On Sun, Jun 1, 2008 at 9:56 PM, Jim Jewett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 5/29/08, Oleg Broytmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> On Thu, May 29, 2008 at 12:31:17PM -0700, Guido van Rossum wrote:
>>> ... I'm opposed to this change, and that I believe
>>> that it would cause way too much
>>> disturba
On 5/29/08, Oleg Broytmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Thu, May 29, 2008 at 12:31:17PM -0700, Guido van Rossum wrote:
>> ... I'm opposed to this change, and that I believe
>> that it would cause way too much
>> disturbance to be accepted this close to beta.
>That's ok. A rejected PEP has i
On Sat, May 31, 2008 at 6:08 PM, Mark Hammond <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Antoine:
>> Mark Hammond skippinet.com.au> writes:
>> > In both Python 2.x and 3 (a few months old build of Py3k though), the
>> > traceback isn't the same. For Python 2.0 you could write it like:
>> >
>> > def handle_exce
On Fri, May 30, 2008 at 6:33 PM, Antoine Pitrou <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Guido van Rossum python.org> writes:
>> I would be okay as well with restricting bare raise syntactically to
>> appearing only inside an except block, to emphasize the change in
>> semantics that was started when we decid
Atsuo Ishimoto wrote:
I'm not comfortable with "printable", too. Is "legible" better? This
is first time for me to see this word in my life :).
The term "printable" has a long history in computing of
meaning that a character code corresponds to some visual
glyph, even if the display process in
On Mon, Jun 2, 2008 at 2:39 AM, Alexandre Vassalotti
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Sun, Jun 1, 2008 at 11:32 AM, Atsuo Ishimoto <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>> --
>> PEP: 3138
>>
>> Title: String representation in Python 3000
>> Version: $Revision$
>>
On Fri, May 30, 2008 at 1:37 AM, M.-A. Lemburg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 2008-05-30 00:57, Nick Coghlan wrote:
>>
>> M.-A. Lemburg wrote:
>>>
>>> * Why can't we have both PyString *and* PyBytes exposed in 2.x,
>>> with one redirecting to the other ?
>>
>> We do have that - the PyString_* name
I've uploaded a patch for the aifc module (http://bugs.python.org/issue2847).
I'm still working on the testsuite.
Comments are welcome!
Quentin
On Thu, May 29, 2008 at 5:39 PM, Quentin Gallet-Gilles <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>
> On Thu, May 29, 2008 at 4:56 PM, Lars Immisch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Hello,
A patch is now at http://bugs.python.org/issue3021 .
Antoine.
___
Python-3000 mailing list
Python-3000@python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-3000
Unsubscribe:
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-3000/archive%40ma
On Sun, Jun 1, 2008 at 2:30 AM, Atsuo Ishimoto <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> I'll update the PEP and the patch on Sunday. Thank you!
Here's new PEP, and new patch is uploaded at http://bugs.python.org/issue2630.
(codereview.appspot.com refused to create new issue for this patch, btw.)
---
Guido van Rossum wrote:
> I really don't like the idea of having Py3k code with doctests written
> in a dialect of Py2k...
BTW, this argument might hold for code that was written for Py3, of which
there currently is close to nothing.
Stefan
___
Python-
Stefan Behnel wrote:
> It would be
> really nice if the doctest module had a simple option that specified if the
> doctests of a test suite are in Py2 or Py3 syntax, and then just did the right
> thing under Py3 (and maybe also 2.6).
I filed a feature request on this for now.
http://bugs.python.o
Hi,
Nick Coghlan wrote:
> Doctest just uses 'exec' under the covers though - the only way for it
> to run code using non-native syntax would be for it to be able to invoke
> a non-native parser and then run the resulting AST directly, or for it
> to invoke 2to3 on the docstring.
I think it should
Stefan Behnel wrote:
That's simple to do. However, doctests in user documentation are much harder
to write in a portable way, as all that overhead of (e.g.) encoding byte
strings to unicode strings for normalised output comparison is very
distracting for readers, so it would be much better if you
Hi again,
sorry, mail editing disorder. I meant to say this:
Stefan Behnel wrote:
> BTW, last time I checked, options were passed into lib2to3 as attributes of
> an object. I find that very inconvenient. A dict or keyword arguments would
> work much better.
And just to give a hint on what I mean
On Tue, May 27, 2008 at 12:42:48PM -0700, Guido van Rossum wrote:
> [+python-3000]
>
> On Tue, May 27, 2008 at 12:32 PM, Armin Ronacher
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
...
> > A problem comes up as soon as user defined strings (such as UserString) is
> > passed to the function. In my opinion a good
2008/6/1 Atsuo Ishimoto <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> In my case, ls checks characters in the file name and convert invalid
> characters to '?'.
GNU ls has more options for displaying filenames with weird
characters:
http://www.gnu.org/software/coreutils/manual/coreutils.html#Formatting-the-file-names
On Sun, Jun 1, 2008 at 5:15 PM, Oleg Broytmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Filesystem encoding is koi8-r, terminal encoding is UTF-8, ls doesn't
> convert (because it doesn't know filesystem encoding) but simply replaces,
> like in Python filename.encode(LC_CTYPE, "replace"). No error reported
On Sun, Jun 01, 2008 at 04:23:10PM +0900, Atsuo Ishimoto wrote:
> silently print converted
> characters. Ditto for utilities such as 'ls'.
$ ls -lF work/
total 72
drwxr-x--- 7 phd phd 4096 May 27 11:14 ?/
drwx-- 9 phd phd 4096 May 30 17:30 ?/
drwxr-xr-x 4 phd phd 4096 May 13 18:35 b
On Sun, Jun 1, 2008 at 6:33 AM, Adam Olsen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I think the reason why strict/backslashreplace (respectively) work
> well is that you can print a unicode string to stdout, have it fail
> (encoding can't handle it), then get an exception printed to stderr
> with the string e
20 matches
Mail list logo
