> I believe it's the wrong diagnosis :)
As I mentioned in the bug, I believe you are correct :)
Thanks!
Mark
___
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe:
http://mail.python.org/mail
Marks Summerfield and Dickenson report 2.6/3.0 b3 will not run IDLE
http://bugs.python.org/issue3628
because idlelib/run.py needs s/set_daemon(True)/daemon = True/
Assuming they are correct and this is general:
1. Is not there any test to make sure that IDLE basically runs?
For instance by havin
On Fri, Aug 22, 2008 at 9:03 AM, harp <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Dear Developers,
>
> We have translated the tutorial into Hungarian earlier, and I do not
> know how to convert the LaTeX file into reStructuredText. Could
> somebody help us?
Have you looked at the LaTeX to reST converter at
http
On Fri, Aug 22, 2008 at 07:59:46AM -0700, Guido van Rossum wrote:
> That's up to us. I don't know what the reason was for keeping the
> 3.2.0 database around -- does anyone here recall ever using it? For
> what?
RFC 3491, one of the internationalized domain name RFCs, explicitly
requires Unicode 3
I think it's an anti-spam measure. Anybody can be a member though. :-)
On Fri, Aug 22, 2008 at 8:15 AM, Fredrik Lundh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> when did Python-Dev turn into a members only list, btw?
>
> ---
>
> Your mail to 'Python-Dev' with the subject
>
> Re: Unicode 5.1.0
>
> Is being hel
when did Python-Dev turn into a members only list, btw?
---
Your mail to 'Python-Dev' with the subject
Re: Unicode 5.1.0
Is being held until the list moderator can review it for approval.
The reason it is being held:
Post by non-member to a members-only list
---
___
2008/8/22 Fredrik Lundh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> On Fri, Aug 22, 2008 at 4:59 PM, Guido van Rossum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>
>>> (how's the 3.2/4.1 dual support implemented? do we have two distinct
>>> datasets, or are the differences encoded in some clever way? would it
>>> make sense to split
ACTIVITY SUMMARY (08/15/08 - 08/22/08)
Python tracker at http://bugs.python.org/
To view or respond to any of the issues listed below, click on the issue
number. Do NOT respond to this message.
1976 open (+67) / 13495 closed (+21) / 15471 total (+88)
Open issues with patches: 626
Average
On Fri, Aug 22, 2008 at 4:59 PM, Guido van Rossum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> (how's the 3.2/4.1 dual support implemented? do we have two distinct
>> datasets, or are the differences encoded in some clever way? would it
>> make sense to split the unicodedata module into three separate
>> modul
Dear Developers,
We have translated the tutorial into Hungarian earlier, and I do not
know how to convert the LaTeX file into reStructuredText. Could
somebody help us?
HTML: http://pythonlib.pergamen.hu/html/tut/
LaTeX file: http://mail.roik.bmf.hu/linux/python/tutorial/tut.tex
There will be i
On Fri, Aug 22, 2008 at 6:42 AM, Facundo Batista
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> - In view of jumping to a new standard at *this* point, what I'd like
> to have is a comprehensive test suite for unicodedata in a similar
> sense to what happens with Decimal... It would be great to have from
> the Unico
On Fri, Aug 22, 2008 at 3:47 AM, Fredrik Lundh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 22, 2008 at 3:25 AM, Guido van Rossum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
[MAL]
>>> So while we could say: "we provide access to the Unicode 5.1.0
>>> database", we cannot say: "we support Unicode 5.1.0", simply because
Facundo Batista gmail.com> writes:
>
> Two thoughts:
>
> - In view of jumping to a new standard at *this* point, what I'd like
> to have is a comprehensive test suite for unicodedata in a similar
> sense to what happens with Decimal... It would be great to have from
> the Unicode Consortium a se
2008/8/21 Guido van Rossum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> The two, quite separate, questions, then, are (a) how much work would
> it be to upgrade to version 5.1.0 of the database; and (b) would it be
> acceptable to do this post-beta3 (but before rc1). If the answer to
> (b) is positive, Google can help
On Fri, Aug 22, 2008 at 3:25 AM, Guido van Rossum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> So while we could say: "we provide access to the Unicode 5.1.0
>> database", we cannot say: "we support Unicode 5.1.0", simply because
>> we have not reviewed the all the necessary changes and implications.
>
> Mark's
Hi Mark,
> I believe that this is the only path that allows us to go past an
> *actual* recursion level of 1/2 the nominated maximum value due to that
> other regression I mentioned.
I believe it's the wrong diagnosis :) If you look at
http://bugs.python.org/issue3373 and the small script I post
16 matches
Mail list logo
