Seems to me that while all this is fine for developers and Python users
it's completely unsatisfactory for people who just want to use Python
applications. For them it's much easier if each application comes with
all dependencies including the interpreter.
I think it depends on your
I do develop applications myself, and had only once in ten years
the desire to package everything in a stand-alone way, and then ended
up using freeze. I'm genuinely curious what the scenarios are where
people desire such packaging - I did hear the desire often, but never
fully explained.
Steve Holden writes:
Seems to me that while all this is fine for developers and Python
users it's completely unsatisfactory for people who just want to
use Python applications.
? I use lots of Python applications under Mac OS X, MacPorts, Debian,
and Gentoo without looking too closely at
Nick Coghlan wrote:
Many of the routines in abstract.c check their parameters for NULL, as a
sanity check, and throw a SystemError if NULL is detected. I'm tempted
to suggest making these checks only when Py_DEBUG is defined, but I
suspect if you wanted it that way, you would have changed it
Hrvoje Niksic hrvoje.niksic at avl.com writes:
Agreed, and more importantly, I have yet to be convinced that those NULL
checks introduce a measurable slowdown. Daniel, have you tried
measuring the performance difference with only the NULL checks removed?
I think it would be fine to add a
Agreed, and more importantly, I have yet to be convinced that those NULL
checks introduce a measurable slowdown. Daniel, have you tried
measuring the performance difference with only the NULL checks removed?
I think it highly unlikely that there is a performance difference.
These tend to
Raymond Hettinger python at rcn.com writes:
-1
The API confusion and clutter isn't worth the micro-optimization.
The API wouldn't change, there would only be a short path for long-indexing of
lists, exactly as there is today in 2.x's BINARY_SUBSCR implementation.
On Tue Mar 24 02:06:29 CET 2009, Tennessee Leeuwenburg tleeuwenburg at
gmail.com wrote:
Perhaps some developers have a well-established workflow and interpret these
flag in a particular, consistent fashion, however part of the purpose of the
issue tracker is to allow a diverse group to work on
Martin v. Löwis wrote:
I do develop applications myself, and had only once in ten years
the desire to package everything in a stand-alone way, and then ended
up using freeze. I'm genuinely curious what the scenarios are where
people desire such packaging - I did hear the desire often, but
On Tue, Mar 24, 2009 at 4:30 AM, Hrvoje Niksic hrvoje.nik...@avl.comwrote:
Agreed, and more importantly, I have yet to be convinced that those NULL
checks introduce a measurable slowdown. Daniel, have you tried measuring
the performance difference with only the NULL checks removed?
I'll
Hello,
I've just tried running test_io under Windows (in a virtual machine) and I get
the following failures:
==
ERROR: test_error_through_destructor (test.test_io.CTextIOWrapperTest)
On Tue, Mar 24, 2009 at 8:53 PM, Steve Holden st...@holdenweb.com wrote:
I'm not convinced we do need a cross-platform packaging solution, so I
may have explained my views badly. I regard application developers as
Python users, so I did not intend to suggest that the requirement for
Nick Coghlan wrote:
Everything I've seen from Daniel so far seems to be about either making
things we already do more efficient, or else providing additional
features in ways that don't make the tools any more confusing for others
already used to a particular way of doing things. So he seems
On Tue, 24 Mar 2009 13:49:28 + (UTC), Antoine Pitrou solip...@pitrou.net
wrote:
Hello,
[snip]
By the way, what happened to the Windows buildbots?
It looks like some of them are suffering from problems which I think are
common with buildbot on Windows - primarily difficulty dealing with
Martin v. Löwis wrote:
Yes, I'm also quite grateful for the contributions I have received from
Daniel.
Thank you Martin. I'm sure I'd still be going around in circles if it
weren't for your guidance, and I'd be MIA after the first time I broke
the tracker too. So thanks a lot for the support.
Stephen J. Turnbull wrote:
Chris Withers writes:
- debian has an outdated and/or broken version of your package.
True, but just as for the package system you are advocating, it's
quite easy to set up your apt to use third-party repositories of
Debian-style packages. The question is
On Tue, Mar 24, 2009 at 7:30 AM, Daniel Stutzbach
dan...@stutzbachenterprises.com wrote:
On Tue, Mar 24, 2009 at 4:30 AM, Hrvoje Niksic hrvoje.nik...@avl.comwrote:
Agreed, and more importantly, I have yet to be convinced that those NULL
checks introduce a measurable slowdown. Daniel, have
Steve Holden wrote:
Seems to me that while all this is fine for developers and Python users
it's completely unsatisfactory for people who just want to use Python
applications. For them it's much easier if each application comes with
all dependencies including the interpreter.
This may seem
2009/3/24 Daniel Stutzbach dan...@stutzbachenterprises.com:
[...]
100 nanoseconds, py3k trunk:
ceval - PyObject_GetItem (object.c) - list_subscript (listobject.c) -
PyNumber_AsSsize_t (object.c) - PyLong_AsSsize_t (longobject.c)
[more timings snipped]
Does removing the PyLong_Check call in
On Tue, 24 Mar 2009 at 07:59, Toshio Kuratomi wrote:
3) Over time, bundled libraries tend to become forked versions. And
worse, privately forked versions. If three python apps all use slightly
different older versions of libfoo-python and have backported fixes,
added new features, etc it is a
2009/3/24 Toshio Kuratomi a.bad...@gmail.com:
Steve Holden wrote:
Seems to me that while all this is fine for developers and Python users
it's completely unsatisfactory for people who just want to use Python
applications. For them it's much easier if each application comes with
all
I know that Python has iterator methods called sorted and reversed and
these are handy shortcuts.
Why not add a new iterator method called shuffled?
for x in shuffled(range(5)):
print x
3
1
2
0
4
Currently, a person has to do the following because random.shuffle() does
not return
On Tue, Mar 24, 2009 at 10:13 AM, Mark Dickinson dicki...@gmail.com wrote:
2009/3/24 Daniel Stutzbach dan...@stutzbachenterprises.com:
[...]
100 nanoseconds, py3k trunk:
ceval - PyObject_GetItem (object.c) - list_subscript (listobject.c) -
PyNumber_AsSsize_t (object.c) - PyLong_AsSsize_t
On Tue, Mar 24, 2009, Roy Hyunjin Han wrote:
I know that Python has iterator methods called sorted and reversed and
these are handy shortcuts.
Why not add a new iterator method called shuffled?
Please do not post ideas like this to python-dev, please use python-ideas
--
Aahz
David Cournapeau wrote:
2009/3/24 Toshio Kuratomi a.bad...@gmail.com:
Steve Holden wrote:
Seems to me that while all this is fine for developers and Python users
it's completely unsatisfactory for people who just want to use Python
applications. For them it's much easier if each application
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
R. David Murray wrote:
On Tue, 24 Mar 2009 at 07:53, Steve Holden wrote:
I don't claim to have all the answers, but distutils and setuptools are
for the savvy users - people who build distros and those who maintain
their own systems independent of
Hi. I'm Japanese and non-ascii charactor user. (cp932)
We have to use IME to input non-ascii charactor in Windows.
When chcp 65001 in cmd.exe, we cannot use IME on cmd.exe.
So setting codepage to 65001 make output universal but make input ascii-only.
Sit!!!
I hope PyQtShell
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
David Cournapeau wrote:
There already is a bit of a DLL hell in python. The whole idea to
solve the dependency problems by installing multiple version of the
same software is fundamentally flawed, it just does not work for
general deployment on
On Wed, Mar 25, 2009 at 1:45 AM, Toshio Kuratomi a.bad...@gmail.com wrote:
David Cournapeau wrote:
2009/3/24 Toshio Kuratomi a.bad...@gmail.com:
Steve Holden wrote:
Seems to me that while all this is fine for developers and Python users
it's completely unsatisfactory for people who just want
On Wed, Mar 25, 2009 at 2:20 AM, Tres Seaver tsea...@palladion.com wrote:
Many of us using setuptools extensively tend to adopt an isolated
environment strategy (e.g., pip, virtualenv, zc.buildout). We don't
install the packages used by different applications into shared
directories at all.
On Tue, Mar 24, 2009 at 3:50 PM, Daniel Stutzbach
dan...@stutzbachenterprises.com wrote:
On Tue, Mar 24, 2009 at 10:13 AM, Mark Dickinson dicki...@gmail.com wrote:
Does removing the PyLong_Check call in PyLong_AsSsize_t
make any noticeable difference to these timings?
Making no other changes
Antoine Pitrou solip...@pitrou.net writes:
Am I the only one getting those?
By the way, what happened to the Windows buildbots?
Oops - sorry, mine (XP-4) apparently got stuck with C++ debug
assertion dialogs (an assertion from the internal close.c module) from
python_d during some earlier
Mark Dickinson dickinsm at gmail.com writes:
Making no other changes from the trunk, removing the PyLong_Check and NULL
check from PyLong_AsSsize_t shaves off 4 nanoseconds (or around 4% since the
trunk is around 100 nanoseconds).
Thanks. I'd call that a noticeable difference.
4% on a
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
David Cournapeau wrote:
On Wed, Mar 25, 2009 at 2:20 AM, Tres Seaver tsea...@palladion.com wrote:
Many of us using setuptools extensively tend to adopt an isolated
environment strategy (e.g., pip, virtualenv, zc.buildout). We don't
install the
These issues should be resolved in the py3k branch, but it will need porting to
2.6.
Dialogue boxes are annoying, but do they pop up if you run your buildslave as a
service without access to the console?
K
-Original Message-
From: python-dev-bounces+kristjan=ccpgames@python.org
David Bolen db3l.net at gmail.com writes:
Antoine Pitrou solipsis at pitrou.net writes:
Am I the only one getting those?
By the way, what happened to the Windows buildbots?
Oops - sorry, mine (XP-4) apparently got stuck with C++ debug
assertion dialogs (an assertion from the internal
Tres Seaver wrote:
David Cournapeau wrote:
I am afraid that distutils, and
setuptools, are not really the answer to the problem, since while they
may (as intended) guarantee that Python applications can be installed
uniformly across different platforms they also more or less guarantee
that
Kristján Valur Jónsson krist...@ccpgames.com writes:
These issues should be resolved in the py3k branch, but it will need
porting to 2.6. Dialogue boxes are annoying, but do they pop up if
you run your buildslave as a service without access to the console?
Not sure what the MSVC++ runtime
On Wed, Mar 25, 2009 at 3:15 AM, Tres Seaver tsea...@palladion.com wrote:
Everytime I tried to understand what buildout was about, I was not
even sure it could help for my own problems at all. It seems very
specific to web development - I may completely miss the point ?
I think so: it is
2009/3/24 Daniel Stutzbach dan...@stutzbachenterprises.com:
On Tue, Mar 24, 2009 at 10:13 AM, Mark Dickinson dicki...@gmail.com wrote:
2009/3/24 Daniel Stutzbach dan...@stutzbachenterprises.com:
[...]
100 nanoseconds, py3k trunk:
ceval - PyObject_GetItem (object.c) - list_subscript
On Tue, Mar 24, 2009 at 11:49 AM, David Bolen db3l@gmail.com wrote:
Kristján Valur Jónsson krist...@ccpgames.com writes:
These issues should be resolved in the py3k branch, but it will need
porting to 2.6. Dialogue boxes are annoying, but do they pop up if
you run your buildslave as a
David Cournapeau wrote:
On Wed, Mar 25, 2009 at 1:45 AM, Toshio Kuratomi a.bad...@gmail.com
wrote:
David Cournapeau wrote:
2009/3/24 Toshio Kuratomi a.bad...@gmail.com:
Steve Holden wrote:
Seems to me that while all this is fine for developers and Python
users
it's completely unsatisfactory
But I don't think that a normal Lunix user should ever have to involve
themselves directly with distutils or setuptools (it's OK to invoke them
from the installation routine, but not to require the user to unpack the
application then run setup.py).
I completely agree. It would be best if the
If the problem is to get a recent enough version of the library, then
the library would better be installed locally, for the application.
If it is too much a problem because the application depends on
billions of libraries which are 6 months old, the problem is to allow
such a dependency in
This is only sortof true. You can install rpms into a local directory
without root privileges with a commandline switch. But rpm/deb are
optimized for system administrators so the documentation on doing this
is not well done. There can also be code issues with doing things this
way but
Please don't do this. We need stable APIs. Trying to switch the entire
community to use CapWord APIs for something as commonly used as
datetime sounds like wasting a lot of cycles with no reason except the
mythical PEP 8 conformance. As I said, it's a pity we didn't change
this at the 3.0 point,
R. David Murray wrote:
So, having triaged a few issues, here are my thoughts.
The current workflow is roughly:
o test needed
o patch needed
o patch review
o commit review
One can look at these and see what needs to be done next. I think
that in practice the above list
On Tue, Mar 24, 2009 at 1:23 PM, Jess Austin jaus...@post.harvard.edu wrote:
On Tue, Mar 24, 2009 at 3:14 PM, Guido van Rossum gu...@python.org wrote:
Please don't do this. We need stable APIs. Trying to switch the entire
community to use CapWord APIs for something as commonly used as
datetime
o consensus needed
o test needed
o patch needed
o patch needs work
o patch review
o commit review
The first of these additional items is equivalent to your bullet item
above. I would propose that the issue, regardless of whether or not
it is a bug fix or a
There was a discussion about this on the py3k mailing list back in
mid-2007 (buildbots thread) and perhaps later as well, at which
point I believe Martin added an -n option to regrtest and the
buildbot test.bat file to disable the assertions. Is that the py3k
branch piece you are referring
Hi. I'm Japanese and non-ascii charactor user. (cp932)
We have to use IME to input non-ascii charactor in Windows.
When chcp 65001 in cmd.exe, we cannot use IME on cmd.exe.
So setting codepage to 65001 make output universal but make input ascii-only.
Sit!!!
Is there a code page that
On Sat, Mar 21, 2009 at 2:54 PM, Greg Ewing greg.ew...@canterbury.ac.nz wrote:
Antoine Pitrou wrote:
Do we really want to add a syntactic feature which has such a complicated
expansion? I fear it will make code using yield from much more difficult
to
understand and audit.
As I've said
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
David Cournapeau wrote:
On Wed, Mar 25, 2009 at 3:15 AM, Tres Seaver tsea...@palladion.com wrote:
Everytime I tried to understand what buildout was about, I was not
even sure it could help for my own problems at all. It seems very
specific to
On Tue, 24 Mar 2009 at 21:27, Martin v. L?wis wrote:
o consensus needed
o test needed
o patch needed
o patch needs work
o patch review
o commit review
The first of these additional items is equivalent to your bullet item
above. I would propose that the issue,
There was a recent test added to test_fileio.py which triggered runtime checks
on windows.
I fixed this and other related issues in a series of revisions around 70580.
Now, I know that this msvc behaviour can be disabled, but it was decided that
it was not appropriate to meddle with runtime
So, 'confirmed' instead of 'consensus needed' (or confirmed/approved,
to cover feature requests), and 'patch is appropriate' that comes...I'm
not quite sure where?
If the person who did the triage actually thinks the patch is ready to
be committed, it would be commit review. Not sure in what
On Tue, 24 Mar 2009 at 22:41, Martin v. L?wis wrote:
If the person doing the triage has made a final call, the issue can
enter the next stage. There should never be debate on the tracker, IMO
(although there often is). It might be that people disagree with a
triage, then they should appeal to
4% on a micro-micro-benchmark is hardly compelling...
I concur! This is utterly insignificant and certainly does
not warrant removing the checks.
-1 on these sort of fake optimizations. We should focus
on algorithmic improvements and eliminating redundant
work and whatnot. Removing checks
Martin v. Löwis mar...@v.loewis.de writes:
I see this as a consequence of Web 2.0, and open source: Publish
early, publish often, make the pieces you publish as tiny as
possible to maximize reuse :-(
I'm all in favour of re-use. But re-use should mean having the library
in a *single*
On 25/03/2009 6:51 AM, Martin v. Löwis wrote:
Mike Driscoll did some work providing Windows installers for various
Python packages and extension modules, and people were amused that he
provided executable installers for pure Python libraries. But I saw that
as a sensible decision, since it meant
OK, so given this then I revise the way I understand what is happening
in the ticket I'm looking at: a reviewer has said this patch needs
work and the submitter has not responded. Since the behavior has been
accepted as a valid bug this means...I can either work on the patch, or
post a
On 25/03/2009 7:34 AM, Martin v. Löwis wrote:
I don't quite remember the -n flag, but I believe that Kristjan
just removed all that stuff, ie. there is now no way to block
CRT assertions anymore.
I
wasn't paying close attention, so maybe there's some other mechanism
in place at this point?
Mark Hammond skippy.hammond at gmail.com writes:
Note that I previously opened http://bugs.python.org/issue5116 with a
patch to enable this to be controlled from Python via the msvcrt module.
This would enable the test suite to disable assertions for its entire run.
We certainly don't
* The creation of an *installer* is something quite different. An
installer for a py2exe based tool also doesn't need dependency
management.
Right. I wasn't really talking about py2exe (anymore), but about
installers for libraries.
An installer for a pure-python package that made no attempt
On Tue, Mar 24, 2009 at 3:45 PM, Antoine Pitrou solip...@pitrou.net wrote:
Mark Hammond skippy.hammond at gmail.com writes:
Note that I previously opened http://bugs.python.org/issue5116 with a
patch to enable this to be controlled from Python via the msvcrt module.
This would enable the
Note that I previously opened http://bugs.python.org/issue5116 with a
patch to enable this to be controlled from Python via the msvcrt module.
This would enable the test suite to disable assertions for its entire run.
This patch is fine with me. It might need some documentation, though.
Guido van Rossum wrote:
I really don't like to have things whose semantics is
defined in terms of code inlining -- even if you don't mean that as
the formal semantics but just as a mnemonic hint.
Think about it the other way around, then. Take any chunk
of code containing a yield, factor it
Kristján Valur Jónsson krist...@ccpgames.com writes:
Now, I know that this msvc behaviour can be disabled, but it was
decided that it was not appropriate to meddle with runtime flags of
the whole process for python.
I must have missed that discussion, but I can't see what the problem
is if
On 2009-03-24 23:47, Martin v. Löwis wrote:
An installer for a pure-python package that made no attempt
to bundle dependencies might be nice, but I don't quite see how that
falls outside the scope of distutils/setuptools/etc. In other words, I
don't see why the installer can't bootstrap the
R. David Murray wrote:
I understood from posts I saw go by earlier from Daniel that 'pending'
meant 'close pending unless there is feedback to the contrary' (and I
just used it that way). It sounds like that is indeed correct but not
universally known, and thus I would suggest that at a
On Tue, Mar 24, 2009 at 4:02 PM, Greg Ewing greg.ew...@canterbury.ac.nz wrote:
Guido van Rossum wrote:
I really don't like to have things whose semantics is
defined in terms of code inlining -- even if you don't mean that as
the formal semantics but just as a mnemonic hint.
Think about it
This proposal has two main goals: making the Python bug tracker more
efficient for core developers and improving Roundup in areas that
don't directly concern the PSF trackers. Most of the code would land
in Roundup's repositories, but many instance-level changes would be
specific to our tracker.
Does anyone remember the reason that most of the named methods were omitted from the ABC for mutablesets and sets? The update()
method in particular would be nice to have.
RAymond
___
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python.org
On Tue, Mar 24, 2009 at 4:38 PM, Raymond Hettinger pyt...@rcn.com wrote:
Does anyone remember the reason that most of the named methods were omitted
from the ABC for mutablesets and sets? The update() method in particular
would be nice to have.
Because it's the same as +=, and if you want it
On approximately 3/24/2009 10:16 AM, came the following characters from
the keyboard of INADA Naoki:
Hi. I'm Japanese and non-ascii charactor user. (cp932)
We have to use IME to input non-ascii charactor in Windows.
When chcp 65001 in cmd.exe, we cannot use IME on cmd.exe.
So setting codepage
On Tue, Mar 24, 2009, Daniel (ajax) Diniz wrote:
This proposal has two main goals: making the Python bug tracker more
efficient for core developers and improving Roundup in areas that
don't directly concern the PSF trackers. Most of the code would land
in Roundup's repositories, but many
Aahz wrote:
Is this for GSoC? If yes, please make sure to include that tag in the
Subject: line to make it easier to track.
Oops, makes a lot of sense :)
Daniel
___
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python.org
I've received several emails recently indicating that someone is
trying to get me unsubscribed from python-dev. I'm sure they're just
pranksters, but just in case they succeed, if I seem to be absent for
a really long time, let me know. After all mailman passwords are not
secure. :-)
--
--Guido
On Mon, Mar 23, 2009 at 7:52 PM, Scott David Daniels
scott.dani...@acm.org wrote:
Guilherme Polo wrote:
On Wed, Mar 18, 2009 at 8:53 PM, Terry Reedy tjre...@udel.edu wrote:
IDLE needs lots of attention -- more than any one experienced person is
likely to have
I'm willing to step up as a
Tennessee Leeuwenburg wrote:
Hi all,
I'm continuing to (slowly) work through issues. I have been looking
particularly at a lot of the open issues regarding strftime.
It would be great to put in some of those extra status options that were
discussed recently...
Open/New
Needs help
On Tue, Mar 24, 2009 at 4:26 AM, Mark Summerfield l...@qtrac.plus.com wrote:
On 2009-03-23, Guilherme Polo wrote:
On Mon, Mar 23, 2009 at 5:39 PM, Terry Reedy tjre...@udel.edu wrote:
Guilherme Polo wrote:
On Wed, Mar 18, 2009 at 8:53 PM, Terry Reedy tjre...@udel.edu wrote:
IDLE needs lots
Greg Ewing wrote:
Guido van Rossum wrote:
I really don't like to have things whose semantics is
defined in terms of code inlining -- even if you don't mean that as
the formal semantics but just as a mnemonic hint.
Think about it the other way around, then. Take any chunk
of code
Hi Ron,
Good flowchart.
Cheers,
-T
On Wed, Mar 25, 2009 at 1:11 PM, Ron Adam r...@ronadam.com wrote:
Tennessee Leeuwenburg wrote:
Hi all,
I'm continuing to (slowly) work through issues. I have been looking
particularly at a lot of the open issues regarding strftime.
It would be great
Martin v. Löwis wrote:
* The creation of an *installer* is something quite different. An
installer for a py2exe based tool also doesn't need dependency
management.
Right. I wasn't really talking about py2exe (anymore), but about
installers for libraries.
An installer for a pure-python
R. David Murray wrote:
On Tue, 24 Mar 2009 at 21:27, Martin v. L�wis wrote:
o consensus needed
o test needed
o patch needed
o patch needs work
o patch review
o commit review
The first of these additional items is equivalent to your bullet item
above. I would
At 10:22 PM 3/24/2009 -0400, Steve Holden wrote:
There is one non-trivial extension that I've been chewing over for a
while. What if you want to yield not the values from the generator but
some function of those values? The present proposal appears to have no
way to specify that. What about
On Tue, Mar 24, 2009 at 8:35 PM, P.J. Eby p...@telecommunity.com wrote:
Now, if somebody came up with a different way to spell the extra value
return, I wouldn't object as much to that part. I can just see people
inadvertently writing 'return x' as a shortcut for 'yield x; return', and
then
Steve Holden wrote:
What about extending the syntax somewhat to
yield expr for x from X
I can't see much advantage that would give you
over writing
for x in X:
yield expr
There would be little or no speed advantage,
since you would no longer be able to shortcut
the intermediate
On 24-Mar-09, at 3:15 PM, Raymond Hettinger wrote:
4% on a micro-micro-benchmark is hardly compelling...
I concur! This is utterly insignificant and certainly does
not warrant removing the checks.
-1 on these sort of fake optimizations. We should focus
on algorithmic improvements and
4% on a micro-micro-benchmark is hardly compelling...
I concur! This is utterly insignificant and certainly does
not warrant removing the checks.
-1 on these sort of fake optimizations. We should focus
on algorithmic improvements and eliminating redundant
work and whatnot. Removing checks
90 matches
Mail list logo
