Re: [Python-3000] removing destructuring del

2008-02-24 Thread Neal Norwitz
On Fri, Feb 22, 2008 at 7:44 AM, Guido van Rossum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: [... del (tuple, of, variables), etc deleted] > > > I also think > > > >del a, > > > > should not be legal ("SyntaxError: trailing comma not allowed without > > surrounding parentheses"?), but that's getting

Re: [Python-3000] [Python-Dev] Python 2.6 and 3.0

2008-02-24 Thread Mark Hammond
Jeroen Ruigrok van der Werven: > -On [20080224 19:57], "Martin v. Lwis" ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: > >I can continue to provide Windows binaries if desired. > > If need be, I can help testing the build infrastructure since I have > access > to various releases of

Re: [Python-3000] Buildbots are all red

2008-02-24 Thread Christian Heimes
Eric Smith wrote: > Eric Smith wrote: >> Guido van Rossum wrote: >>> If this is Py3k, perhaps the result should be a PyUnicode instead? >> Probably so, yes. >> >> But I can't reproduce this on a Fedora Core 6 box. I'm compiling under >> Windows now to see if I can reproduce it there. I'll change

Re: [Python-3000] Buildbots are all red

2008-02-24 Thread Eric Smith
Eric Smith wrote: > Guido van Rossum wrote: >> If this is Py3k, perhaps the result should be a PyUnicode instead? > > Probably so, yes. > > But I can't reproduce this on a Fedora Core 6 box. I'm compiling under > Windows now to see if I can reproduce it there. I'll change it to > PyUnicode_Ch

Re: [Python-3000] Buildbots are all red

2008-02-24 Thread Eric Smith
Guido van Rossum wrote: > If this is Py3k, perhaps the result should be a PyUnicode instead? Probably so, yes. But I can't reproduce this on a Fedora Core 6 box. I'm compiling under Windows now to see if I can reproduce it there. I'll change it to PyUnicode_Check shortly, even if I can't repr

Re: [Python-3000] Buildbots are all red

2008-02-24 Thread Guido van Rossum
If this is Py3k, perhaps the result should be a PyUnicode instead? On Sun, Feb 24, 2008 at 1:19 PM, Eric Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Brett Cannon wrote: > > test_types is triggering an assertion error:: > > > > Objects/stringlib/string_format.h:497: failed assertion > > `PyString_Chec

Re: [Python-3000] Buildbots are all red

2008-02-24 Thread Eric Smith
Brett Cannon wrote: > test_types is triggering an assertion error:: > > Objects/stringlib/string_format.h:497: failed assertion > `PyString_Check(result)' > > A *really* quick session with gdb would seem to suggest that 'result' > is actually a str, so I don't know what is going on. Don't have

[Python-3000] Buildbots are all red

2008-02-24 Thread Brett Cannon
test_types is triggering an assertion error:: Objects/stringlib/string_format.h:497: failed assertion `PyString_Check(result)' A *really* quick session with gdb would seem to suggest that 'result' is actually a str, so I don't know what is going on. Don't have time to dig any deeper right now.

Re: [Python-3000] Python 2.6 and 3.0

2008-02-24 Thread Martin v. Löwis
> It very well might. See Christian Heimes's follow up re: Windows > builds. OTOH, I'm okay if at least for the alphas, the binary builds > lag behind the source releases, though I'd like to get the process as > streamlined as possible. I can continue to provide Windows binaries if desired

Re: [Python-3000] Python 2.6 and 3.0

2008-02-24 Thread Barry Warsaw
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Feb 22, 2008, at 6:54 PM, Brett Cannon wrote: >> Hi everyone, >> >> I've volunteered to be the release manager for Python 2.6 and 3.0. >> It's been several years since I've RM'd a Python release, and I'm >> happy to do it again (he says while the m

Re: [Python-3000] Python 2.6 and 3.0

2008-02-24 Thread Christian Heimes
Barry Warsaw wrote: > I'd also like for us to consider doing regular monthly releases. > Several other FLOSS projects I'm involved with are doing this to very > good success. The nice thing is that everyone knows well in advance > when the next release is going to happen, and so all developers and

Re: [Python-3000] Putting pdb.set_trace() in builtins?

2008-02-24 Thread Barry Warsaw
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Feb 21, 2008, at 10:23 AM, Jean-Paul Calderone wrote: > Wouldn't a less invasive solution be to make pdb better? In > particular, > to make `breakpoint´ actually reliably set a breakpoint? Maybe, although I like the directness and simplicity of