Jack Jansen wrote:
> I was wondering: how many other people who maintain websites (well:
> "maintain" might be a bit of a misnomer in my case:-) related to
> Python have also got this spam?
probably everyone. I've gotten two copies, this far.
__
Jack Jansen wrote:
> I was wondering: how many other people who maintain websites (well:
> "maintain" might be a bit of a misnomer in my case:-) related to
> Python have also got this spam?
I got it. I was rather amused that they claim to have been
"looking for sites that would make good link
I was wondering: how many other people who maintain websites (well:
"maintain" might be a bit of a misnomer in my case:-) related to
Python have also got this spam?
Begin forwarded message:
> From: "Snake Tracks" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Date: October 1, 2006 21:21:45 GMT+02:00
> To: Cwi <[EMAIL
Hi Brett,
On Wed, Sep 27, 2006 at 02:11:30PM -0700, Brett Cannon wrote:
> is so bad that it is worth trying to re-implement the import semantics in
> pure Python or if in the name of time to just work with the C code.
In the name of time, sanity and usefulness, rewriting the expected
semantics in
On 9/30/06, Giovanni Bajo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> It would be terrific if you gave us some clue about what is wrong in PEP355,
> so
> that the next guy does not waste his time. For instance, I find PEP355
> incredibly good for my own path manipulation (much cleaner and concise than
> the
> a
Michael Urman wrote:
> On 10/1/06, Ron Adam <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> (I don't think this has been suggested yet.)
>>
>> while , :
>>
>
> [snip]
>
>> Putting both the entry and exit conditions at the top is easier to read.
>
> I agree in principle, but I thought the proposed sy
> This pattern:
>
> while entry_cond:
> ...
> and while not exit_cond:
> ...
>
> has been suggested before, and I believe that at least one of the times it
> was suggested, it had some support from Guido. Essentially, the "and
> while not exit" is equivalent to an "
On Oct 1, 2006, at 10:54 AM, Ronald Oussoren wrote:
Hi,
Someone reported on the pythonmac list that HAVE_UINTPTR_T wasn't
defined in pyconfig.h while it should have been defined. I'm
looking into this and am now wondering whether the configure
snipped below is correct:
AC_MSG_CHECKING(
On Sun, 1 Oct 2006 13:54:31 -0400, Terry Reedy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>"Nick Craig-Wood" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> On Fri, Sep 29, 2006 at 12:03:03PM -0700, Guido van Rossum wrote:
>>> I see some confusion in this thread.
>>>
>>> If a *LITERAL* 0.0 (or an
At 12:58 PM 10/1/2006 -0400, Andrew Koenig wrote:
> > (I don't think this has been suggested yet.)
> >
> > while , :
> >
>
>This usage makes me uneasy, not the least because I don't understand why the
>comma isn't creating a tuple. That is, why whould
>
> while x, y:
>
"Nick Craig-Wood" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> On Fri, Sep 29, 2006 at 12:03:03PM -0700, Guido van Rossum wrote:
>> I see some confusion in this thread.
>>
>> If a *LITERAL* 0.0 (or any other float literal) is used, you only get
>> one object, no matter how many t
> (I don't think this has been suggested yet.)
>
> while , :
>
This usage makes me uneasy, not the least because I don't understand why the
comma isn't creating a tuple. That is, why whould
while x, y:
be any different from
while (x, y):
On 10/1/06, Ron Adam <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> (I don't think this has been suggested yet.)
>
> while , :
>
[snip]
> Putting both the entry and exit conditions at the top is easier to read.
I agree in principle, but I thought the proposed syntax already has
meaning today (as it
Nick Coghlan wrote:
> Hans Polak wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>>
>>
>> Just an opinion, but many uses of the ‘while true loop’ are instances of
>> a ‘do loop’. I appreciate the language layout question, so I’ll give you
>> an alternative:
>>
>>
>>
>> do:
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
On Sat, Sep 30, 2006 at 03:21:50PM -0700, Bob Ippolito wrote:
> On 9/30/06, Terry Reedy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > "Nick Coghlan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > I suspect the problem would typically stem from floating point
> > > values that are read in from a
On Fri, Sep 29, 2006 at 12:03:03PM -0700, Guido van Rossum wrote:
> I see some confusion in this thread.
>
> If a *LITERAL* 0.0 (or any other float literal) is used, you only get
> one object, no matter how many times it is used.
For some reason that doesn't happen in the interpreter which has be
Hi,
Someone reported on the pythonmac list that HAVE_UINTPTR_T wasn't
defined in pyconfig.h while it should have been defined. I'm looking
into this and am now wondering whether the configure snipped below is
correct:
AC_MSG_CHECKING(for uintptr_t support)
have_uintptr_t=no
AC_TRY_COMPILE
On Sep 30, 2006, at 11:13 PM, Scott David Daniels wrote:
Christos Georgiou wrote:
Does anyone know why this happens? I can't find any information
pointing to
this being deliberate.
I just upgraded to 2.5 on Windows (after making sure I can build
extensions
with the freeware VC++ Toolkit
18 matches
Mail list logo
