On Mon, Jun 29, 2009 at 10:23 PM, Stephen J. Turnbull wrote:
> Jesse Noller writes:
>
> > Any thoughts? Does anyone hate this idea with the power of a thousand suns?
>
> If somebody has the power of 1000 Suns at their disposal, maybe they
> can contribute a few buildbots?
>
> Wishful-thinking-is-t
On Mon, Jun 29, 2009 at 6:59 PM, Jesse Noller wrote:
> Something that's been helping me squirrel out "wacky" and "fun" bugs
> in multiprocessing is running the tests in a loop - sometimes hundreds
> of times. Right now, I hack this up with a bash script, but I'm
> sitting here wondering if adding a
Jesse Noller writes:
> Any thoughts? Does anyone hate this idea with the power of a thousand suns?
If somebody has the power of 1000 Suns at their disposal, maybe they
can contribute a few buildbots?
Wishful-thinking-is-the-order-of-the-day-ly y'rs,
Something that's been helping me squirrel out "wacky" and "fun" bugs
in multiprocessing is running the tests in a loop - sometimes hundreds
of times. Right now, I hack this up with a bash script, but I'm
sitting here wondering if adding a "loop for x iterations" option to
regrtest.py would be usefu
> AFAIK, ignoring EINTR doesn't preclude the calling of signal handlers.
This is my understanding as well - so I don't think Python actually
"swallows" the signal.
> A great example is reading from a socket. Whether or not it can be
> interrupted depends on the platform, so catching Ctrl+C often
> If no one objects, I'd like to push PEP 376 in the "accepted" status
> and go ahead with its implementation,
> with continuous feedback at Distutils-SIG as we did to build it.
I think this isn't quite the process. In the past, every PEP required
BDFL pronouncement, which you should now seek.
Re
I'll do my best to try and explain/contribute, but please feel free to
correct anything I get wrong.
I believe the "swallowing" he's referring to is the ignoring of errno
EINTR. I don't think that's the correct place to handle signals to
begin with- why not just use the signal module to deal with
Hello,
If no one objects, I'd like to push PEP 376 in the "accepted" status
and go ahead with its implementation,
with continuous feedback at Distutils-SIG as we did to build it.
The next PEPs that are being discussed at Distutils-SIG are :
- the new version of PEP 345 for the inclusion of field
-On [20090626 22:29], Terry Reedy (tjre...@udel.edu) wrote:
>If you were running on a PC with what is now considered to be very small
>memory, I would hypothesize that you had filled memory so that the
>interpreter or parts thereof were being swapped in and out of memory
>from and to disk. Is an
Python 2.4 will become 5 years old this November. I plan to make the
final security release this month or next month. If you want to see
additional patches in Python 2.4, please let us now, or commit them
yourself if you can.
Remember that only security fixes can be considered for inclusion,
and p
10 matches
Mail list logo
