> All I really mean to fix is to standardize the terminology, especially
> in repr().
So you don't want to be called a wimp anymore ?-)
r23331 | gvanrossum | 2001-09-25 05:56:29 +0200 (Di, 25 Sep 2001) | 5 lines
Change repr
Guido van Rossum wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 2, 2008 at 6:30 AM, Nick Coghlan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> One of the issues with porting to Py3k is the problem that __getattr__
>> and __getattribute__ can't reliably provide special methods like __add__
>> the way __getattr__ could with classic classes
I'll wait for others to jump on this bandwagon... IMO the tempfile
object would be better off not to bother with caching at all...
On Thu, Apr 3, 2008 at 5:33 AM, Nick Coghlan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Guido van Rossum wrote:
>
> > On Wed, Apr 2, 2008 at 6:30 AM, Nick Coghlan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Thu, Apr 3, 2008 at 12:58 AM, "Martin v. Löwis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > All I really mean to fix is to standardize the terminology, especially
> > in repr().
>
> So you don't want to be called a wimp anymore ?-)
Indeed.
> --
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On behalf of the Python development team and the Python community, I'm
happy to announce the second alpha release of Python 2.6, and the
fourth alpha release of Python 3.0.
Please note that these are alpha releases, and as such are not
suitable
On 24/03/2008, at 1:49 PM, Mike Meyer wrote:
> How many programs that used set.Set in 2.3 broke in 2.4
> when the set module vanished?
I presume you're referring to the "sets" module, and it has not gone
anywhere in 2.x:
Python 2.5.1 (r251:54863, Jan 17 2008, 19:35:17)
[GCC 4.0.1 (Apple Inc. bu
On Wed, 02 Apr 2008 04:37:05 +0200
"Martin v. Löwis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > So unless I am misinterpreting this, it sounds like the burden of
> > proof now falls on the option to keep the status quo. The thing is
> > that it seems to me that if that an outside observer were to look at
> >
