I just read PEP 3112, and I believe it contains a
flaw/underspecification.
It says
# Each shortstringchar or longstringchar must be a character between 1
# and 127 inclusive, regardless of any encoding declaration [2] in the
# source file.
What does that mean? In particular, what is "a character
> Can I please press the button for a few days until I can offer a
> useful starting point.
Socially, this is the point of the PEP process in the first place: the
PEP author is supposed to collect community feedback in the PEP, and
address it as necessary. People won't stop discussing if the PE
Martin v. Löwis wrote:
> Procedurally, there is a problem that this still isn't an
> officially-posted PEP, even though it's already several days
> past the deadline. OTOH, it's listed in the PEP parade. Still,
> I would like to see a posted PEP rather sooner than later.
> Defending the deadline wi
On 01/05/07, Raymond Hettinger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
PEP: Eliminating __del__
+1
--
Cheers,
Hasan Diwan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
___
Python-3000 mailing list
Python-3000@python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-3000
Unsubscribe:
Josiah Carlson wrote:
> There are many solutions to handling the scaling of Python on multicore
> processors, only one of which is killing the GIL. Another is Greg
> Ewing's ideas offered in the "Ideas towards GIL removal" thread in the
> python-ideas list.
Yeah, except I think only one of those
Martin v. Löwis a écrit :
>> If this is to ever happen, it should be only accessible through a
>> command-line
>> option to python. That way we make sure people are aware that they are making
>> their code incompatible with the larger world.
>
> In what way will the source code be incompatible wi
i finished reading almost all of the new peps, so to prevent cluttering
i'll post all my comments in a single message.
3130 (Access to Current Module/Class/Function)
why make them keywords? they could as well be builtin functions,
like globals() an
On 5/6/07, tomer filiba <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> 3130 (Access to Current Module/Class/Function)
>
> why make them keywords? they could as well be builtin functions,
> like globals() and locals(). i.e., getmodule(), getclass(), and
> getfunction(
On 05/05/2007 15.29, tomer filiba wrote:
> however, running a threaded python script over an 8-core
> machine, where you can utilize at most 12.5% of the horsepower,
> seems like too large a sacrifice to me.
You seem to believe that the only way to parallelize your programs is to use
threads. IM
Giovanni Bajo wrote:
> On 05/05/2007 15.29, tomer filiba wrote:
>
>> however, running a threaded python script over an 8-core
>> machine, where you can utilize at most 12.5% of the horsepower,
>> seems like too large a sacrifice to me.
>
> You seem to believe that the only way to parallelize your
I am sending this email to make sure people are aware of a possible build
problem they might come up against that is unique to Python 3.0 and how to
deal with it.
I decided to do a ``make distclean`` and rebuild my p3yk checkout. But I
came across the error of::
File "./Parser/asdl_c.py", line
Giovanni Bajo wrote:
> What I really meant was:
>
>self.__wr = weakref.ref(self, ...)
Okay, that looks better. But I'm not sure what will
happen if the holder becomes part of a cycle. If the
GC picks the holder as the object to clear to break
the cycle, then the weakref will be deallocated
be
Talin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Giovanni Bajo wrote:
> > On 05/05/2007 15.29, tomer filiba wrote:
> >
> >> however, running a threaded python script over an 8-core
> >> machine, where you can utilize at most 12.5% of the horsepower,
> >> seems like too large a sacrifice to me.
> >
> > You see
> File "./Parser/asdl_c.py", line 744
> print(auto_gen_msg, file=f)
I think asdl_c.py should be formulated in a way
that is compatible with 2.x. It already uses
f.write in many places; the few remaining ones
should be updated.
Regards,
Martin
___
Steve Holden wrote:
> Tim Delaney wrote:
>> BTW, one of my test cases involves multiple super calls in the same
>> method - there is a *very* large performance improvement by
>> instantiating it once.
>>
> And how does speed deteriorate for methods with no uses of super at
> all (which will, I s
On 5/6/07, "Martin v. Löwis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > File "./Parser/asdl_c.py", line 744
> > print(auto_gen_msg, file=f)
>
> I think asdl_c.py should be formulated in a way
> that is compatible with 2.x. It already uses
> f.write in many places; the few remaining ones
> should be updat
16 matches
Mail list logo
