"Neal Norwitz" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> 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
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).
=
Ann
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 n
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__
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 sy
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
_
> 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
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/)
__
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 ch
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
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 cle
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 def
On Sun, 30 Jul 2006, Greg Ward wrote:
[...]
> Did you look at the crude attempt at testing for this bug that I hacked
> into test_httplib.py? I posted it to bug #1486335 here:
>
>
> http://sourceforge.net/tracker/download.php?group_id=5470&atid=105470&file_id=186245&aid=1486335
>
> The idea is s
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 wi
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
--
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
"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
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
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 con
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
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:
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.module
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 sy
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:
Traceba
Hi Martin,
On Tue, Aug 08, 2006 at 11:14:56PM +0200, "Martin v. L?wis" wrote:
> - h = PyInt_AsLong(res);
> + if (PyLong_Check(res))
> + h = res->ob_type->tp_hash(res);
This bug will keep showing up forever :-) It's unsafe against a user
subclassi
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 th
> 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)
>
> O
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 mi
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 Pyt
29 matches
Mail list logo
