Christian Heimes wrote:
> * add a new file stringobject.h which contains the aliases PyString_ ->
> PyBytes_
Just a quick note that that file is still missing from SVN, so it's kind of
hard to compile existing code against the current branch state...
Stefan
_
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
M.-A. Lemburg wrote:
| If you use PyBytes APIs, you expect to find PyBytes functions in
| the libs and also set breakpoints on these.
Very good point.
- --
Jesus Cea Avion _/_/ _/_/_/_/_/_/
[EMAIL PROTECTED] - ht
Lisandro Dalcin wrote:
> Chistian, I've posted some weeks ago some observation about the status
> of PyNumberMethods API. The thread link is below, I t did not received
> much atention.
>
> http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-3000/2008-May/013594.html
>
> Now I sumarize that post
>
> * 'nb_n
M.-A. Lemburg wrote:
> If you use PyBytes APIs, you expect to find PyBytes functions in
> the libs and also set breakpoints on these.
AFAICT, the PyBytes_* functions are in both Py2.6 and Py3 now, so no problem
here.
Besides, how likely is it that users set a breakpoint on the PyBytes/PyString
f
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> I just looked through the official tutorial and Dive into Python, and
> didn't find anything about it in either of those places.
Tutorial section on "tuples and sequences", not quite the most hidden place in
the universe.
http://docs.python.org/tut/node7.html#SECTION007
hi,
i'm looking to duplicate this string format operator '#' functionality
with the new format(). here it is using the old string format
operator:
>>> i = 45
>>> 'dec: %d/oct: %o/hex: %X' % (i, i, i) # no "#" means no leading "0"
>>> or "0x/X"
'dec: 45/oct: 55/hex: 2D'
>>> 'dec: %d/oct:
this work, (a, (b[2], c)) = ('big', ('red', 'dog'))
but this not (a, (b[2], c)) += ('big' ('red', 'dog'))
paul bedaride
On Thu, May 29, 2008 at 6:52 AM, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Indeed. Thank you, Guido.
>
> On 5/28/08, Guido van Rossum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Apart from the missing c
Stefan Behnel schrieb:
> Christian Heimes wrote:
>> * add a new file stringobject.h which contains the aliases PyString_ ->
>> PyBytes_
>
> Just a quick note that that file is still missing from SVN, so it's kind of
> hard to compile existing code against the current branch state...
No, the file
2008/5/29 Nick Coghlan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> it would still be nice if the PyBytes_* symbols
> were visible to the linker as well as the preprocessor.
If this is not a strict requirement but a useful extra, then it might
be done in an unportable way. GCC has an 'alias' attribute:
http://gcc.gnu.
Christian Heimes wrote:
> Stefan Behnel schrieb:
>> M.-A. Lemburg wrote:
>>> If you use PyBytes APIs, you expect to find PyBytes functions in
>>> the libs and also set breakpoints on these.
>> AFAICT, the PyBytes_* functions are in both Py2.6 and Py3 now, so no problem
>> here.
>
> In Python 2.6
wesley chun wrote:
i have to resort to the uglier:
'dec: {0}/oct: 0o{0:o}/hex: 0X{0:X}'.format(i)
'dec: 45/oct: 0o55/hex: 0X2D'
Is being explicit about the displayed prefix really that much uglier?
The old # alternative display formats were somewhat arbitrary.
is this functionality being
Stefan Behnel schrieb:
> M.-A. Lemburg wrote:
>> If you use PyBytes APIs, you expect to find PyBytes functions in
>> the libs and also set breakpoints on these.
>
> AFAICT, the PyBytes_* functions are in both Py2.6 and Py3 now, so no problem
> here.
In Python 2.6 the PyBytes_* functions are only
Stefan Behnel wrote:
M.-A. Lemburg wrote:
If you use PyBytes APIs, you expect to find PyBytes functions in
the libs and also set breakpoints on these.
AFAICT, the PyBytes_* functions are in both Py2.6 and Py3 now, so no problem
here.
The PyBytes_* functions appear to be there, but a preproc
Stefan Behnel wrote:
Nick Coghlan wrote:
Stefan Behnel wrote:
Besides, how likely is it that users set a breakpoint on the
PyBytes/PyString functions?
Not very likely at all - but it would still be nice if the PyBytes_*
symbols were visible to the linker as well as the preprocessor.
Right, t
On Thu, May 29, 2008 at 9:12 AM, Georg Brandl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Brett Cannon schrieb:
>
>> The issues related to PEP 3108 now total 14. With the beta
>> (supposedly) in a week, I am hoping the last minor details can be
>> pulled together or decisions made on what can be postponed and wh
wesley chun wrote:
hi,
i'm looking to duplicate this string format operator '#' functionality
with the new format(). here it is using the old string format
operator:
i = 45
'dec: %d/oct: %o/hex: %X' % (i, i, i) # no "#" means no leading "0" or
"0x/X"
'dec: 45/oct: 55/hex: 2D'
'dec:
Stefan Behnel schrieb:
Christian Heimes wrote:
Stefan Behnel schrieb:
M.-A. Lemburg wrote:
If you use PyBytes APIs, you expect to find PyBytes functions in
the libs and also set breakpoints on these.
AFAICT, the PyBytes_* functions are in both Py2.6 and Py3 now, so no problem
here.
In Pyth
On 2008-05-28 19:08, Bill Janssen wrote:
I'm beginning to wonder whether I'm the only one who cares about
the Python 2.x branch not getting cluttered up with artifacts caused
by a broken forward merge strategy.
I share your concern. Seems to me that perhaps (not sure, but
perhaps) the rush to
On 2008-05-28 22:47, Gregory P. Smith wrote:
On Wed, May 28, 2008 at 3:12 AM, M.-A. Lemburg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I'm beginning to wonder whether I'm the only one who cares about
the Python 2.x branch not getting cluttered up with artifacts caused
by a broken forward merge strategy.
How ca
Issue 2847 - the aifc module still imports the cl module in 3.0.
Problem is that the cl module is gone. =) So it seems silly to have
the imports lying about. This can probably be changed to critical.
It shouldn't be a problem to rip everything cl-related out of aifc
On Thu, May 29, 2008 at 4:56 PM, Lars Immisch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
>>Issue 2847 - the aifc module still imports the cl module in 3.0.
>>Problem is that the cl module is gone. =) So it seems silly to have
>>the imports lying about. This can probably be changed to
M.-A. Lemburg schrieb:
> Well, first of all, it is a change in the C API:
> APIs have different names now, they live in different files,
> the Python documentation doesn't apply anymore, books have to
> be updated, programmers trained, etc. etc. That's fine for
> 3.x, it's not for 2.x.
No, that's
On Thu, May 29, 2008 at 12:12 AM, Georg Brandl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Brett Cannon schrieb:
>>
>> The issues related to PEP 3108 now total 14. With the beta
>> (supposedly) in a week, I am hoping the last minor details can be
>> pulled together or decisions made on what can be postponed and w
This is in response to Stefan Behnel, who wrote
Tutorial section on "tuples and sequences", not quite the most hidden place in
the universe.
http://docs.python.org/tut/node7.html#SECTION00730
Stefan
I just read that section twice and no where does it mention that
Pyt
> wesley chun wrote:
>>
>> i have to resort to the uglier:
>> >>> 'dec: {0}/oct: 0o{0:o}/hex: 0X{0:X}'.format(i)
>> 'dec: 45/oct: 0o55/hex: 0X2D'
[Nick Coghlan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>]:
> Is being explicit about the displayed prefix really that much uglier? The
> old # alternative display formats wer
Christian,
so far you have not responded to any of the suggestions made on
this thread, only defended your checkin. That's not very helpful
in getting to some conclusion.
* What's so hard about going with a proper, standard solution that
doesn't involve using your preprocessor hack ?
* Why can'
2008/5/29 Eric Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> I don't see it as a big problem. You can now use any prefix you want,
> instead of the hard coded values that # supplied.
Except that it works incorrectly for negative numbers.
--
Marcin Kowalczyk
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://qrnik.knm.org.pl/~qrczak/
__
On Thu, May 29, 2008 at 10:51 AM, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> This is in response to Stefan Behnel, who wrote
>
>
>
> Tutorial section on "tuples and sequences", not quite the most hidden place in
> the universe.
>
> http://docs.python.org/tut/node7.html#SECTION00730
>
> Stef
Hello. A draft for a discussion.
PEP: XXX
Title: str(container) should call str(item), not repr(item)
Version: $Revision$
Last-Modified: $Date$
Author: Oleg Broytmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Jim Jewett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Discussions-To: [email protected]
Status: Draft
Type: Standards Tr
Let me just save everyone a lot of time and say that 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.
--Guido
On Thu, May 29, 2008 at 12:21 PM, Oleg Broytmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hello. A draft for a discussion
Marcin ‘Qrczak’ Kowalczyk wrote:
2008/5/29 Eric Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
I don't see it as a big problem. You can now use any prefix you want,
instead of the hard coded values that # supplied.
Except that it works incorrectly for negative numbers.
Excellent point. If only this had been
Jim Jewett writes:
> On 5/26/08, Stephen J. Turnbull <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Jim Jewett writes:
>
> > > The only reason for this change is that __repr__ gets used when
> > > __str__ *should* be used instead.
>
> > That's not what the advocates say.
>
> I still haven't seen a
On Thu, May 29, 2008 at 12:31:17PM -0700, Guido van Rossum wrote:
> Let me just save everyone a lot of time and say that 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.
>
> On Thu, May 29, 2008 at 12:21 PM, Oleg Bro
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> Well, I'm sorry for bothering his majesty with such a stupid idea. At
> least one other person didn't know about it either...
>
> On 5/28/08, Mike Klaas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > I find it hard to believe that you have even attempted this, which has
> > bee
On Wed, May 28, 2008 at 11:38 PM, Brett Cannon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Issue 2854 - gestalt needs to be added back into 3.0. This is
> Benjamin's issue. =)
Is that your way of say "Check in the patch!" ? :)
--
Cheers,
Benjamin Peterson
"There's no place like 127.0.0.1."
On Thu, May 29, 2008 at 1:49 PM, Benjamin Peterson
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Wed, May 28, 2008 at 11:38 PM, Brett Cannon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>> Issue 2854 - gestalt needs to be added back into 3.0. This is
>> Benjamin's issue. =)
>
> Is that your way of say "Check in the patch!" ? :
On Thu, May 29, 2008 at 2:57 PM, Oleg Broytmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Thu, May 29, 2008 at 12:31:17PM -0700, Guido van Rossum wrote:
>> Let me just save everyone a lot of time and say that I'm opposed to
>> this change, and that I believe that it would cause way too much
>> disturbance to
On Thu, May 29, 2008 at 04:04:43PM -0500, Benjamin Peterson wrote:
> On Thu, May 29, 2008 at 2:57 PM, Oleg Broytmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Any objection if I demand it be properly registered, assigned a number
> > and then rejected?
>
> I've added it for you. See r63794.
Thank you!
Daniel Wong wrote:
Are there plans for introducing syntax like this:
(a, (b[2], c)) = ('big' ('red', 'dog'))
I think you'll find Guido has made another trip
in the time machine for this one:
Python 2.3 (#1, Aug 5 2003, 15:52:30)
[GCC 3.1 20020420 (prerelease)] on darwin
Type "help", "copyri
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_* names still work perfectly fine in 2.x.
They just won't be used in the Python core codebase anymore - everything
in the Python core will us
Eric Smith wrote:
Marcin ‘Qrczak’ Kowalczyk wrote:
2008/5/29 Eric Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
I don't see it as a big problem. You can now use any prefix you want,
instead of the hard coded values that # supplied.
Except that it works incorrectly for negative numbers.
Excellent point. If
On 5/29/08, Eric Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Marcin 'Qrczak' Kowalczyk wrote:
> > Except that it works incorrectly for negative numbers.
wow, that is a great point. i didn't think of this either. it makes
it very inconvenient (see below) and makes it more difficult to say
we've completed r
On 29/05/2008, at 14:32, Brett Cannon wrote:
On Thu, May 29, 2008 at 12:12 AM, Georg Brandl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
Issue 2848 - mimetools has been deprecated for a while, but it is
still used in a bunch of places. Since this has been deprecated in
PEP
4 for a long time, should we add
wesley chun wrote:
On 5/29/08, Eric Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Marcin 'Qrczak' Kowalczyk wrote:
Except that it works incorrectly for negative numbers.
wow, that is a great point. i didn't think of this either. it makes
it very inconvenient (see below) and makes it more difficult to say
Daniel Wong wrote:
Ironic that you should mention it. He already mentioned it.
The time machine thing is pretty much a standard
joke in the Python community, which goes to show
how common it is for people to be pleasantly
surprised by what Python already does.
I think everyone's being a bit ha
45 matches
Mail list logo
