Alexandre Vassalotti alexan...@peadrop.com added the comment:
Now, that 2.7 is out we won't able to commit this anymore. It is sad to abandon
a good patch like this.
--
resolution: - wont fix
stage: patch review - committed/rejected
status: open - closed
George Sakkis george.sak...@gmail.com added the comment:
Is there any update on this for 2.7 ?
--
nosy: +gsakkis
___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
http://bugs.python.org/issue1745
___
George Sakkis george.sak...@gmail.com added the comment:
FWIW I updated the patch to r79264; it applies cleanly and passes the tests but
other than that I can't tell if it's ready. It would be nice to have it in 2.7
though.
--
Added file:
Alexandre Vassalotti alexan...@peadrop.com added the comment:
Mark Dickinson added the comment:
(1) should the 'signed' parameter remain keyword-only in 2.7?
We should keep it as a keyword-only argument. Also, issue #1745 might bring
keyword-only arguments to 2.7.
(2) When specifying the
Changes by Alexandre Vassalotti alexan...@peadrop.com:
--
___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
http://bugs.python.org/issue1745
___
___
Python-bugs-list mailing list
Changes by Alexandre Vassalotti alexan...@peadrop.com:
--
nosy: +alexandre.vassalotti
stage: - patch review
___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
http://bugs.python.org/issue1745
___
Michael Foord mich...@voidspace.org.uk added the comment:
Running out of time for 2.7 as well...
--
nosy: +michael.foord
___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
http://bugs.python.org/issue1745
___
Benjamin Peterson benja...@python.org added the comment:
2009/4/3 Michael Foord rep...@bugs.python.org:
Michael Foord mich...@voidspace.org.uk added the comment:
Running out of time for 2.7 as well...
How so? The first 2.7 alpha probably won't be until the end of summer.
--
Changes by Benjamin Peterson [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
--
versions: +Python 2.7 -Python 2.6
___
Python tracker [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://bugs.python.org/issue1745
___
___
Guido van Rossum [EMAIL PROTECTED] added the comment:
This will definitely not be in 2.6.
--
keywords: -26backport
___
Python tracker [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://bugs.python.org/issue1745
___
Benjamin Peterson [EMAIL PROTECTED] added the comment:
On Mon, Aug 4, 2008 at 1:35 AM, tav [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
tav [EMAIL PROTECTED] added the comment:
What's holding back the backport to 2.6?
The fact that we are working towards the 3rd and final beta.
--
nosy: +tav
tav [EMAIL PROTECTED] added the comment:
What's holding back the backport to 2.6?
--
nosy: +tav
___
Python tracker [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://bugs.python.org/issue1745
___
Benjamin Peterson [EMAIL PROTECTED] added the comment:
This will probably have to be deferred to 2.7.
--
nosy: +benjamin.peterson
___
Python tracker [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://bugs.python.org/issue1745
___
Eric Smith [EMAIL PROTECTED] added the comment:
The patch doesn't apply cleanly for me. I can fix the non-clean patch,
but another error is that obj2ast_arguments doesn't call arguments()
with the correct parameters. If I pass in NULL's for the new params,
all tests pass, but that just tells
Georg Brandl [EMAIL PROTECTED] added the comment:
Bumping priority.
--
keywords: +26backport
priority: normal - critical
__
Tracker [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://bugs.python.org/issue1745
__
Robin Stocker [EMAIL PROTECTED] added the comment:
I've updated the patch to apply cleanly again.
Added file:
http://bugs.python.org/file9828/backport-keyword-only-arguments-full-2.patch
__
Tracker [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://bugs.python.org/issue1745
Changes by Eric Smith [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
--
nosy: +eric.smith
__
Tracker [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://bugs.python.org/issue1745
__
___
Python-bugs-list mailing list
Unsubscribe:
Robin Stocker added the comment:
Guido: The check was only done for call nodes, not for function definitions.
__
Tracker [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://bugs.python.org/issue1745
__
___
Robin Stocker added the comment:
Ok, I checked all the logs and updated the patch. test_collections uses
n = 254 now and all tests pass.
I left revision 54043 out on purpose, because it fixes Lib/inspect.py
and Lib/pydoc.py for both PEP 3102 and 3107, so it should be included in
the patch for
Georg Brandl added the comment:
Keyword-only-args are not yet documented.
__
Tracker [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://bugs.python.org/issue1745
__
___
Python-bugs-list mailing list
Unsubscribe:
Robin Stocker added the comment:
Thanks for the feedback!
It's on line 111 in test_collections.py::
n = 1
import string, random
names = [''.join([random.choice(string.letters) for j in
range(10)]) for i in range(n)]
Big = namedtuple('Big', names)
b =
Christian Heimes added the comment:
I vaguely remember that I had to modify the tests to use 254 args in
Python 3.0.
--
nosy: +tiran
priority: - normal
__
Tracker [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://bugs.python.org/issue1745
__
Guido van Rossum added the comment:
There's something I misunderstand then. I thought 2.x also didn't
accept 255 args, but that test would seem to prove I'm wrong.
__
Tracker [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://bugs.python.org/issue1745
__
New submission from Robin Stocker:
The attached patch ports the implementation of keyword-only arguments
from revision 52491 back to trunk.
This is the first time I've worked on the C internals, so here are some
notes:
- test_collections is the only test which fails, because it tries to
call a
Robin Stocker added the comment:
Another note: Because the marshalling of code objects is changed, is
there a version number of the format which has to be incremented?
__
Tracker [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://bugs.python.org/issue1745
Guido van Rossum added the comment:
Thanks for tackling this!
What line in test_collections.py is calling a function with 255 args?
I'm a bit surprised since this has always been disallowed AFAICT.
I'd like to see everything related to keyword-only args included in one
patch. Hopefully the
Changes by Guido van Rossum:
--
keywords: +patch
__
Tracker [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://bugs.python.org/issue1745
__
___
Python-bugs-list mailing list
Unsubscribe:
27 matches
Mail list logo
