Barry Warsaw writes:
> I said semi-jokingly that the first release of Py3k should be /
> literally/ called Python 3000. Then each successive stabilizing
> release should drop a zero -- e.g. Python 3000, then Python 300, then
> Python 30.
RKN = reverse Knuth numbering?
_
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Feb 25, 2007, at 3:49 PM, Neal Norwitz wrote:
> The time schedules in PEP 361 (2.6 release schedule) and what Guido
> has said for 3k (from what I remember) are roughly:
>
> April 2007 - 3.0 PEPs and features accepted/decided
> June 2007 - 3.0a1
Thomas Wouters wrote:
> One thing in particular I wonder about
> is the warning about mixing tabs and spaces. Should it be in category 2)
> (on by default) or 3) (still off by default, but part of -Wpy3k)?
For my part, it wouldn't bother me at all if you
turn it on by default any time you want.
On 1/3/07, "Martin v. Löwis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> In #1626545, Anton Tropashko requests that object.h should be
> renamed, because it causes conflicts with other software.
>
> I would like to comply with this requests for 2.6, assuming there
> shouldn't be many problems with existing softwa
On 2/25/07, Neil Schemenauer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Sun, Feb 25, 2007 at 05:37:08PM -0600, Guido van Rossum wrote:
> > Right. To be honest, I consider the str/unicode unification a much
> > bigger project than the new I/O library.
>
> I was more concerned about IO because it would seem to
On Sun, Feb 25, 2007 at 05:37:08PM -0600, Guido van Rossum wrote:
> Right. To be honest, I consider the str/unicode unification a much
> bigger project than the new I/O library.
I was more concerned about IO because it would seem to require your
time for design work. The str/unicode work could be
On 2/25/07, Neal Norwitz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 2/25/07, Neil Schemenauer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Any talk at PyCon regarding the new IO system? That looks like the
> > biggest piece of unfinished Py3k work.
>
> AFAIK, there hasn't been any work on the new IO system or str/unicode
Just the "it's not there yet" part :) There's some prototype code and email
conversations archived, but no recent work that I'm aware of.
On 2/25/07, Neil Schemenauer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Neal Norwitz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> The time schedules in PEP 361 (2.6 release schedule) and wh
On 2/25/07, Neil Schemenauer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Neal Norwitz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > The time schedules in PEP 361 (2.6 release schedule) and what Guido
> > has said for 3k (from what I remember) are roughly:
> >
> > April 2007 - 3.0 PEPs and features accepted/decided
> > June 2
Neal Norwitz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> The time schedules in PEP 361 (2.6 release schedule) and what Guido
> has said for 3k (from what I remember) are roughly:
>
> April 2007 - 3.0 PEPs and features accepted/decided
> June 2007 - 3.0a1 - basic (most) features implemented
Any talk at PyCon r
Guido van Rossum wrote:
> How would this change be helpful? I'm utterly mystified by these
> suggestions that bool would be more useful if it didn't behave like an
> int in arithmetic.
I think there's a desire by some people to get rid of
unnecessary conceptual baggage left over for historical
re
On 2/25/07, Thomas Wouters <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> It's about how we get Python 2.x to 3.0, and howmuch of 3.0 we put into 2.6
> and later.
I've also talked to a bunch of people at PyCon, including Thomas.
There seems to be much concern (rightfully so!) about the upgrade path
from 2.x to 3
I'm organizing a trip to Standard in downtown Dallas for dinner
tonight (Sunday night). It's about a 10 minute cab ride to Standard.
We can share cabs and get there without too much trouble. The
restaurant is on the expensive side. I'm thinking we should leave
from the hotal around 6:30pm.
http
When I gave the PSF members an update on the work to move the
python-dev tracker over to Roundup Andrew Kuchling asked me to also
send an email to python-dev since October/November.
As of right now the biggest thing holding up the transition is
documentation. A doc needs to get written explaining
I'm sending this to python-dev instead of python-3000 for two reasons: It's
not about features to be added to Python 3.0, and it's not really
about 3.0at all -- it's about
2.6 and later. It's about how we get Python 2.x to 3.0, and howmuch of
3.0we put into
2.6 and later.
So here at PyCon, Guido
I'm organizing a trip to Standard in downtown Dallas for dinner
tonight (Sunday night). It's about a 10 minute cab ride to Standard.
We can share cabs and get there without too much trouble. The
restaurant is on the expensive side. I'm thinking we should leave
from the hotal around 6:30pm.
http
K D schrieb:
> I thought it would be nice to have the code marked somehow so that it
> was obvious what the additional (and obviously unused) parameter was.
> The two references (NULL and METH_NOARGS) are both in upper-case and as
> C is a case-sensitive language I think it's probably usual to do
>
Hi Adam,
On Thu, Feb 15, 2007 at 06:17:03AM -0700, Adam Olsen wrote:
> > E.g. have a wait(events = [], timeout = -1) method would be sufficient
> > for most cases, where an event would specify
>
> I agree with everything except this. A simple function call would
> have O(n) cost, thus being unac
On 2/22/07, Gabriel Becedillas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I'd hit an access violation inside PyErr_WriteUnraisable when a
> non-exception instance was raised. The call to PyExceptionClass_Name
> with a non-exception instance is yielding an invalid pointer.
> We are embedding Python 2.5 and a stri
On Fri, Feb 23, 2007 at 04:24:19AM -0800, Sydney Pang wrote:
> do I have to call Py_Finalize() at
> the end of each Python embedded C function?
As far I understand you only need to call Py_Initialize() and
Py_Finalize() once per every embedded interpreter, not for an every
function.
Oleg.
--
Hi, I am developing an application where I have Python embedded in C
functions using the C/Python API to execute commands. My question stems
from my need to preserve a PyObject to pass between these Python
embedded C functions. My question is: do I have to call Py_Finalize() at
the end of each
I'd hit an access violation inside PyErr_WriteUnraisable when a
non-exception instance was raised. The call to PyExceptionClass_Name
with a non-exception instance is yielding an invalid pointer.
We are embedding Python 2.5 and a string instance is raised using
PyThreadState_SetAsyncExc. I can fi
22 matches
Mail list logo
