New submission from James Hutchison jamesghutchi...@gmail.com:
tested python 3.1.2
Man = multiprocessing.Manager();
d = man.dict();
d['l'] = list();
d['l'].append(hey);
print(d['l']);
[]
using debugger reveals a KeyError. Extend also does not work. Only thing that
works is += which means you
New submission from James Hutchison jamesghutchi...@gmail.com:
I have multiple versions of python - 2.6.1 and 3.1.2. 2.6.1 is the primary
install (i.e., right click on a file and edit with IDLE brings up 2.6), and
was installed first. This issue occurs on 3.1.2, Windows XP 32-bit
If I
New submission from James Hutchison jamesghutchi...@gmail.com:
Tested on Python 3.1.2 Windows XP 32-bit
Binary strings (such as what is returned by filereader.readline()) are never
equal to raw or normal strings, even when both strings are empty
if(b == ):
print(Strings are equal
James Hutchison jamesghutchi...@gmail.com added the comment:
Is there a way to get this so it behaves more intuitively? You'd think adding a
managed list to a managed dictionary (or another managed list) or making a deep
copy would work but it still doesn't. When you get an item from a managed
New submission from James Hutchison jamesghutchi...@gmail.com:
v.3.2a3
If the maxtasksperchild argument is used, the program will just hang after
whatever that value is rather than working as expected. Tested in Windows XP
32-bit
test code:
import multiprocessing
def f(x):
return 0
New submission from James Hutchison jamesghutchi...@gmail.com:
The Unzip module is always unbuffered (tested v.3.1.2 Windows XP, 32-bit). This
means that if one has to do many small reads it is a lot slower than reading a
chunk of data to a buffer and then reading from that buffer. It seems
James Hutchison jamesghutchi...@gmail.com added the comment:
I should clarify that this is the zipfile constructor I am using:
zipfile.ZipFile(filename, mode='r', allowZip64=True);
--
___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
http://bugs.python.org
New submission from James Hutchison jamesghutchi...@gmail.com:
In windows, 64-bit, python *mostly* writes only a \n to stdout even though it's
mode is 'w'. However it sometimes writes a \r\n on certain print statements and
erratically when I have multiple processes writing to stdout.
Output
James Hutchison jamesghutchi...@gmail.com added the comment:
Sorry there isn't more info but I'm really busy right now
In fact a workaround would be appreciated if known.
--
___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
http://bugs.python.org/issue11990
James Hutchison jamesghutchi...@gmail.com added the comment:
Nevermind, I have a workaround that didn't require rewriting all the print
statements but its in the C# code not the python code
--
___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
http
James Hutchison jamesghutchi...@gmail.com added the comment:
Yes and no, I can give you a single process single child example that just
shows that python 3.2 uses binary output while python 3.1 used system default
when piping, but trying to reproduce the multiprocessing output inconsistencies
New submission from James Hutchison jamesghutchi...@gmail.com:
When upgrading from Python 3.1 to Python 3.2 I noticed that when my program
closed it printed out a non-consequential AttributeError Exception. My program
had a custom class that replaced stdout and stderr for use in a piped
James Hutchison jamesghutchi...@gmail.com added the comment:
You are right, when I add:
def flush(self):
pass;
the error goes away.
When I have this:
def flush():
pass;
I get:
Exception TypeError: 'flush() takes no arguments (1 given)' in
__main__.FlushFile object
James Hutchison jamesghutchi...@gmail.com added the comment:
I would like to add in windows, input now adds a \r at the end which wasn't
in 3.1. It doesn't do it in idle. This is using just the regular console window
that opens up when you double click. I'm guessing this is related
New submission from James Hutchison jamesghutchi...@gmail.com:
In python is currently there a way to elegantly throw an error if a variable is
already in the current scope?
For example:
def longfunc(self, filename):
FILE = open(filename);
header = FILE.readline();
... bunch
James Hutchison jamesghutchi...@gmail.com added the comment:
For starters, this would be most efficient implementation:
def unique(varname, value, scope):
assert(not varname in scope);
scope[varname] = value;
Usage:
unique('b', 1, locals());
print(b);
But you can't put that in a loop
New submission from James Hutchison:
Following code deadlocks on Windows 7 64-bit, Python 3.2.3
If you have a pool issue a map operation over an empty iterable then try to
join later, it will deadlock. If there is no map operation or blah in the code
below isn't empty, it does not deadlock
New submission from James Hutchison jamesghutchi...@gmail.com:
Tested on 3.2
Note that I noticed that Decimal is supposed to be faster in 3.3 but I thought
I would bring this to light just in case its still relevant
Decimal hashing is very slow, even for simple numbers. I found by caching
James Hutchison jamesghutchi...@gmail.com added the comment:
If I increase the cycles increased 10x with 3.2 I get:
int: 0.421313354492
Decimal: 24.20299983024597
CachingDecimal: 1.7809998989105225
The sample you have provided is basically what I'm using. See attached
What about worst
James Hutchison jamesghutchi...@gmail.com added the comment:
100x should be e100
--
___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
http://bugs.python.org/issue14478
James Hutchison jamesghutchi...@gmail.com added the comment:
I presume you mean in 3.2? Have you looked at the source code for that
decorator? It's fundamentally a try/except but with a lot more unnecessary
bloat than is needed for caching a single int result from a function with no
arguments
James Hutchison jamesghutchi...@gmail.com added the comment:
This is an issue for me (Python 3.2). I have a custom pool that sends arguments
for a function call over a pipe. I cannot send another pipe as an argument.
Tim's workaround also does not work for me (win xp 32bit and 64bit)
From
James Hutchison jamesghutchi...@gmail.com added the comment:
err, is it possible to edit out those file paths? I didn't intend them to be in
the message. I'd appreciate it if someone with the privileges to do so could
remove them.
--
___
Python
James Hutchison jamesghutchi...@gmail.com added the comment:
@pitrou
You can just delete my original post. I'll repost an edited version here for
reference
original post with paths removed:
This is an issue for me (Python 3.2). I have a custom pool that sends arguments
for a function call
James Hutchison jamesghutchi...@gmail.com added the comment:
Shouldn't reduce_pipe_connection just be an alias for reduce_connection in unix
so that using reduce_pipe_connection would work for both win and unix? My
understanding after looking at the code is that reduce_pipe_connection isn't
James Hutchison jamesghutchi...@gmail.com added the comment:
In the patch:
This:
+except AttributeError:
+pass
should be:
+except:
everything inside except statement
Checking for the AttributeError is very slightly slower. Not by a lot, but I
think if we're going
James Hutchison jamesghutchi...@gmail.com added the comment:
See attached, which will open a zipfile that contains one file and reads it a
bunch of times using unbuffered and buffered idioms. This was tested on windows
using python 3.2
You're in charge of coming up with a file to test
New submission from James Hutchison:
Windows 7 64-bit, Python 3.2.3
This is a very odd issue and I haven't figured out what caused it. I have a
python script that runs continuously. When it receives a request to do a task,
it creates a new thread (not a new process), does the task, then sends
James Hutchison added the comment:
This is the traceback I was getting where it was just a script that simply made
an SMTP connection then closed it. This fails before it attempts to connect to
the server.
Traceback (most recent call last):
File C:\tmp\manysmtptest.py, line 8, in module
James Hutchison added the comment:
That makes no sense. Why does:
s = socket.socket()
s.bind(('',50007))
s.listen(1);
s.close();
fix the issue then?
Re-opening, this issue should be understood because having such an operation
randomly fail is unacceptable for a production system. How does
New submission from James Hutchison:
One issue I've encountered is someone else's software setting PYTHONPATH to
their install directory of python. We have some old software that installs and
uses python 2.3 scripts and unfortunately this prevents the IDLE shortcuts for
newer versions
James Hutchison added the comment:
It's from the example.
http://docs.python.org/library/socket.html#example
--
___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
http://bugs.python.org/issue15779
James Hutchison added the comment:
The firewall is disabled for my machine.
So the options are:
1. Port was in-use: possible except that is normally a different error
2. Port was firewalled: firewall was disabled
3. Port mis-use: not likely because this wouldn't be random
4. Port
James Hutchison added the comment:
I can connect to all of the IPs for my server without issue.
Found this:
Another possible reason for the WSAEACCES error is that when the bind function
is called (on Windows NT 4.0 with SP4 and later), another application, service,
or kernel mode driver
Changes by James Hutchison jamesghutchi...@gmail.com:
--
status: closed - open
___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
http://bugs.python.org/issue15779
___
___
Python
James Hutchison added the comment:
Looks to me like python grabs an outgoing port number via unrandom means and if
it happens to map to a port taken by a service that demands exclusive access,
then it returns the WSAEACCESS error instead of WSAEADDRINUSE. Because this is
a fairly new feature
Changes by James Hutchison jamesghutchi...@gmail.com:
--
components: +Windows
___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
http://bugs.python.org/issue15779
___
___
Python
New submission from James Hutchison:
This might even be a bug I've stumbled upon but I'm listing it as an
enhancement for now.
I really feel that relative imports in Python should just work. Regardless of
the __name__, I should be able to import below me. Likewise, it should work
even
38 matches
Mail list logo
