Greg Ewing schrieb:
If distributing the source doesn't violate the patent,
and distributing a binary doesn't violate the patent,
then what *would* constitute a violation of a software
patent?
IANAL, but AFAICT, the rights controlled by patent law
are the right to make, to use, to sell, to
Tim Peters wrote:
[Georg Brandl, on
http://python.org/sf/1523610 - PyArg_ParseTupleAndKeywords
potential core dump
]
This one's almost fixed if we can decide what to do with levels.
I wrote some time ago:
With respect to this bug (which is about stack issues in Python/getargs.c
Gregory P. Smith schrieb:
disabling/enabling a cipher in openssl that isn't commonly used and
isn't even directly exposed via any API to a python user hardly sounds
like dropping a feature to me.
Strictly speaking, it is dropping a feature: a connection that can get
established with 2.5b3
Strictly speaking, it is dropping a feature: a connection that can get
established with 2.5b3 might not get established with 2.5c1, assuming
a server that requires some IDEA-based cipher.
(any sane SSL connection will negotiate AES or 3DES
as its cipher; IDEA isn't required)
Ok, I'll
This has an sf number now #1537167, and hopefully a clearer
explanation of what I think the problem is. This is not a duplicate of
the earlier PEP 302 Fix thread.
Thanks,
Robin
On 07/08/06, Robin Bryce [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi,
Appologies for the lack of an sf#. I tried to submit this
Is this considered a bug? Sure, deleting modules from sys.modules
isn't quite common, but it happened to me on one occasion.
Python 2.4.3 (#1, Jul 29 2006, 10:52:20)
import logging
import sys
del logging
del sys.modules['logging']
^D
Error in atexit._run_exitfuncs:
Traceback (most
On 09/08/06, Georg Brandl [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Is this considered a bug? Sure, deleting modules from sys.modules
isn't quite common, but it happened to me on one occasion.
Python 2.4.3 (#1, Jul 29 2006, 10:52:20)
import logging
import sys
del logging
del sys.modules['logging']
Georg Brandl [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Is this considered a bug? Sure, deleting modules from sys.modules
isn't quite common, but it happened to me on one occasion.
Python 2.4.3 (#1, Jul 29 2006, 10:52:20)
import logging
import sys
del logging
del sys.modules['logging']
^D
Matt Could it be considered a bug in the atexit module (or is that what
Matt you meant)?
Or a bug in the logging package?
Skip
___
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe:
On 8/8/06, Greg Ewing [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
If distributing the source doesn't violate the patent,
and distributing a binary doesn't violate the patent,
then what *would* constitute a violation of a software
patent?
Writing new code using the algorithm? Compiling
something which uses
class X (object):
pass
X() += 2
SyntaxError: can't assign to function call
Suppose I actually had defined __iadd__ for class X. Python says this
syntax is invalid. I wish is wasn't.
Here's where I might use it. Suppose I have a container class. Suppose I
could make a slice of this
Neal Becker [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
class X (object):
pass
X() += 2
SyntaxError: can't assign to function call
[snip]
Does anyone else think this would be a good addition to Python?
No. += implies assignment. As the syntax error states, can't assign
to function call.
-1
-
Neal Becker [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
class X (object):
pass
X() += 2
SyntaxError: can't assign to function call
Suppose I actually had defined __iadd__ for class X. Python says this
syntax is invalid. I wish is wasn't.
If you translate to x() = x()
Neal Becker [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
1) Should assignment to a temporary object be allowed?
The question doesn't make sense: in Python, you assign to a name,
an attribute or a subscript, and that's it.
Cheers,
mwh
--
exarkun I think there's a rather large difference between a stale
Terry Reedy wrote:
Neal Becker [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
class X (object):
pass
X() += 2
SyntaxError: can't assign to function call
Suppose I actually had defined __iadd__ for class X. Python says this
syntax is invalid. I wish is wasn't.
If you
On 8/9/06, Georg Brandl [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Terry Reedy wrote:
Neal Becker [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
class X (object):
pass
X() += 2
SyntaxError: can't assign to function call
Suppose I actually had defined __iadd__ for class X. Python
Guido van Rossum wrote:
This is similar to
x = ([1], 2)
x[0] += [2]
which doesn't currently work either, though it could.
No it couldn't. You can't assign to x[0]. L += R is defined as L =
L.__iadd__(R) so L must be a valid assignment target.
Thanks for making that clear. I actually
I've been happily ignoring python-dev for the last three weeks or so,
and Neal just pointed me to some thorny issues that are close to
resolution but not quite yet resolved, yet need to be before beta 3 on
August 18 (Friday next week).
Here's my take on the dict-suppressing-exceptions issue (I'll
Here's another issue where Neal thought it would be useful if I
weighed in. I'm not quite sure of the current status, but perhaps the
following would work?
- Called from Python, (10**10).__index__() should return 100L,
not raise an exception or return sys.maxint.
- The nb_index slot is
This is regarding #1112549. I think this can go in. It should also be
backported to 2.4 and to 2.3 (if we ever release another one of that).
I reviewed the code and added some minor comments to the SF tracker.
--
--Guido van Rossum (home page: http://www.python.org/~guido/)
It wasn't my idea to stop ignoring exceptions in dict lookups; I would
gladly have put this off until Py3k, where the main problem
(str-unicode __eq__ raising UnicodeError) will go away.
But since people are adamant that they want this in sooner,
Is this true for dictionaries specifically?
Martin v. Löwis wrote:
In the context of an encryption algorithm, the right to
use would be the most prominent one; you wouldn't be
allowed to use the algorithm unless you have a patent
license.
But what does use *mean* in relation to an
algorithm?
--
Greg
Guido van Rossum wrote:
Here's another issue where Neal thought it would be useful if I
weighed in. I'm not quite sure of the current status, but perhaps the
following would work?
- Called from Python, (10**10).__index__() should return 100L,
not raise an exception or return
On 8/9/06, Travis E. Oliphant [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Guido van Rossum wrote:
Here's another issue where Neal thought it would be useful if I
weighed in. I'm not quite sure of the current status, but perhaps the
following would work?
- Called from Python, (10**10).__index__() should
On 8/9/06, Josiah Carlson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
2.4 performed these imports silently, while 2.5 complains SystemError:
Parent module 'x' not loaded, which is actually a useful message, and
helped me fix it.
Can you make a small, self-contained test case? The SystemError
should be a normal
Here's the summary for the first half of July. Corrections and
comments are greatly apprecieated. Particularly for the section on
restricted execution (though my understanding is that the current
plans are somewhat different than what was discussed during the first
half of July).
=
26 matches
Mail list logo
