Brett Cannon wrote:
> On Jan 10, 2008 8:39 AM, Joe Angell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> My apologies if this has been asked before, but are there any plans to
>> add the compiler module back in to py3k? If so, any idea on a
>> timeline? If help is needed I may be able to put in some time on
On Ubuntu 7.10 "Gutsy Gibbon":
Unfortunately I don't really know python, so am unable to debug this.
I checked out by doing
svn co http://svn.python.org/projects/python/tags/r30a2 py3k
Then I built python itself with no apparent trouble. But building the docs
fails:
make -k html
Eric Hanchrow schrieb:
> On Ubuntu 7.10 "Gutsy Gibbon":
>
> Unfortunately I don't really know python, so am unable to debug this.
>
> I checked out by doing
>
> svn co http://svn.python.org/projects/python/tags/r30a2 py3k
>
> Then I built python itself with no apparent trouble. But bui
Well, I'm explicitly dropping this. So far no one has pointed out
any use cases that are not equivalent to intercepting an array of the
namespace in the __init__() of a subclass of type, then calling
type's __init__() on the modified namespace. Still, I do get a level
of snarky insults that le
sorry, I meant __new__() not __init__(). For this crowd, I thought
I'd put in the obvious correction. :)
On Jan 13, 2008 9:37 AM, Charles Merriam <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Well, I'm explicitly dropping this. So far no one has pointed out
> any use cases that are not equivalent to intercepti
> On Jan 13, 2008 9:37 AM, Charles Merriam <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Well, I'm explicitly dropping this. So far no one has pointed out
> > any use cases that are not equivalent to intercepting an array of the
> > namespace in the __init__() of a subclass of type, then calling
> > type's __i
Sorry, if my Italian is non-existent. Code is code however.
Could you verify that the article covers:
1. Complaints that __metaclass__ will be silently ignored in PEP 3115.
My understanding from the last line of the Rational section is that
this is undecided.
2. Complaints that, without _pr
At 09:37 AM 1/13/2008 -0800, Charles Merriam wrote:
>Well, I'm explicitly dropping this. So far no one has pointed out
>any use cases that are not equivalent to intercepting an array of the
>namespace in the __init__() of a subclass of type, then calling
>type's __init__() on the modified namesp
At 10:55 AM 1/13/2008 -0800, Charles Merriam wrote:
>You have a legitimate counter-argument that grouping the
>implementations of __add__ in the metaclass is cleaner than having
>them stand alone and be referenced in.
You've misunderstood Michele's example code. __add__ in the
metaclass lets you
Sigh.. Yes mix-ins are about mixing classes. No I didn't miss it.
No I'm not explaining it. You can type 100 words to my one and not
add much. I'm dropping metaclass changes.
Have a nice day,
Charles
On Jan 13, 2008 12:27 PM, Phillip J. Eby <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> At 10:55 AM 1/13/2008 -
At 12:35 PM 1/13/2008 -0800, Charles Merriam wrote:
>Sigh.. Yes mix-ins are about mixing classes. No I didn't miss it.
Yes, you did miss it, and are still missing it.
Otherwise you'd know why your original proposal was never viable in
the first place, and why mixins have nothing to do with it.
On Jan 12, 2008 8:21 PM, Guido van Rossum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On Jan 12, 2008 5:09 PM, Jeffrey Yasskin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > During the discussion about the new Rational implementation
> > (http://bugs.python.org/issue1682), Guido and Raymond decided that
> > Decimal should not
On Jan 13, 2008 6:12 PM, Jeffrey Yasskin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Jan 12, 2008 8:21 PM, Guido van Rossum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > On Jan 12, 2008 5:09 PM, Jeffrey Yasskin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > During the discussion about the new Rational implementation
> > > (http://bugs
On Jan 13, 2008 3:41 PM, Leif Walsh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I haven't been watching the python-dev list for very long, so maybe
> this has already been discussed ad nauseam (in which case, sorry),
> but, from the devil's advocate-ish mathematics side of things, unless
> numbers.Decimal is plan
On Jan 13, 2008 7:26 PM, Jeffrey Yasskin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Guido mentioned the possibility briefly at
> http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-3000/2007-April/007015.html
> ("One could argue that float and Decimal are <:Q, but I'm not sure if
> that makes things better pragmatically") b
On Jan 13, 2008 7:55 PM, Charles Merriam <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Sorry, if my Italian is non-existent. Code is code however.
>
> Could you verify that the article covers:
>
> 1. Complaints that __metaclass__ will be silently ignored in PEP 3115.
>
> My understanding from the last line of th
16 matches
Mail list logo
