Hi All,
Thanks much for your suggestions and help.
Shall get back after reading through and trying some
stuff mentioned in the emails.
Thanks and regards,
Mithun
--- [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> >> Am a new subscriber to this list. Am facing
> an issue in deciphering
> >> core-files o
Thanks! The check-in emails are working again.
-- Alexandre
On 6/27/07, Thomas Wouters <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> The mail-checkins script broke because of the upgrade of the machine that
> hosts the subversion repository -- Python 2.3 went away, but two scripts
> were still using '#!/usr/bin
At 01:26 PM 6/28/2007 -0400, Phillip J. Eby wrote:
>You should also be able to delete unwanted function type attributes
>like this::
>
>from types import FunctionType
>del dictionary_of(FunctionType)['func_closure']
>del dictionary_of(FunctionType)['func_code']
By the way, you probabl
tav wrote:
> But, all I am asking for is to not expose func_closure (and perhaps
> some of the other func_*) as members of FunctionType -- isn't it
> possible to add functionality to the ``new`` module which would allow
> one to read/write func_closure?
Would func_closure then also be removed from
I love you PJE! Thank you! =)
On 6/28/07, Phillip J. Eby <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> At 05:23 PM 6/28/2007 +0100, tav wrote:
> >Any pointers on removing members via ctypes front?
> >
> >Whilst I can understand even the most obscure aspects of your python
> >code fine, I'm not familiar with C/ctyp
> [Martin]
>> That will be very difficult to achieve, as Python is (deliberately)
>> not even consistent across systems. Instead, it reports what the
>> platform reports, so you should do the same in Java.
>
> Do these examples make it clearer why and in what way I want the jython
> errno symbolic
At 10:20 AM 6/28/2007 -0700, Robert Brewer wrote:
>tav wrote:
> > But, all I am asking for is to not expose func_closure (and perhaps
> > some of the other func_*) as members of FunctionType -- isn't it
> > possible to add functionality to the ``new`` module which would allow
> > one to read/write
At 05:23 PM 6/28/2007 +0100, tav wrote:
>Any pointers on removing members via ctypes front?
>
>Whilst I can understand even the most obscure aspects of your python
>code fine, I'm not familiar with C/ctypes...
What you want is to get access to the type's real dictionary, not the
proxy. Then you
>> Am a new subscriber to this list. Am facing an issue in deciphering
>> core-files of applications with mixed C and libpython frames in it.
>> I was thinking of knowing any work that has been done with respect to
>> getting into the actual python line (file-name.py:) from
>
At 04:14 PM 6/28/2007 +0100, tav wrote:
> > Well, there's no __self__ in 2.3 or 2.4; I guess that was added
> in 2.5. Darn.
>
>anyone know *why* it was added?
>
> > >Or, setting __call__.__doc__ ?
> >
> > What does that do?
>
>ah, i just wanted a way of providing documentation, and __call__'s
>__
> Well, there's no __self__ in 2.3 or 2.4; I guess that was added in 2.5. Darn.
anyone know *why* it was added?
> >Or, setting __call__.__doc__ ?
>
> What does that do?
ah, i just wanted a way of providing documentation, and __call__'s
__doc__ isn't writable...
> If it works, you could probabl
At 01:09 PM 6/28/2007 +0100, tav wrote:
>>You know, I find it particularly interesting that, as far as I can
>>tell, nobody who proposes making changes to the Python language to
>>add security, ever seems to offer any comparison or contrast of their
>>approaches to Zope's -- which doesn't require a
On Thu, Jun 28, 2007 at 09:41:06AM +0100, Mithun R N wrote:
> Am a new subscriber to this list.
> Am facing an issue in deciphering core-files of
> applications with mixed C and libpython frames in it.
>
> I was thinking of knowing any work that has been done
> with respect to getting into the act
Hi Mithun,
Because python-dev is a mailing list for the development *of* Python
rather than development *with* Python, I believe you may not have
posted to the best list. Further information about this distinction,
and some discussion about potentially setting up a special-interest
list exclusive
> You know, I find it particularly interesting that, as far as I can
> tell, nobody who proposes making changes to the Python language to
> add security, ever seems to offer any comparison or contrast of their
> approaches to Zope's -- which doesn't require any changes to the language. :)
Whilst
Hi All,
Am a new subscriber to this list.
Am facing an issue in deciphering core-files of
applications with mixed C and libpython frames in it.
I was thinking of knowing any work that has been done
with respect to getting into the actual python line
(file-name.py:) from the libpython frames
on th
[Alan]
>>I want jython to use the same errno symbolic constants as cpython, to
>>ease portability of code.
[Martin]
> That will be very difficult to achieve, as Python is (deliberately)
> not even consistent across systems. Instead, it reports what the
> platform reports, so you should do the sam
17 matches
Mail list logo
