On Dec 11, 2007 11:00 PM, Andrew Bennetts <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Guido van Rossum wrote:
> > On Dec 11, 2007 4:54 PM, Jan Claeys <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > Op vrijdag 07-12-2007 om 07:26 uur [tijdzone -0700], schreef Sean
> > > Reifschneider:
> > > > I would say that this is an optimiza
Guido van Rossum wrote:
> On Dec 11, 2007 4:54 PM, Jan Claeys <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Op vrijdag 07-12-2007 om 07:26 uur [tijdzone -0700], schreef Sean
> > Reifschneider:
> > > I would say that this is an optimization that helps a specific set of
> > > platforms, including one that I think w
On Dec 11, 2007 6:01 PM, Greg Ewing <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Guido van Rossum wrote:
>
> > On Dec 11, 2007 4:54 PM, Jan Claeys <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> >>Almost every laptop user would benefit from it, and even some desktop or
> >>server users might save on their electric power bill...
I think that should not change. None is different than 0. It makes
sense to use it as a "use the default value" kind of place holder.
Silently using 1 when you pass 0 is a very different thing.
Maybe the slice was calculated and the developer should know about it
being 0, because in this cas
I was playing around with sliceobject.c this evening and noticed the following
behavior. If you slice with a step 0, you receive a ValueError but when you
slice with a step of None, the step is set to 1. As an example, observe the
following interactive session:
>>> a = [1,2,3,4,5,6]
>>> b
Guido van Rossum wrote:
> On Dec 11, 2007 4:54 PM, Jan Claeys <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>>Almost every laptop user would benefit from it, and even some desktop or
>>server users might save on their electric power bill...
>
>
> Do you have data to support this claim?
Even if it doesn't save
On Dec 11, 2007 4:54 PM, Jan Claeys <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Op vrijdag 07-12-2007 om 07:26 uur [tijdzone -0700], schreef Sean
> Reifschneider:
> > I would say that this is an optimization that helps a specific set of
> > platforms, including one that I think we really care about, the OLPC
> >
Op vrijdag 07-12-2007 om 07:26 uur [tijdzone -0700], schreef Sean
Reifschneider:
> I would say that this is an optimization that helps a specific set of
> platforms, including one that I think we really care about, the OLPC
> which needs it for decreased battery use.
Almost every laptop user would
It is important; care to submit a fix?
On Dec 11, 2007 11:08 AM, Joseph Armbruster <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> All,
>
> Not sure if this is significant or not but the spacing of the builtin_format
> function is not consistent with the
> rest of the bltinmodule.c file.
--
--Guido van Rossum (hom
All,
Not sure if this is significant or not but the spacing of the builtin_format
function is not consistent with the
rest of the bltinmodule.c file.
Joseph Armbruster
___
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/list
> From: "Giampaolo Rodola'" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> I remembered right now that there's a patch pending which should be
> included in the trunk before solving issues related to py3k and/or
> applying other changes:
> http://bugs.python.org/issue1736190
> Since it solves a lot of older and newer async
11 matches
Mail list logo
