interpreter containing protection from the client level violating (supposed) direction put forth in python multithreaded guidelines. Glenn Linderman's post really gets at what's at hand here. It's really important to consider that it's not a given that python (or any framework) has to be designed against hazardous use. Again, I refer you to the diagrams and guidelines in the QuickTime API: http://developer.apple.com/technotes/tn/tn2125.html They tell you point-blank what you can and can't do, and it's that's simple. Their engineers can then simply create the implementation around those specs and not weigh any of the implementation down with sync mechanisms. I'm in the camp that simplicity and convention wins the day when it comes to an API. It's safe to say that software engineers expect and assume that a thread that doesn't have contact with other threads
Re: 2.6, 3.0, and truly independent intepreters
As a side note to the performance question, we are executing python code in an audio thread that is used in all of the top-end music production environments. We have found the language to perform extremely well when executed at control-rate frequency, meaning we aren't doing DSP computations, just responding to less-frequent events like user input and MIDI messages. So we are sitting this music platform with unimaginable possibilities in the music world (of which python does not play a role), but those little CPU spikes caused by the GIL at low latencies won't let us have it. AFAIK, there is no music scripting language out there that would come close, and yet we are so close! This is a big deal. On Fri, Oct 24, 2008 at 7:42 AM, Andy O'Meara [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Glenn, great post and points! Andy seems to want an implementation of independent Python processes implemented as threads within a single address space, that can be coordinated by an outer application. This actually corresponds to the model promulgated in the paper as being most likely to succeed. Yeah, that's the idea--let the highest levels run and coordinate the show. It does seem simpler and more efficient to simply copy data from one memory location to another, rather than send it in a message, especially if the data are large. That's the rub... In our case, we're doing image and video manipulation--stuff not good to be messaging from address space to address space. The same argument holds for numerical processing with large data sets. The workers handing back huge data sets via messaging isn't very attractive. One thing Andy hasn't yet explained (or I missed) is why any of his application is coded in a language other than Python. Our software runs in real time (so performance is paramount), interacts with other static libraries, depends on worker threads to perform real-time image manipulation, and leverages Windows and Mac OS API concepts and features. Python's performance hits have generally been a huge challenge with our animators because they often have to go back and massage their python code to improve execution performance. So, in short, there are many reasons why we use python as a part rather than a whole. The other area of pain that I mentioned in one of my other posts is that what we ship, above all, can't be flaky. The lack of module cleanup (intended to be addressed by PEP 3121), using a duplicate copy of the python dynamic lib, and namespace black magic to achieve independent interpreters are all examples that have made using python for us much more challenging and time-consuming then we ever anticipated. Again, if it turns out nothing can be done about our needs (which appears to be more and more like the case), I think it's important for everyone here to consider the points raised here in the last week. Moreover, realize that the python dev community really stands to gain from making python usable as a tool (rather than a monolith). This fact alone has caused lua to *rapidly* rise in popularity with software companies looking to embed a powerful, lightweight interpreter in their software. As a python language fan an enthusiast, don't let lua win! (I say this endearingly of course--I have the utmost respect for both communities and I only want to see CPython be an attractive pick when a company is looking to embed a language that won't intrude upon their app's design). Andy -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: 2.6, 3.0, and truly independent intepreters
Stefan Behnel wrote: Terry Reedy wrote: Everything in DLLs is compiled C extensions. I see about 15 for Windows 3.0. Ah, weren't that wonderful times back in the days of Win3.0, when DLL-hell was inhabited by only 15 libraries? *sigh* ... although ... wait, didn't Win3.0 have more than that already? Maybe you meant Windows 1.0? SCNR-ly, Is that the equivalent of a smilely? or did you really not understand what I wrote? -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: dictionary
On Oct 24, 8:01 pm, Steven D'Aprano [EMAIL PROTECTED] cybersource.com.au wrote: On Fri, 24 Oct 2008 14:53:19 +, Peter Pearson wrote: On 24 Oct 2008 13:17:45 GMT, Steven D'Aprano wrote: What are programmers coming to these days? When I was their age, we were expected to *read* the error messages our compilers gave us, not turn to the Interwebs for help as soon there was the tiniest problem. Yes, and what's more, the text of the error message was IEH208. After reading it several times, one looked it up in a big fat set of books, where one found the explanation: IEH208: Your program contains an error. Correct the error and resubmit your job. An excellent system for purging the world of the weak and timid. You had reference books? You were lucky! When I was lad, we couldn't afford reference books. If we wanted to know what an error code meant, we had to rummage through the bins outside of compiler vendors' offices looking for discarded documentation. -- Steven I don't have a reference book. I read from e-buks and some print outs of Reference Card. Again, I had this error becoz my console has no colour highlighting feature. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: dictionary
asit wrote:
what the wrong with the following code
d={server:mpilgrim,database:master,
... uid:sa,
... pwd:secret}
d
{'pwd': 'secret', 'database': 'master', 'uid': 'sa', 'server':
'mpilgrim'}
[%s=%s % (k,v) for k,v in d.items()]
File stdin, line 1
[%s=%s % (k,v) for k,v in d.items()]
^
SyntaxError: EOL while scanning single-quoted string
By single-quoted, the message mean quoted by ' or rather than
triple-quoted with ''' or .
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: 2.6, 3.0, and truly independent intepreters
On Fri, Oct 24, 2008 at 10:40 AM, Andy O'Meara [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: 2) Barriers to free threading. As Jesse describes, this is simply just the GIL being in place, but of course it's there for a reason. It's there because (1) doesn't hold and there was never any specs/ guidance put forward about what should and shouldn't be done in multi- threaded apps No, it's there because it's necessary for acceptable performance when multiple threads are running in one interpreter. Independent interpreters wouldn't mean the absence of a GIL; it would only mean each interpreter having its own GIL. I see what you're saying, but let's note that what you're talking about at this point is an interpreter containing protection from the client level violating (supposed) direction put forth in python multithreaded guidelines. Glenn Linderman's post really gets at what's at hand here. It's really important to consider that it's not a given that python (or any framework) has to be designed against hazardous use. Again, I refer you to the diagrams and guidelines in the QuickTime API: http://developer.apple.com/technotes/tn/tn2125.html They tell you point-blank what you can and can't do, and it's that's simple. Their engineers can then simply create the implementation around those specs and not weigh any of the implementation down with sync mechanisms. I'm in the camp that simplicity and convention wins the day when it comes to an API. It's safe to say that software engineers expect and assume that a thread that doesn't have contact with other threads (except for explicit, controlled message/object passing) will run unhindered and safely, so I raise an eyebrow at the GIL (or any internal helper sync stuff) holding up an thread's performance when the app is designed to not need lower-level global locks. Anyway, let's talk about solutions. My company looking to support python dev community endeavor that allows the following: - an app makes N worker threads (using the OS) - each worker thread makes its own interpreter, pops scripts off a work queue, and manages exporting (and then importing) result data to other parts of the app. Generally, we're talking about CPU-bound work here. - each interpreter has the essentials (e.g. math support, string support, re support, and so on -- I realize this is open-ended, but work with me here). Let's guesstimate about what kind of work we're talking about here and if this is even in the realm of possibility. If we find that it *is* possible, let's figure out what level of work we're talking about. From there, I can get serious about writing up a PEP/spec, paid support, and so on. Point of order! Just for my own sanity if anything :) I think some minor clarifications are in order. What are threads within Python: Python has built in support for POSIX light weight threads. This is what most people are talking about when they see, hear and say threads - they mean Posix Pthreads (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/POSIX_Threads) this is not what you (Adam) seem to be asking for. PThreads are attractive due to the fact they exist within a single interpreter, can share memory all willy nilly, etc. Python does in fact, use OS-Level pthreads when you request multiple threads. The Global Interpreter Lock is fundamentally designed to make the interpreter easier to maintain and safer: Developers do not need to worry about other code stepping on their namespace. This makes things thread-safe, inasmuch as having multiple PThreads within the same interpreter space modifying global state and variable at once is, well, bad. A c-level module, on the other hand, can sidestep/release the GIL at will, and go on it's merry way and process away. POSIX Threads/pthreads/threads as we get from Java, allow unsafe programming styles. These programming styles are of the shared everything deadlock lol kind. The GIL *partially* protects against some of the pitfalls. You do not seem to be asking for pthreads :) http://www.python.org/doc/faq/library/#can-t-we-get-rid-of-the-global-interpreter-lock http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multi-threading However, then there are processes. The difference between threads and processes is that they do *not share memory* but they can share state via shared queues/pipes/message passing - what you seem to be asking for - is the ability to completely fork independent Python interpreters, with their own namespace and coordinate work via a shared queue accessed with pipes or some other communications mechanism. Correct? Multiprocessing, as it exists within python 2.6 today actually forks (see trunk/Lib/multiprocessing/forking.py) a completely independent interpreter per process created and then construct pipes to inter-communicate, and queue to do work coordination. I am not suggesting this is good for you - I'm trying to get to exactly what you're asking for. Fundamentally, allowing total free-threading with Posix threads,
Re: 2.6, 3.0, and truly independent intepreters
On Fri, Oct 24, 2008 at 12:30 PM, Jesse Noller [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Fri, Oct 24, 2008 at 10:40 AM, Andy O'Meara [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: 2) Barriers to free threading. As Jesse describes, this is simply just the GIL being in place, but of course it's there for a reason. It's there because (1) doesn't hold and there was never any specs/ guidance put forward about what should and shouldn't be done in multi- threaded apps No, it's there because it's necessary for acceptable performance when multiple threads are running in one interpreter. Independent interpreters wouldn't mean the absence of a GIL; it would only mean each interpreter having its own GIL. I see what you're saying, but let's note that what you're talking about at this point is an interpreter containing protection from the client level violating (supposed) direction put forth in python multithreaded guidelines. Glenn Linderman's post really gets at what's at hand here. It's really important to consider that it's not a given that python (or any framework) has to be designed against hazardous use. Again, I refer you to the diagrams and guidelines in the QuickTime API: http://developer.apple.com/technotes/tn/tn2125.html They tell you point-blank what you can and can't do, and it's that's simple. Their engineers can then simply create the implementation around those specs and not weigh any of the implementation down with sync mechanisms. I'm in the camp that simplicity and convention wins the day when it comes to an API. It's safe to say that software engineers expect and assume that a thread that doesn't have contact with other threads (except for explicit, controlled message/object passing) will run unhindered and safely, so I raise an eyebrow at the GIL (or any internal helper sync stuff) holding up an thread's performance when the app is designed to not need lower-level global locks. Anyway, let's talk about solutions. My company looking to support python dev community endeavor that allows the following: - an app makes N worker threads (using the OS) - each worker thread makes its own interpreter, pops scripts off a work queue, and manages exporting (and then importing) result data to other parts of the app. Generally, we're talking about CPU-bound work here. - each interpreter has the essentials (e.g. math support, string support, re support, and so on -- I realize this is open-ended, but work with me here). Let's guesstimate about what kind of work we're talking about here and if this is even in the realm of possibility. If we find that it *is* possible, let's figure out what level of work we're talking about. From there, I can get serious about writing up a PEP/spec, paid support, and so on. Point of order! Just for my own sanity if anything :) I think some minor clarifications are in order. What are threads within Python: Python has built in support for POSIX light weight threads. This is what most people are talking about when they see, hear and say threads - they mean Posix Pthreads (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/POSIX_Threads) this is not what you (Adam) seem to be asking for. PThreads are attractive due to the fact they exist within a single interpreter, can share memory all willy nilly, etc. Python does in fact, use OS-Level pthreads when you request multiple threads. The Global Interpreter Lock is fundamentally designed to make the interpreter easier to maintain and safer: Developers do not need to worry about other code stepping on their namespace. This makes things thread-safe, inasmuch as having multiple PThreads within the same interpreter space modifying global state and variable at once is, well, bad. A c-level module, on the other hand, can sidestep/release the GIL at will, and go on it's merry way and process away. POSIX Threads/pthreads/threads as we get from Java, allow unsafe programming styles. These programming styles are of the shared everything deadlock lol kind. The GIL *partially* protects against some of the pitfalls. You do not seem to be asking for pthreads :) http://www.python.org/doc/faq/library/#can-t-we-get-rid-of-the-global-interpreter-lock http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multi-threading However, then there are processes. The difference between threads and processes is that they do *not share memory* but they can share state via shared queues/pipes/message passing - what you seem to be asking for - is the ability to completely fork independent Python interpreters, with their own namespace and coordinate work via a shared queue accessed with pipes or some other communications mechanism. Correct? Multiprocessing, as it exists within python 2.6 today actually forks (see trunk/Lib/multiprocessing/forking.py) a completely independent interpreter per process created and then construct pipes to inter-communicate, and queue to do work coordination. I am not suggesting this is good for you - I'm trying
Re: @property decorator doesn't raise exceptions
On Oct 24, 2:21 am, Christian Heimes [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Rafewrote: Hi, I've encountered a problem which is making debugging less obvious than it should be. The @property decorator doesn't always raise exceptions. It seems like it is bound to the class but ignored when called. I can see the attribute using dir(self.__class__) on an instance, but when called, python enters __getattr__. If I correct the bug, the attribute calls work as expected and do not call __getattr__. I can't seem to make a simple repro. Can anyone offer any clues as to what might cause this so I can try to prove it? You must subclass from object to get a new style class. properties don't work correctly on old style classes. Christian All classes are a sub-class of object. Any other ideas? - Rafe -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: OS 10.5 build 64 bits
Graham Dumpleton wrote: http://code.google.com/p/modwsgi/wiki/InstallationOnMacOSX http://developer.apple.com/releasenotes/OpenSource/PerlExtensionsRelNotes/index.html The latter only works for Apple supplied Python as I understand it. .. thanks for these, the mod_wsgi build contains interesting stuff; no doubt I'll burn my fingers with a few misguided fudges. -- Robin Becker -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Porting VB apps to Python for Window / Linux use
On Oct 18, 2008, at 8:12 AM, Dotan Cohen wrote: I often see mention of SMBs that either want to upgrade their Windows installations, or move to Linux, but cannot because of inhouse VB apps. Are there any Python experts who I can reference them to for porting? I have nothing on hand at the moment, but I see this as a need without an obvious answer. Sorry for the delay in responding, but someone just pointed out this post to me. You might want to take a look at Dabo, which is an integrated desktop application framework for Python (disclosure: I'm one of the authors). It allows you to visually create UIs that run unmodified on Windows, Linux and OS X. You can learn about it at http://dabodev.com -- Ed Leafe -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: @property decorator doesn't raise exceptions
Rafe wrote: On Oct 24, 2:21 am, Christian Heimes [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Rafewrote: Hi, I've encountered a problem which is making debugging less obvious than it should be. The @property decorator doesn't always raise exceptions. It seems like it is bound to the class but ignored when called. I can see the attribute using dir(self.__class__) on an instance, but when called, python enters __getattr__. If I correct the bug, the attribute calls work as expected and do not call __getattr__. I can't seem to make a simple repro. Can anyone offer any clues as to what might cause this so I can try to prove it? You must subclass from object to get a new style class. properties don't work correctly on old style classes. Christian All classes are a sub-class of object. Any other ideas? Hard to tell when you don't give any code. class A(object): ... @property ... def attribute(self): ... raise AttributeError ... def __getattr__(self, name): ... return nobody expects the spanish inquisition ... A().attribute 'nobody expects the spanish inquisition' Do you mean something like this? I don't think the __getattr__() call can be avoided here. Peter -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Python barcode decoding
Does anyone know of any decent (open source or commercial) python barcode recognition tools or libraries. I need to read barcodes from pdfs or images, so it will involve some OCR algorithm. I also only need to read the code 93 symbology, so it doesn't have to be very fancy. The most important thing to me is that it outputs in some python friendly way, or ideally that it is written in python. Any tips would be great! -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
portable python
I code in both windows and Linux. As python is portable, the o/p
should be same in both cases. But why the following code is perfect in
windows but error one in Linux ???
from socket import *
import sys
status={0:open,10049:address not available,10061:closed,
10060:timeout,10056:already connected,10035:filtered,11001:IP
not found,10013:permission denied}
def scan(ip,port,timeout):
s = socket(AF_INET, SOCK_STREAM)
s.settimeout(timeout)
try:
result= s.connect_ex((ip, port))
except:
print Cannot connect to IP
return
s.close()
return status[result]
if (len(sys.argv) == 4):
ip=sys.argv[1]
minrange = int(sys.argv[2])
maxrange = int(sys.argv[3])
timeout = 3
ports=range(minrange,maxrange+1)
for port in ports:
print str(port) + : + scan(ip,port,timeout)
else:
print usage : + sys.argv[0] + ip-address min-port
range max-port range
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: What's the perfect (OS independent) way of storing filepaths ?
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED], Steven D'Aprano wrote: Putting preferences files in the user's top level directory is horribly inconvenient for the user. There is a way around this: redefine the HOME environment variable to be the directory where you want the dotfiles to end up. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
URL as input - IOError: [Errno 2] The system cannot find the path specified
Hello I'm trying to use urllib to download web pages with the GET method, but Python 2.5.1 on Windows turns the URL into something funny: url = amazon.fr/search/index.php?url=search [...] IOError: [Errno 2] The system cannot find the path specified: 'amazon.fr\\search\\index.php?url=search' f = urllib.urlopen(url) Any idea why it does this? Thank you. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: URL as input - IOError: [Errno 2] The system cannot find the path specified
On Fri, 24 Oct 2008 19:56:04 +0200, Gilles Ganault wrote: I'm trying to use urllib to download web pages with the GET method, but Python 2.5.1 on Windows turns the URL into something funny: url = amazon.fr/search/index.php?url=search This URL lacks the protocol! Correct would be http://amazon.fr… (I guess). [...] IOError: [Errno 2] The system cannot find the path specified: 'amazon.fr\\search\\index.php?url=search' Without protocol it seems that the 'file://' protocol is used and there is no such file on your system. Ciao, Marc 'BlackJack' Rintsch -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
from package import * without overwriting similarly named functions?
I have multiple packages that have many of the same function names. Is it possible to do from package1 import * from package2 import * without overwriting similarly named objects from package1 with material in package2? How about a way to do this that at least gives a warning? Thanks. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: portable python
On Fri, 24 Oct 2008 10:42:21 -0700, asit wrote: I code in both windows and Linux. As python is portable, the o/p should be same in both cases. But why the following code is perfect in windows but error one in Linux ??? So what *is* the error on Linux!? def scan(ip,port,timeout): s = socket(AF_INET, SOCK_STREAM) s.settimeout(timeout) try: result= s.connect_ex((ip, port)) except: print Cannot connect to IP return s.close() return status[result] The bare ``except`` catches *all* errors in the ``try`` block, even those you might know about because they don't belong to the set of exceptions you expected. Like `NameError`, `MemoryError`, `KeyboardInterrupt`, … And the function can return two quite different types… if (len(sys.argv) == 4): ip=sys.argv[1] minrange = int(sys.argv[2]) maxrange = int(sys.argv[3]) timeout = 3 ports=range(minrange,maxrange+1) for port in ports: print str(port) + : + scan(ip,port,timeout) …one of which is `None` and that will blow up here, regardless of platform. In [18]: : + None --- type 'exceptions.TypeError' Traceback (most recent call last) /home/bj/ipython console in module() type 'exceptions.TypeError': cannot concatenate 'str' and 'NoneType' objects Ciao, Marc 'BlackJack' Rintsch -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
big objects and avoiding deepcopy?
I am writing an algorithm that takes objects (i.e. graphs with thousands of nodes) into a hypothetical state. I need to keep a history of these hypothetical objects depending on what happens to them later. Note that these hypothetical objects are intimately operated on, changed, and made otherwise significantly different from the objects they were copied from. I've been using deepcopy to push the objects into the hypothetical state where I operate on them heavily. This is pretty slow since the objects are very large. Is there another way to do this without resorting to deepcopy? by the way, the algorithm works fine. It's just this part of it that I am trying to change. Thanks in advance. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: from package import * without overwriting similarly named functions?
On Oct 24, 1:06 pm, Reckoner [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I have multiple packages that have many of the same function names. Is it possible to do from package1 import * from package2 import * without overwriting similarly named objects from package1 with material in package2? How about a way to do this that at least gives a warning? Thanks. You can't do something like this: from package1 import bork from package2 import bork and expect python to know that you want the bork from the first package at one point and the other at another point. The latter will basically overwrite the former. You should just import them like this: import package1 import package2 package1.bork() package2.bork() Then Python will know what to do. If the name of the package is long, you can do this too: import reallylongnamedpackage as p then it would be p.bork() Then again, python is open source. Thus, you can modify the source to do whatever you want if you have the patience and the knowledge to do so. Mike -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: from package import * without overwriting similarly named functions?
I have multiple packages that have many of the same function names. Is it possible to do from package1 import * from package2 import * without overwriting similarly named objects from package1 with material in package2? How about a way to do this that at least gives a warning? Yeah, just use from package2 import * from package1 import * then nothing in package1 will get tromped upon. However, best practices suggest leaving them in a namespace and not using the import * mechanism for precisely this reason. You can always use module aliasing: import package1 as p1 import package2 as p2 so you don't have to type package1.subitem, but can instead just write p1.subitem. I prefer to do this with packages like Tkinter: import Tkinter as tk ... tk.Scrollbar... so it doesn't litter my namespace, but also doesn't require me to type Tkinter.Scrollbar, prefixing with Tkinter. for everything. -tkc -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: How to examine the inheritance of a class?
On Fri, Oct 24, 2008 at 11:59:46AM +1000, James Mills wrote: On Fri, Oct 24, 2008 at 11:36 AM, John Ladasky [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: etc. The list of subclasses is not fully defined. It is supposed to be extensible by the user. Developer. NOT User. It's a semantic argument, but John's semantics are fine. A library is code intended to be consumed by developers. The developers *are* the users of the library. *End users* use applications, not libraries. -- Derek D. Martin http://www.pizzashack.org/ GPG Key ID: 0x81CFE75D pgpug97BBp01J.pgp Description: PGP signature -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: portable python
On Fri, Oct 24, 2008 at 1:42 PM, asit [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I code in both windows and Linux. As python is portable, the o/p should be same in both cases. But why the following code is perfect in windows but error one in Linux ??? What error message do you get in linux? How are you running your code in linux? Your code seems to generally work on my Ubuntu linux box, so you need to give us more information. -- Jerry -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: portable python
On Oct 24, 11:18 pm, Jerry Hill [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Fri, Oct 24, 2008 at 1:42 PM, asit [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I code in both windows and Linux. As python is portable, the o/p should be same in both cases. But why the following code is perfect in windows but error one in Linux ??? What error message do you get in linux? How are you running your code in linux? Your code seems to generally work on my Ubuntu linux box, so you need to give us more information. -- Jerry this the o/p [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~/hack$ python portscan.py 59.93.128.10 10 20 Traceback (most recent call last): File portscan.py, line 33, in module print str(port) + : + scan(ip,port,timeout) File portscan.py, line 22, in scan return status[result] KeyError: 11 [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~/hack$ -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: URL as input - IOError: [Errno 2] The system cannot find the path specified
On 24 Oct 2008 18:02:45 GMT, Marc 'BlackJack' Rintsch [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: This URL lacks the protocol! Correct would be http://amazon.fr (I guess). Thanks, that did it :) -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Python/Django Developer
My client in Jersey City, NJ 07302 is looking for a Python Developer. Below is the job description: Job Summary: This is a programming position in the technical department of Advance Internet, working on application development, application integration, automated testing and deployment of applications, publishing structure and unit testing in various development environments. Job Functions: Develop extensible online applications Integrate vendor code into web tier Write and Maintain Unit Tests Develop and Maintain Automated Testing Frameworks Perform Load/Performance Testing Maintain Enhance Build Deployment Scripts Liaise with programmers (internal external) Ability to set development standards Oversee incorporation of applications into web tier Assess stability of existing applications Coordinate conversion from legacy systems Supervisory Responsibilities: None Required Knowledge, Skills and Abilities: Candidate needs to be aggressive in learning new things as well as taking responsibility for work product and meeting deadlines with minimal supervision. They need to have worked in an online environment and have published applications that have withstood live deployment. Open source familiarity Django framework Python Other frameworks At least 2 standard templating languages such as Velocity, PHP, JSP Knowledge of quality control methods and philosophy Linux command line proficiency ANT/Maven, Build, Make Project management experience Excellent written and oral communication skills Desired Skills/Experience: Moveable Type application knowledge Developing for a clustered server environment Ability to read/understand C OO Perl -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Python-Django-Developer-tp20155587p20155587.html Sent from the Python - python-list mailing list archive at Nabble.com. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Urllib vs. FireFox
Hello After scratching my head as to why I failed finding data from a web using the re module, I discovered that a web page as downloaded by urllib doesn't match what is displayed when viewing the source page in FireFox. For instance, when searching Amazon for Wargames: URLLIB: a href=http://www.amazon.fr/Wargames-Matthew-Broderick/dp/B4RJ7H;span class=srTitleWargames/span/a ~ Matthew Broderick, Dabney Coleman, John Wood, et Ally Sheedy span class=bindingBlock(span class=bindingCassette vidéo/span - 2000)/span/td/tr FIREFOX: div class=productTitlea href=http://www.amazon.fr/Wargames-Matthew-Broderick/dp/B4RJ7H/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8s=dvdqid=1224872998sr=8-1; Wargames/a span class=binding ~ Matthew Broderick, Dabney Coleman, John Wood, et Ally Sheedy/spanspan class=binding (span class=formatCassette vidéo/span - 2000)/span/div Why do they differ? Thank you. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Urllib vs. FireFox
Gilles Ganault wrote: After scratching my head as to why I failed finding data from a web using the re module, I discovered that a web page as downloaded by urllib doesn't match what is displayed when viewing the source page in FireFox. For instance, when searching Amazon for Wargames: URLLIB: a href=http://www.amazon.fr/Wargames-Matthew-Broderick/dp/B4RJ7H;span class=srTitleWargames/span/a ~ Matthew Broderick, Dabney Coleman, John Wood, et Ally Sheedy span class=bindingBlock(span class=bindingCassette vidéo/span - 2000)/span/td/tr FIREFOX: div class=productTitlea href=http://www.amazon.fr/Wargames-Matthew-Broderick/dp/B4RJ7H/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8s=dvdqid=1224872998sr=8-1; Wargames/a span class=binding ~ Matthew Broderick, Dabney Coleman, John Wood, et Ally Sheedy/spanspan class=binding (span class=formatCassette vidéo/span - 2000)/span/div Why do they differ? The browser sends a different client identifier than urllib, and the server sends back different page content depending on what client is asking. Stefan -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: 2.6, 3.0, and truly independent intepreters
The Global Interpreter Lock is fundamentally designed to make the interpreter easier to maintain and safer: Developers do not need to worry about other code stepping on their namespace. This makes things thread-safe, inasmuch as having multiple PThreads within the same interpreter space modifying global state and variable at once is, well, bad. A c-level module, on the other hand, can sidestep/release the GIL at will, and go on it's merry way and process away. ...Unless part of the C module execution involves the need do CPU- bound work on another thread through a different python interpreter, right? (even if the interpreter is 100% independent, yikes). For example, have a python C module designed to programmatically generate images (and video frames) in RAM for immediate and subsequent use in animation. Meanwhile, we'd like to have a pthread with its own interpreter with an instance of this module and have it dequeue jobs as they come in (in fact, there'd be one of these threads for each excess core present on the machine). As far as I can tell, it seems CPython's current state can't CPU bound parallelization in the same address space (basically, it seems that we're talking about the embarrassingly parallel scenario raised in that paper). Why does it have to be in same address space? Convenience and simplicity--the same reasons that most APIs let you hang yourself if the app does dumb things with threads. Also, when the data sets that you need to send to and from each process is large, using the same address space makes more and more sense. So, just to clarify - Andy, do you want one interpreter, $N threads (e.g. PThreads) or the ability to fork multiple heavyweight processes? Sorry if I haven't been clear, but we're talking the app starting a pthread, making a fresh/clean/independent interpreter, and then being responsible for its safety at the highest level (with the payoff of each of these threads executing without hinderance). No different than if you used most APIs out there where step 1 is always to make and init a context object and the final step is always to destroy/take- down that context object. I'm a lousy writer sometimes, but I feel bad if you took the time to describe threads vs processes. The only reason I raised IPC with my messaging isn't very attractive comment was to respond to Glenn Linderman's points regarding tradeoffs of shared memory vs no. Andy -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: dictionary
Am Fri, 24 Oct 2008 05:06:23 -0500 schrieb Tim Chase: [%s=%s % (k,v) for k,v in d.items()] File stdin, line 1 [%s=%s % (k,v) for k,v in d.items()] ^ SyntaxError: EOL while scanning single-quoted string You have three quotation marks... you want %s=%s not %s=%s -tkc Or he may have wanted %s = '%s' Another neat python feature. HTH Martin -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Consequences of importing the same module multiple times in C++?
Hi, I'm currently using boost::python::import() to import Python modules, so I'm not sure exactly which Python API function it is calling to import these files. I posted to the Boost.Python mailing list with this question and they said I'd probably get a better answer here, so here it goes... If I do the following: using namespace boost::python; import( __main__ ).attr( new_global ) = 40.0f; import( __main__ ).attr( another_global ) = 100.0f: Notice that I'm importing twice. What would be the performance consequences of this? Do both import operations query the disk for the module and load it into memory? Will the second call simply reference a cached version of the module loaded at the first import() call? Thanks. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: portable python
Am Fri, 24 Oct 2008 11:33:33 -0700 schrieb asit: On Oct 24, 11:18 pm, Jerry Hill [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Fri, Oct 24, 2008 at 1:42 PM, asit [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I code in both windows and Linux. As python is portable, the o/p should be same in both cases. But why the following code is perfect in windows but error one in Linux ??? What error message do you get in linux? How are you running your code in linux? Your code seems to generally work on my Ubuntu linux box, so you need to give us more information. -- Jerry this the o/p [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~/hack$ python portscan.py 59.93.128.10 10 20 Traceback (most recent call last): File portscan.py, line 33, in module print str(port) + : + scan(ip,port,timeout) File portscan.py, line 22, in scan return status[result] KeyError: 11 [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~/hack$ Python is certainly portable, but ino order to do its job, it relies on the underlying OS and libraries to work, which may be different from OS to OS. The status message you define in your code (e.g. 10056:already connected) seem to be specific to Windows, IIRC. HTH Martin -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: portable python
On Fri, Oct 24, 2008 at 2:33 PM, asit [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: this the o/p [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~/hack$ python portscan.py 59.93.128.10 10 20 Traceback (most recent call last): File portscan.py, line 33, in module print str(port) + : + scan(ip,port,timeout) File portscan.py, line 22, in scan return status[result] KeyError: 11 [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~/hack$ Oh, connect_ex is returning errno 11, which isn't in your dictionary of statuses. Did you think that the eight items in your status dictionary were the only possible return values of connect_ex? Since the socket module is a thin wrapper over the c socket library, you'll probably need to consult the documentation for that to see exactly what's going on. I'd start with man connect on your unix command line, or this page: http://www.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/009695399/functions/connect.html You'd probably be better off using built in modules to map errno to a message, like this: from socket import * import os def scan(ip, port, timeout): s = socket(AF_INET, SOCK_STREAM) s.settimeout(timeout) errno = s.connect_ex((ip, port)) return os.strerror(errno) -- Jerry -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: 2.6, 3.0, and truly independent intepreters
On Fri, Oct 24, 2008 at 3:17 PM, Andy O'Meara [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I'm a lousy writer sometimes, but I feel bad if you took the time to describe threads vs processes. The only reason I raised IPC with my messaging isn't very attractive comment was to respond to Glenn Linderman's points regarding tradeoffs of shared memory vs no. I actually took the time to bring anyone listening in up to speed, and to clarify so I could better understand your use case. Don't feel bad, things in the thread are moving fast and I just wanted to clear it up. Ideally, we all want to improve the language, and the interpreter. However trying to push it towards a particular use case is dangerous given the idea of general use. -jesse -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Urllib vs. FireFox
Right. If you want to get the same results with your Python script that you did with Firefox, you can modify the browser headers in your code. Here's an example with urllib2: http://vsbabu.org/mt/archives/2003/05/27/urllib2_setting_http_headers.html By the way, if you're doing non-trivial web scraping, the mechanize module might make your work much easier. You can install it with easy_install. http://wwwsearch.sourceforge.net/mechanize/ -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: from package import * without overwriting similarly named functions?
If you're concerned about specific individual functions, you can use: from package1 import some_function as f1 form package2 import some_function as f2 -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: 2.6, 3.0, and truly independent intepreters
On Oct 24, 1:02 pm, Glenn Linderman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On approximately 10/24/2008 8:42 AM, came the following characters from the keyboard of Andy O'Meara: Glenn, great post and points! Thanks. I need to admit here that while I've got a fair bit of professional programming experience, I'm quite new to Python -- I've not learned its internals, nor even the full extent of its rich library. So I have some questions that are partly about the goals of the applications being discussed, partly about how Python is constructed, and partly about how the library is constructed. I'm hoping to get a better understanding of all of these; perhaps once a better understanding is achieved, limitations will be understood, and maybe solutions be achievable. Let me define some speculative Python interpreters; I think the first is today's Python: PyA: Has a GIL. PyA threads can run within a process; but are effectively serialized to the places where the GIL is obtained/released. Needs the GIL because that solves lots of problems with non-reentrant code (an example of non-reentrant code, is code that uses global (C global, or C static) variables – note that I'm not talking about Python vars declared global... they are only module global). In this model, non-reentrant code could include pieces of the interpreter, and/or extension modules. PyB: No GIL. PyB threads acquire/release a lock around each reference to a global variable (like with feature). Requires massive recoding of all code that contains global variables. Reduces performance significantly by the increased cost of obtaining and releasing locks. PyC: No locks. Instead, recoding is done to eliminate global variables (interpreter requires a state structure to be passed in). Extension modules that use globals are prohibited... this eliminates large portions of the library, or requires massive recoding. PyC threads do not share data between threads except by explicit interfaces. PyD: (A hybrid of PyA PyC). The interpreter is recoded to eliminate global variables, and each interpreter instance is provided a state structure. There is still a GIL, however, because globals are potentially still used by some modules. Code is added to detect use of global variables by a module, or some contract is written whereby a module can be declared to be reentrant and global-free. PyA threads will obtain the GIL as they would today. PyC threads would be available to be created. PyC instances refuse to call non-reentrant modules, but also need not obtain the GIL... PyC threads would have limited module support initially, but over time, most modules can be migrated to be reentrant and global-free, so they can be used by PyC instances. Most 3rd-party libraries today are starting to care about reentrancy anyway, because of the popularity of threads. PyE: objects are reclassified as shareable or non-shareable, many types are now only allowed to be shareable. A module and its classes become shareable with the use of a __future__ import, and their shareddict uses a read-write lock for scalability. Most other shareable objects are immutable. Each thread is run in its own private monitor, and thus protected from the normal threading memory module nasties. Alas, this gives you all the semantics, but you still need scalable garbage collection.. and CPython's refcounting needs the GIL. Our software runs in real time (so performance is paramount), interacts with other static libraries, depends on worker threads to perform real-time image manipulation, and leverages Windows and Mac OS API concepts and features. Python's performance hits have generally been a huge challenge with our animators because they often have to go back and massage their python code to improve execution performance. So, in short, there are many reasons why we use python as a part rather than a whole. [...] As a python language fan an enthusiast, don't let lua win! (I say this endearingly of course--I have the utmost respect for both communities and I only want to see CPython be an attractive pick when a company is looking to embed a language that won't intrude upon their app's design). I agree with the problem, and desire to make python fill all niches, but let's just say I'm more ambitious with my solution. ;) -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Urllib vs. FireFox
On Oct 24, 2:53 pm, Rex [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Right. If you want to get the same results with your Python script that you did with Firefox, you can modify the browser headers in your code. Here's an example with urllib2:http://vsbabu.org/mt/archives/2003/05/27/urllib2_setting_http_headers... By the way, if you're doing non-trivial web scraping, the mechanize module might make your work much easier. You can install it with easy_install.http://wwwsearch.sourceforge.net/mechanize/ Or if you just need to query stuff on Amazon, then you might find this module helpful: http://pypi.python.org/pypi/Python-Amazon/ --- Mike Driscoll Blog: http://blog.pythonlibrary.org Python Extension Building Network: http://www.pythonlibrary.org -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Python barcode decoding
On Oct 24, 12:05 pm, Robocop [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Does anyone know of any decent (open source or commercial) python barcode recognition tools or libraries. I need to read barcodes from pdfs or images, so it will involve some OCR algorithm. I also only need to read the code 93 symbology, so it doesn't have to be very fancy. The most important thing to me is that it outputs in some python friendly way, or ideally that it is written in python. Any tips would be great! The closest thing I've heard of is the bar code stuff in reportlab. This post talks a little about it: http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-list/2000-February/024893.html And here's the official Reportlab site link: http://www.reportlab.org/downloads.html Mike -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: from package import * without overwriting similarly named functions?
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED], Reckoner wrote: I have multiple packages that have many of the same function names. Is it possible to do from package1 import * from package2 import * without overwriting similarly named objects from package1 with material in package2? Avoid wildcard imports. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Global dictionary or class variables
Hi,
in an application I have to use some variables with fixed valuse.
For example, I'm working with musical notes, so I have a global
dictionary like this:
natural_notes = {'C': 0, 'D': 2, 'E': 4 }
This actually works fine. I was just thinking if it wasn't better to
use class variables.
Since I have a class Note, I could write:
class Note:
C = 0
D = 2
...
Which style maybe better? Are both bad practices?
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Question about scope
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED], Steven D'Aprano wrote: Why is it a class attribute instead of an instance attribute? Singleton class. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: What's the perfect (OS independent) way of storing filepaths ?
Steven D'Aprano wrote: On Sun, 19 Oct 2008 20:50:46 +0200, Stef Mientki wrote: Duncan, in windows it's begin to become less common to store settings in DocsSettings, because these directories are destroyed by roaming profiles The directories aren't destroyed by roaming profiles. When the user logs out, they get copied to the server. When they log in at a different machine, they get copied to the workstation. So configuration information saved in c:\Documents and Settings\pmcnett\Application Data\My Application gets conveniently migrated from machine to machine where I happen to login. A really nice feature. Isn't *everything* destroyed by roaming profiles? *wink* I've heard such bashing of roaming profiles but I've never had anything but love for them. That is, until people go and start saving their movies and pictures in My Documents. Which is why I set their home directory to a server share and have them save their docs there. Seriously, I don't know anyone who has anything nice to say about roaming profiles. I loathe Windows, but roaming profiles was one thing they did (mostly) right. I couldn't be happy in a world that didn't include roaming profiles. Perhaps I'm not seeing the worst of it as I use Samba on Linux as the PDC? Anyway, on Windows user configuration information should go in the user's Application Data directory. If you don't want it to roam, you can instead put it in the (hidden) Local Settings/Application Data directory. Paul -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: How to get the actual address of a object
On Sat, Oct 25, 2008 at 12:25 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Thank you,James. My original idea was to study all the contents of any object. I can do it by using module ctypes. You can simply just query it's attributes. Use __dict__ or dir(obj) Example: x = 10 dir(x) ['__abs__', '__add__', '__and__', '__class__', '__cmp__', '__coerce__', '__delattr__', '__div__', '__divmod__', '__doc__', '__float__', '__floordiv__', '__getattribute__', '__getnewargs__', '__hash__', '__hex__', '__index__', '__init__', '__int__', '__invert__', '__long__', '__lshift__', '__mod__', '__mul__', '__neg__', '__new__', '__nonzero__', '__oct__', '__or__', '__pos__', '__pow__', '__radd__', '__rand__', '__rdiv__', '__rdivmod__', '__reduce__', '__reduce_ex__', '__repr__', '__rfloordiv__', '__rlshift__', '__rmod__', '__rmul__', '__ror__', '__rpow__', '__rrshift__', '__rshift__', '__rsub__', '__rtruediv__', '__rxor__', '__setattr__', '__str__', '__sub__', '__truediv__', '__xor__'] cheers James -- -- -- Problems are solved by method -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: 2.6, 3.0, and truly independent intepreters
Another great post, Glenn!! Very well laid-out and posed!! Thanks for taking the time to lay all that out. Questions for Andy: is the type of work you want to do in independent threads mostly pure Python? Or with libraries that you can control to some extent? Are those libraries reentrant? Could they be made reentrant? How much of the Python standard library would need to be available in reentrant mode to provide useful functionality for those threads? I think you want PyC I think you've defined everything perfectly, and you're you're of course correct about my love for for the PyC model. :^) Like any software that's meant to be used without restrictions, our code and frameworks always use a context object pattern so that there's never and non-const global/shared data). I would go as far to say that this is the case with more performance-oriented software than you may think since it's usually a given for us to have to be parallel friendly in as many ways as possible. Perhaps Patrick can back me up there. As to what modules are essential... As you point out, once reentrant module implementations caught on in PyC or hybrid world, I think we'd start to see real effort to whip them into compliance-- there's just so much to be gained imho. But to answer the question, there's the obvious ones (operator, math, etc), string/buffer processing (string, re), C bridge stuff (struct, array), and OS basics (time, file system, etc). Nice-to-haves would be buffer and image decompression (zlib, libpng, etc), crypto modules, and xml. As far as I can imagine, I have to believe all of these modules already contain little, if any, global data, so I have to believe they'd be super easy to make PyC happy. Patrick, what would you see you guys using? That's the rub... In our case, we're doing image and video manipulation--stuff not good to be messaging from address space to address space. The same argument holds for numerical processing with large data sets. The workers handing back huge data sets via messaging isn't very attractive. In the module multiprocessing environment could you not use shared memory, then, for the large shared data items? As I understand things, the multiprocessing puts stuff in a child process (i.e. a separate address space), so the only to get stuff to/ from it is via IPC, which can include a shared/mapped memory region. Unfortunately, a shared address region doesn't work when you have large and opaque objects (e.g. a rendered CoreVideo movie in the QuickTime API or 300 megs of audio data that just went through a DSP). Then you've got the hit of serialization if you're got intricate data structures (that would normally would need to be serialized, such as a hashtable or something). Also, if I may speak for commercial developers out there who are just looking to get the job done without new code, it's usually always preferable to just a single high level sync object (for when the job is complete) than to start a child processes and use IPC. The former is just WAY less code, plain and simple. Andy -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: 2.6, 3.0, and truly independent intepreters
On approximately 10/24/2008 1:09 PM, came the following characters from the keyboard of Rhamphoryncus: On Oct 24, 1:02 pm, Glenn Linderman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On approximately 10/24/2008 8:42 AM, came the following characters from the keyboard of Andy O'Meara: Glenn, great post and points! Thanks. I need to admit here that while I've got a fair bit of professional programming experience, I'm quite new to Python -- I've not learned its internals, nor even the full extent of its rich library. So I have some questions that are partly about the goals of the applications being discussed, partly about how Python is constructed, and partly about how the library is constructed. I'm hoping to get a better understanding of all of these; perhaps once a better understanding is achieved, limitations will be understood, and maybe solutions be achievable. Let me define some speculative Python interpreters; I think the first is today's Python: PyA: Has a GIL. PyA threads can run within a process; but are effectively serialized to the places where the GIL is obtained/released. Needs the GIL because that solves lots of problems with non-reentrant code (an example of non-reentrant code, is code that uses global (C global, or C static) variables – note that I'm not talking about Python vars declared global... they are only module global). In this model, non-reentrant code could include pieces of the interpreter, and/or extension modules. PyB: No GIL. PyB threads acquire/release a lock around each reference to a global variable (like with feature). Requires massive recoding of all code that contains global variables. Reduces performance significantly by the increased cost of obtaining and releasing locks. PyC: No locks. Instead, recoding is done to eliminate global variables (interpreter requires a state structure to be passed in). Extension modules that use globals are prohibited... this eliminates large portions of the library, or requires massive recoding. PyC threads do not share data between threads except by explicit interfaces. PyD: (A hybrid of PyA PyC). The interpreter is recoded to eliminate global variables, and each interpreter instance is provided a state structure. There is still a GIL, however, because globals are potentially still used by some modules. Code is added to detect use of global variables by a module, or some contract is written whereby a module can be declared to be reentrant and global-free. PyA threads will obtain the GIL as they would today. PyC threads would be available to be created. PyC instances refuse to call non-reentrant modules, but also need not obtain the GIL... PyC threads would have limited module support initially, but over time, most modules can be migrated to be reentrant and global-free, so they can be used by PyC instances. Most 3rd-party libraries today are starting to care about reentrancy anyway, because of the popularity of threads. PyE: objects are reclassified as shareable or non-shareable, many types are now only allowed to be shareable. A module and its classes become shareable with the use of a __future__ import, and their shareddict uses a read-write lock for scalability. Most other shareable objects are immutable. Each thread is run in its own private monitor, and thus protected from the normal threading memory module nasties. Alas, this gives you all the semantics, but you still need scalable garbage collection.. and CPython's refcounting needs the GIL. Hmm. So I think your PyE is an instance is an attempt to be more explicit about what I said above in PyC: PyC threads do not share data between threads except by explicit interfaces. I consider your definitions of shared data types somewhat orthogonal to the types of threads, in that both PyA and PyC threads could use these new shared data items. I think/hope that you meant that many types are now only allowed to be non-shareable? At least, I think that should be the default; they should be within the context of a single, independent interpreter instance, so other interpreters don't even know they exist, much less how to share them. If so, then I understand most of the rest of your paragraph, and it could be a way of providing shared objects, perhaps. I don't understand the comment that CPython's refcounting needs the GIL... yes, it needs the GIL if multiple threads see the object, but not for private objects... only one threads uses the private objects... so today's refcounting should suffice... with each interpreter doing its own refcounting and collecting its own garbage. Shared objects would have to do refcounting in a protected way, under some lock. One easy solution would be to have just two types of objects; non-shared private objects in a thread, and global shared objects; access to global shared objects would require grabbing the GIL, and then accessing the object, and releasing the GIL. An interface could allow for grabbing
Re: 2.6, 3.0, and truly independent intepreters
On Fri, Oct 24, 2008 at 4:51 PM, Andy O'Meara [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: In the module multiprocessing environment could you not use shared memory, then, for the large shared data items? As I understand things, the multiprocessing puts stuff in a child process (i.e. a separate address space), so the only to get stuff to/ from it is via IPC, which can include a shared/mapped memory region. Unfortunately, a shared address region doesn't work when you have large and opaque objects (e.g. a rendered CoreVideo movie in the QuickTime API or 300 megs of audio data that just went through a DSP). Then you've got the hit of serialization if you're got intricate data structures (that would normally would need to be serialized, such as a hashtable or something). Also, if I may speak for commercial developers out there who are just looking to get the job done without new code, it's usually always preferable to just a single high level sync object (for when the job is complete) than to start a child processes and use IPC. The former is just WAY less code, plain and simple. Are you familiar with the API at all? Multiprocessing was designed to mimic threading in about every way possible, the only restriction on shared data is that it must be serializable, but event then you can override or customize the behavior. Also, inter process communication is done via pipes. It can also be done with messages if you want to tweak the manager(s). -jesse -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: 2.6, 3.0, and truly independent intepreters
On Oct 24, 2:59 pm, Glenn Linderman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On approximately 10/24/2008 1:09 PM, came the following characters from the keyboard of Rhamphoryncus: PyE: objects are reclassified as shareable or non-shareable, many types are now only allowed to be shareable. A module and its classes become shareable with the use of a __future__ import, and their shareddict uses a read-write lock for scalability. Most other shareable objects are immutable. Each thread is run in its own private monitor, and thus protected from the normal threading memory module nasties. Alas, this gives you all the semantics, but you still need scalable garbage collection.. and CPython's refcounting needs the GIL. Hmm. So I think your PyE is an instance is an attempt to be more explicit about what I said above in PyC: PyC threads do not share data between threads except by explicit interfaces. I consider your definitions of shared data types somewhat orthogonal to the types of threads, in that both PyA and PyC threads could use these new shared data items. Unlike PyC, there's a *lot* shared by default (classes, modules, function), but it requires only minimal recoding. It's as close to have your cake and eat it too as you're gonna get. I think/hope that you meant that many types are now only allowed to be non-shareable? At least, I think that should be the default; they should be within the context of a single, independent interpreter instance, so other interpreters don't even know they exist, much less how to share them. If so, then I understand most of the rest of your paragraph, and it could be a way of providing shared objects, perhaps. There aren't multiple interpreters under my model. You only need one. Instead, you create a monitor, and run a thread on it. A list is not shareable, so it can only be used within the monitor it's created within, but the list type object is shareable. I've no interest in *requiring* a C/C++ extension to communicate between isolated interpreters. Without that they're really no better than processes. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: 2.6, 3.0, and truly independent intepreters
On Oct 24, 3:02 pm, Glenn Linderman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On approximately 10/23/2008 2:24 PM, came the following characters from the keyboard of Rhamphoryncus: On Oct 23, 11:30 am, Glenn Linderman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On approximately 10/23/2008 12:24 AM, came the following characters from the keyboard of Christian Heimes Andy wrote: I'm very - not absolute, but very - sure that Guido and the initial designers of Python would have added the GIL anyway. The GIL makes Python faster on single core machines and more stable on multi core machines. Actually, the GIL doesn't make Python faster; it is a design decision that reduces the overhead of lock acquisition, while still allowing use of global variables. Using finer-grained locks has higher run-time cost; eliminating the use of global variables has a higher programmer-time cost, but would actually run faster and more concurrently than using a GIL. Especially on a multi-core/multi-CPU machine. Those globals include classes, modules, and functions. You can't have *any* objects shared. Your interpreters are entirely isolated, much like processes (and we all start wondering why you don't use processes in the first place.) Or use safethread. It imposes safe semantics on shared objects, so you can keep your global classes, modules, and functions. Still need garbage collection though, and on CPython that means refcounting and the GIL. Another peeve I have is his characterization of the observer pattern. The generalized form of the problem exists in both single-threaded sequential programs, in the form of unexpected reentrancy, and message passing, with infinite CPU usage or infinite number of pending messages. So how do you get reentrancy is a single-threaded sequential program? I think only via recursion? Which isn't a serious issue for the observer pattern. If you add interrupts, then your program is no longer sequential. Sorry, I meant recursion. Why isn't it a serious issue for single-threaded programs? Just the fact that it's much easier to handle when it does happen? Try looking at it on another level: when your CPU wants to read from a bit of memory controlled by another CPU it sends them a message requesting they get it for us. They send back a message containing that memory. They also note we have it, in case they want to modify it later. We also note where we got it, in case we want to modify it (and not wait for them to do modifications for us). I understand that level... one of my degrees is in EE, and I started college wanting to design computers (at about the time the first microprocessor chip came along, and they, of course, have now taken over). But I was side-lined by the malleability of software, and have mostly practiced software during my career. Anyway, that is the level that Herb Sutter was describing in the Dr Dobbs articles I mentioned. And the overhead of doing that at the level of a cache line is high, if there is lots of contention for particular memory locations between threads running on different cores/CPUs. So to achieve concurrency, you must not only limit explicit software locks, but must also avoid memory layouts where data needed by different cores/CPUs are in the same cache line. I suspect they'll end up redesigning the caching to use a size and alignment of 64 bits (or smaller). Same cache line size, but with masking. You still need to minimize contention of course, but that should at least be more predictable. Having two unrelated mallocs contend could suck. Message passing vs shared memory isn't really a yes/no question. It's about ratios, usage patterns, and tradeoffs. *All* programs will share data, but in what way? If it's just the code itself you can move the cache validation into software and simplify the CPU, making it faster. If the shared data is a lot more than that, and you use it to coordinate accesses, then it'll be faster to have it in hardware. I agree there are tradeoffs... unfortunately, the hardware architectures vary, and the languages don't generally understand the hardware. So then it becomes an OS API, which adds the overhead of an OS API call to the cost of the synchronization... It could instead be (and in clever applications is) a non-portable assembly level function that wraps on OS locking or waiting API. In practice I highly doubt we'll see anything that doesn't extend traditional threading (posix threads, whatever MS has, etc). Nonetheless, while putting the shared data accesses in hardware might be more efficient per unit operation, there are still tradeoffs: A software solution can group multiple accesses under a single lock acquisition; the hardware probably doesn't have enough smarts to do that. So it may well require many more hardware unit operations for the same overall concurrently executed function, and the resulting performance may not be any better. Speculative ll/sc? ;)
RE: Python-list Digest, Vol 61, Issue 368
From: Andy O'Meara [EMAIL PROTECTED] Unfortunately, a shared address region doesn't work when you have large and opaque objects (e.g. a rendered CoreVideo movie in the QuickTime API or 300 megs of audio data that just went through a DSP). Then you've got the hit of serialization if you're got intricate data structures (that would normally would need to be serialized, such as a hashtable or something). Also, if I may speak for commercial developers out there who are just looking to get the job done without new code, it's usually always preferable to just a single high level sync object (for when the job is complete) than to Just to chime as a CPython-based ISV from the scientific visualization realm, we face the same problem limitations due to lack of threading (or at least multiple independent interpreters). A typical use case might be a 1-3 GB dataset (molecular dynamics trajectory and derived state) subjected to asynchronous random read/write by N threads each running on one of N cores in parallel. We get by jettisoning CPython almost entirely and working in C for all tasks other than the most basic operations: thread creation, workload scheduling, mutexes, and thread deletion. The biggest problem is not for the most compute-intensive tasks (where use of C is justified), but for those relatively short-running but algorithmically complex tasks which could be done much more easily from Python than from C (e.g. data organization, U.I. survey/present tasks, rarely used transformations, ad hoc scripting experiments, etc.). Cheers, Warren -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Global dictionary or class variables
On Fri, Oct 24, 2008 at 1:44 PM, Mr. SpOOn [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi,
in an application I have to use some variables with fixed valuse.
For example, I'm working with musical notes, so I have a global
dictionary like this:
natural_notes = {'C': 0, 'D': 2, 'E': 4 }
This actually works fine. I was just thinking if it wasn't better to
use class variables.
Since I have a class Note, I could write:
class Note:
C = 0
D = 2
...
Which style maybe better? Are both bad practices?
Depends. Does your program use the note values as named constants, or
does it lookup the values dynamically based on the note name?
If the former, then the class is marginally better, though putting the
assignments in a (possibly separate) module would probably be best. If
the latter, than the dictionary is fine.
Cheers,
Chris
--
Follow the path of the Iguana...
http://rebertia.com
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
ANN: gui_support v1.5, a convenience library for wxPython
hello, Although I personally hate to release a new version so soon, the error reporting is so essential, that updating is a must. V1.5 changes - errors (catched by the library) will now give a normal error report - GUI preview function now available in this library gui_support is library for easy creation of GUI designs in wxPython. Brief documentation can be found here http://oase.uci.kun.nl/~mientki/data_www/pylab_works/pw_gui_support.html ( as this website will soon be moved, this docpage can always be found through the redirector http://pic.flappie.nl look under paragraph PyLab_Works | GUI_support ) Download: http://pylab-works.googlecode.com/files/Data_Python_Test_V1_5.zip cheers, Stef -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: dictionary
when I was a baby programmer even vendors didn't have documentation to throw out... we just viewed the dissassembeled opcodes to find out how things worked... we never did find out much but I could make the speak click, and we were happy with it. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: How to examine the inheritance of a class?
Developer. NOT User. I go around and around on this issue, and have ended up considering anyone using my code a user, and if it's a library or class system, likely that user is a programmer. I don't really think there is a strong distinction... more and more users can do sophisticated configuration which while not like what we do professionally as software engineers... is not fundamentally different that programming, making the distinction arbitrary. I think the issue here for the term user is that there are many kinds of user, many ways they can customize the system, and the programmer/developer is just one kind of user. No? -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: How to examine the inheritance of a class?
Thank you, Chris. Class.__bases__ is exactly what I wanted to see. And I thought I had tried isinstance(), and found it lacking -- but I just tried it again, and it does what I hoped it would do. While isinstance is no doubt the proper way to access this information, you may have run into problems because that isinstance and ducktyping do not always work well together... because having a particular interface does not mean you inherited that interface. Checking __bases__ will not solve the problem either though, so best to use isinstance if you can and document what you do well enough to help people avoid breaking the assumptions of your system. not that you didn't know that... but I thought it was worth saying because I, at least, more and more do meta-class style techniques which unfortunately do not play well with certain methods of checking type. -cba -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
