>On Fri, 18 Sep 2009 11:04:46 am Andrew McNamara wrote:
>> >To a non-specialist, "the network address" is ambiguous. There are
>> > many addresses in a network, and none of them are the entire
>> > network. It's like saying, given a list [2, 4, 8, 12], what's "the
>> > list item"?
>>
>> A "network
On Fri, 18 Sep 2009 01:29:21 pm Peter Moody wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 17, 2009 at 6:17 PM, Andrew McNamara
>
> wrote:
> >>off to patch the pep and implement some of the non controversial
> >> changes.
> >
> > It might be a good idea to add some use-cases to the PEP.
>
> There are several use-cases in t
On Thu, Sep 17, 2009 at 11:10 AM, Daniel Fetchinson
wrote:
>> 188 (check that, 190) people have downloaded the 2.0 release in the
>> last week (numbers publicly available from the code.google.com). I
>> can't tell you how many (if any) have downloaded it via svn.
>
> Downloadin
>> It might be a good idea to add some use-cases to the PEP.
>
>There are several use-cases in the PEP already.
Maybe the use-cases deserve their own section in the PEP, or better yet,
be pulled up into the Motivation section.
>The problem is, for every use-case where one can show that the
>exist
On Thu, Sep 17, 2009 at 6:17 PM, Andrew McNamara
wrote:
>>off to patch the pep and implement some of the non controversial changes.
>
> It might be a good idea to add some use-cases to the PEP.
There are several use-cases in the PEP already.
The problem is, for every use-case where one can show
On Fri, 18 Sep 2009 11:41:32 am Andrew McNamara wrote:
> The issue is bigger than error checking - I'm maintaining that a
> distinction between an Address (singleton, item) and a Network
> (Container) is useful and should be embraced. The current
> implementation has already partially gone this ro
On Fri, 18 Sep 2009 11:04:46 am Andrew McNamara wrote:
> >To a non-specialist, "the network address" is ambiguous. There are
> > many addresses in a network, and none of them are the entire
> > network. It's like saying, given a list [2, 4, 8, 12], what's "the
> > list item"?
>
> A "network address
On Fri, 18 Sep 2009 at 11:04, Andrew McNamara wrote:
[attribution lost; apparently Steven D'Aprano given the CC]
To a non-specialist, "the network address" is ambiguous. There are many
addresses in a network, and none of them are the entire network. It's
like saying, given a list [2, 4, 8, 12],
On Fri, 18 Sep 2009 at 02:24, Sebastian Rittau wrote:
On Thu, Sep 17, 2009 at 02:04:11PM -0400, R. David Murray wrote:
I mean, eg, IPv4Network.fromHostIP('192.168.1.1/24').
I'd actually suggest to use
>>> net, host = parse_network_and_host("192.168.111.33/24")
(IPv4Network('192.168.111.0/2
>Again, the same error-catching functionality can be obtained through
>an option to the constructor. network and broadcast attributes can be
>renamed to .\1_address to alleviate confusion as well.
>
>I mentioned before that IPy's insistence on receiving masked out
>networks was one of the main reas
>off to patch the pep and implement some of the non controversial changes.
It might be a good idea to add some use-cases to the PEP.
--
Andrew McNamara, Senior Developer, Object Craft
http://www.object-craft.com.au/
___
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-D
On Thu, Sep 17, 2009 at 7:26 PM, A.M. Kuchling wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 17, 2009 at 11:32:25PM +0200, Georg Brandl wrote:
>> > Should we do something similar with the FAQs at
>> > http://www.python.org/doc/faq/ ?
>>
>> They would then go into the main docs, I guess?
>
> That would make sense. However
>To a non-specialist, "the network address" is ambiguous. There are many
>addresses in a network, and none of them are the entire network. It's
>like saying, given a list [2, 4, 8, 12], what's "the list item"?
A "network address" is an IP address and mask, but I understand your
confusion - we're
>> Conceptually, you sometimes need a bare address, and other times,
>> you need an address with an associated network (host interface
>> configs, router configs, etc). By AddressWithMask, I really mean
>> AddressWithEnoughInformationToDeriveNetworkWhenNeeded. Conveniently,
>> IPv4 and IPv6 addres
>On Thu, 17 Sep 2009 10:41:37 am Andrew McNamara wrote:
>> In the olden days, the mask was spelled out in octets (eg
>> 255.255.255.0). But we've moved to a more compact and logical
>> notation where the number of leading significant bits is specified
>> (eg /24).
>
>I hope you're not suggesting th
On Thu, Sep 17, 2009 at 02:04:11PM -0400, R. David Murray wrote:
> I mean, eg, IPv4Network.fromHostIP('192.168.1.1/24').
I'd actually suggest to use
>>> net, host = parse_network_and_host("192.168.111.33/24")
(IPv4Network('192.168.111.0/24'), IPv4Address('192.168.111.33'))
>>>
I think th
On Thu, 17 Sep 2009 at 14:19, Fred Drake wrote:
One of the reasons www.python.org/doc/ was considered less discoverable was
the about of only-sometimes-interesting information there; docs.python.org
contains only "current" docs (for some vague notion of current and only,
given that dev builds a
On Thu, Sep 17, 2009 at 11:32:25PM +0200, Georg Brandl wrote:
> > Should we do something similar with the FAQs at
> > http://www.python.org/doc/faq/ ?
>
> They would then go into the main docs, I guess?
That would make sense. However, we already have seven different FAQs
there, so I don't think
On Thu, Sep 17, 2009 at 3:27 PM, Greg Ewing wrote:
> Peter Moody wrote:
>
>> the address with all of the hosts bits masked to zero is most commonly
>> referred to as the network address.
>
> Then call the attribute 'network_address', not just 'network'.
from an earlier email:
Again, the same err
On Fri, 18 Sep 2009 at 07:45, Nick Coghlan wrote:
R. David Murray wrote:
I would have IPv4Address itself be strict, and thus the new constructors
would compute the network address and call the regular IPv4Address
constructor.(*)
s/Address/Network/ in this paragraph :)
Ah, yes, sorry for the
Oleg Broytmann wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 04, 2009 at 04:02:39PM +0100, Chris Withers wrote:
> > So, httplib does this:
> >
> > GET / HTTP/1.1
> [skip]
> > While wget does this:
> >
> > GET / HTTP/1.0
> [skip]
> > - Apache responds with a chunked response only to httplib. Why is that?
>
>Probably
Peter Moody wrote:
the address with all of the hosts bits masked to zero is most commonly
referred to as the network address.
Then call the attribute 'network_address', not just 'network'.
--
Greg
___
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python.org
ht
Paul Moore wrote:
> runpy - Nick Coghlan
And for the general interest table, the import system and the AST
compiler are the two main areas that I know better than most.
Cheers,
Nick.
--
Nick Coghlan | ncogh...@gmail.com | Brisbane, Australia
-
Eric Smith wrote:
> Peter Moody wrote:
>
>> indexing is plenty efficient, but the problem is that these names for
>> these attributes are common to the point of causing confusion if
>> they're omitted.
>
> After thinking about it some more, I'm okay with names for [-1] and [0].
> I like .broadcas
R. David Murray wrote:
> I would have IPv4Address itself be strict, and thus the new constructors
> would compute the network address and call the regular IPv4Address
> constructor.(*)
s/Address/Network/ in this paragraph :)
Cheers,
Nick.
--
Nick Coghlan | ncogh...@gmail.com | Brisbane,
A.M. Kuchling schrieb:
> On Thu, Sep 17, 2009 at 07:38:50PM +0200, Georg Brandl wrote:
>> So the plan would be to consolidate these into another set of rst docs,
>> having them in the repo, editable by every committer, as well as published
>> somewhere on python.org (devdocs.python.org or somesuch)
On Sep 17, 2009, at 10:59 AM, Brett Cannon wrote:
On Thu, Sep 17, 2009 at 10:38, Georg Brandl wrote:
R. David Murray schrieb:
I floated a proposal on stdlib-sig to create a file named
Misc/maintainers.rst. The purpose of this file is to collect
knowledge
about who knows which modules well
Andrew McNamara writes:
> Conceptually, you sometimes need a bare address, and other times,
> you need an address with an associated network (host interface
> configs, router configs, etc). By AddressWithMask, I really mean
> AddressWithEnoughInformationToDeriveNetworkWhenNeeded. Conveniently,
On Thu, Sep 17, 2009 at 1:38 PM, Georg Brandl wrote:
> R. David Murray schrieb:
>> I floated a proposal on stdlib-sig to create a file named
>> Misc/maintainers.rst. The purpose of this file is to collect knowledge
>> about who knows which modules well enough to make decision about issues
>> in t
I decided to commit the draft of maintainers.rst in case people would
rather update it themselves. I'm happy to continue collecting updates
and applying them as well.
--David
___
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python.org
http://mail.python.org/mail
On Thursday, September 17, 2009, Daniel Fetchinson
wrote:
>> 188 (check that, 190) people have downloaded the 2.0 release in the
>> last week (numbers publicly available from the http://code.google.com). I
>> can't tell you how many (if any) have downloaded it via svn.
>
> Down
On Thu, Sep 17, 2009 at 10:38, Georg Brandl wrote:
So the plan would be to consolidate these into another set of rst
docs,
having them in the repo, editable by every committer, as well as
published
somewhere on python.org (devdocs.python.org or somesuch).
On Sep 17, 2009, at 1:56 PM, Brett
2009/9/17 R. David Murray :
> Feel free to respond with comments about the header text, but more
> importantly let me know what you know about who (especially if it is you)
> should be listed for each module, platform, and topic, and feel free to
> suggest additional topics. My goal is to record t
On Thu, 17 Sep 2009 10:41:37 am Andrew McNamara wrote:
> In the olden days, the mask was spelled out in octets (eg
> 255.255.255.0). But we've moved to a more compact and logical
> notation where the number of leading significant bits is specified
> (eg /24).
I hope you're not suggesting the older
On Thu, Sep 17, 2009 at 07:38:50PM +0200, Georg Brandl wrote:
> So the plan would be to consolidate these into another set of rst docs,
> having them in the repo, editable by every committer, as well as published
> somewhere on python.org (devdocs.python.org or somesuch).
+1.
Should we do somethi
R. David Murray wrote:
On Thu, 17 Sep 2009 at 10:57, Brett Cannon wrote:
Looks great to me! Only thing missing that I can think of is sticking
Eric down as the guy who does str.format(). =)
OK, I've added that one to the last table ;)
Awesome! I get to spend even more time on formatting stri
On Thu, 17 Sep 2009 at 14:08, R. David Murray wrote:
On Thu, 17 Sep 2009 at 10:59, Brett Cannon wrote:
On Thu, Sep 17, 2009 at 10:38, Georg Brandl wrote:
> ??Could we *please* have tracker names that match the committer names?
>
> (This doesn't even need to be done by the individual users,
On Thu, 17 Sep 2009 at 10:57, Brett Cannon wrote:
Looks great to me! Only thing missing that I can think of is sticking
Eric down as the guy who does str.format(). =)
OK, I've added that one to the last table ;)
--David
___
Python-Dev mailing list
Py
On Thu, Sep 17, 2009 at 10:59:22AM -0700, Peter Moody wrote:
> currently have, or do you feel that simply adding 5 rfc's to the
> references section adds to the overall readability of the PEP?
I would list them simply because it's not obvious which RFC specifies
the format of IP addresses or how t
On Thu, 17 Sep 2009 05:15:16 pm Andrew McNamara wrote:
> Conceptually, you sometimes need a bare address, and other times,
> you need an address with an associated network (host interface
> configs, router configs, etc). By AddressWithMask, I really mean
> AddressWithEnoughInformationToDeriveNetw
> 188 (check that, 190) people have downloaded the 2.0 release in the
> last week (numbers publicly available from the code.google.com). I
> can't tell you how many (if any) have downloaded it via svn.
Downloading and using are not the same thing.
>>>
>>> Correct, but there is
On Thu, 17 Sep 2009 at 10:59, Brett Cannon wrote:
On Thu, Sep 17, 2009 at 10:38, Georg Brandl wrote:
??Could we *please* have tracker names that match the committer names?
(This doesn't even need to be done by the individual users, I would
volunteer to rename all committer accounts and notify
On Thu, 17 Sep 2009 at 10:38, Peter Moody wrote:
On Thu, Sep 17, 2009 at 10:32 AM, R. David Murray wrote:
On Thu, 17 Sep 2009 at 09:16, Peter Moody wrote:
I mentioned before that IPy's insistence on receiving masked out
networks was one of the main reasons I wrote ipaddr to begin with.
Having
On Thu, Sep 17, 2009 at 10:38, Georg Brandl wrote:
> R. David Murray schrieb:
>> I floated a proposal on stdlib-sig to create a file named
>> Misc/maintainers.rst. The purpose of this file is to collect knowledge
>> about who knows which modules well enough to make decision about issues
>> in the
On Thu, Sep 17, 2009 at 10:50 AM, David Moss wrote:
> On 17 Sep 2009, at 15:40, Peter Moody wrote:
>
>> On Thu, Sep 17, 2009 at 7:26 AM, DrKJam wrote:
>>>
>>> Please can we have the following RFCs added to the references section
>>> that
>>> cover many of the aspects covered by this PEP?
>>>
>>>
Looks great to me! Only thing missing that I can think of is sticking
Eric down as the guy who does str.format(). =)
On Thu, Sep 17, 2009 at 10:14, R. David Murray wrote:
> I floated a proposal on stdlib-sig to create a file named
> Misc/maintainers.rst. The purpose of this file is to collect kn
On Thu, Sep 17, 2009 at 10:38, Georg Brandl wrote:
> R. David Murray schrieb:
>> I floated a proposal on stdlib-sig to create a file named
>> Misc/maintainers.rst. The purpose of this file is to collect knowledge
>> about who knows which modules well enough to make decision about issues
>> in the
On 17 Sep 2009, at 15:40, Peter Moody wrote:
On Thu, Sep 17, 2009 at 7:26 AM, DrKJam wrote:
Please can we have the following RFCs added to the references
section that
cover many of the aspects covered by this PEP?
RFC 791 - Internet Protocol
RFC 1918 - Address Allocation for Private Intern
On Thu, 17 Sep 2009 10:40:47 pm Nick Coghlan wrote:
> Antoine Pitrou wrote:
> > Peter Moody hda3.com> writes:
> >> the address with all of the hosts bits masked to zero is most
> >> commonly referred to as the network address. same as the address
> >> with all of the host bits set to one is called
R. David Murray schrieb:
> I floated a proposal on stdlib-sig to create a file named
> Misc/maintainers.rst. The purpose of this file is to collect knowledge
> about who knows which modules well enough to make decision about issues
> in the tracker when the participants in the issue aren't sure, a
On Thu, Sep 17, 2009 at 10:32 AM, R. David Murray wrote:
> On Thu, 17 Sep 2009 at 09:16, Peter Moody wrote:
>>
>> I mentioned before that IPy's insistence on receiving masked out
>> networks was one of the main reasons I wrote ipaddr to begin with.
>> Having ipaddr mimic this behavior would make i
On Thu, 17 Sep 2009 at 09:16, Peter Moody wrote:
I mentioned before that IPy's insistence on receiving masked out
networks was one of the main reasons I wrote ipaddr to begin with.
Having ipaddr mimic this behavior would make it significantly less
useful. Removing functionality in the name of avo
On Fri, 18 Sep 2009 12:44:04 am DrKJam wrote:
> IPv6 doesn't support the notion of a broadcast address as part of a
> CIDR network block at all. AFAIK, it is a perfect legitimate for the
> last address in an IPv6 block to be used to configure a network
> interface. The IPv6 network object interfac
I floated a proposal on stdlib-sig to create a file named
Misc/maintainers.rst. The purpose of this file is to collect knowledge
about who knows which modules well enough to make decision about issues
in the tracker when the participants in the issue aren't sure, and to
write down the community k
On Thu, Sep 17, 2009 at 9:26 AM, Antoine Pitrou wrote:
> Peter Moody hda3.com> writes:
>>
>> Again, the same error-catching functionality can be obtained through
>> an option to the constructor. network and broadcast attributes can be
>> renamed to .\1_address to alleviate confusion as well.
>
>
Peter Moody hda3.com> writes:
>
> Again, the same error-catching functionality can be obtained through
> an option to the constructor. network and broadcast attributes can be
> renamed to .\1_address to alleviate confusion as well.
My remark was not targetting error-catching of non-zero low bits
On Thu, Sep 17, 2009 at 5:32 AM, Nick Coghlan wrote:
> Eric Smith wrote:
>> Antoine Pitrou wrote:
>>> As it is, -1 from me. Either we only keep two concepts (Address and
>>> Network), or if we introduce a third one (AddressWithMask,
>>> whatever) for added practicality; but we shouldn't blur the
2009/9/17 nathan binkert :
> I've been working on code that works a lot like string.Template and in
> the process, I stumbled on re.Scanner. I have two questions.
> 1) Is re.Scanner ever going to be official? Can I count on it being
> in future versions of python? It's been there for a really lo
I've been working on code that works a lot like string.Template and in
the process, I stumbled on re.Scanner. I have two questions.
1) Is re.Scanner ever going to be official? Can I count on it being
in future versions of python? It's been there for a really long time,
so I assume so, but someth
On Thu, 17 Sep 2009 at 15:44, DrKJam wrote:
Granted, there are decisions to be made about exactly what the
properties/methods should be named to avoid ambiguity, but they are
important enough to be given access to in their own right. Details in
docstrings help too ;-) 'network' and 'broadcast' ar
DrKJam gmail.com> writes:
>
> BTW, has anyone considered use of the term *CIDR to refer to an address + mask
object?
This sounds too obscure for a non-specialist.
> Obviously we'd still have the issue of what to do with the host bits to the
right of the supplied mask (keep or discard). This is
Peter Moody wrote:
indexing is plenty efficient, but the problem is that these names for
these attributes are common to the point of causing confusion if
they're omitted.
After thinking about it some more, I'm okay with names for [-1] and [0].
I like .broadcast, and I can live with .network (
On Thu, Sep 17, 2009 at 6:25 AM, Eric Smith wrote:
> Nick Coghlan wrote:
>>
>> To be honest, given the indexing behaviour, I'm -1 on the idea of giving
>> the network address or broadcast address attribute names *at all*.
>> Consider:
>>
>> network_address = my_net[0]
>> broadcast_address = my_n
On Thu, Sep 17, 2009 at 7:32 AM, Antoine Pitrou wrote:
> Le Mon, 14 Sep 2009 09:44:12 -0700, Peter Moody a écrit :
>> Folks, Guido,
>>
>> I believe PEP 3144 is ready for your review. When you get a chance, can
>> you take a look/make a pronouncement?
>
> I might add that, according to the whole d
>
> Antoine Pitrou wrote:
> > Peter Moody hda3.com> writes:
> >> the address with all of the hosts bits masked to zero is most commonly
> >> referred to as the network address. same as the address with all of
> >> the host bits set to one is called the broadcast address. calling it
> >> something
On Thu, Sep 17, 2009 at 7:26 AM, DrKJam wrote:
> Please can we have the following RFCs added to the references section that
> cover many of the aspects covered by this PEP?
>
> RFC 791 - Internet Protocol
> RFC 1918 - Address Allocation for Private Internets
> RFC 3330 - Special-Use IPv4 Addresses
On Thu, Sep 17, 2009 at 9:26 AM, DrKJam wrote:
> Please can we have the following RFCs added to the references section that
> cover many of the aspects covered by this PEP?
>
> RFC 791 - Internet Protocol
> RFC 1918 - Address Allocation for Private Internets
> RFC 3330 - Special-Use IPv4 Addresse
Le Mon, 14 Sep 2009 09:44:12 -0700, Peter Moody a écrit :
> Folks, Guido,
>
> I believe PEP 3144 is ready for your review. When you get a chance, can
> you take a look/make a pronouncement?
I might add that, according to the whole discussion, it seems not all of
the API is exposed in the PEP. W
Please can we have the following RFCs added to the references section that
cover many of the aspects covered by this PEP?
RFC 791 - Internet Protocol
RFC 1918 - Address Allocation for Private Internets
RFC 3330 - Special-Use IPv4 Addresses
RFC 4291 - IPv6 Addressing Architecture
RFC 4632 - Classle
Nick Coghlan wrote:
To be honest, given the indexing behaviour, I'm -1 on the idea of giving
the network address or broadcast address attribute names *at all*. Consider:
network_address = my_net[0]
broadcast_address = my_net[-1]
My only concern with this is a possible performance issue wit
On Wed, 16 Sep 2009 at 20:26, Peter Moody wrote:
On Wed, Sep 16, 2009 at 7:48 PM, Greg Ewing wrote:
I'm not sure what usefulness the zero address on its own
has, but if it's considered useful enough to have an
attribute for it, calling it something like 'base_address'
would be less confusing.
On Thu, 17 Sep 2009 at 22:32, Nick Coghlan wrote:
Eric Smith wrote:
Antoine Pitrou wrote:
As it is, -1 from me. Either we only keep two concepts (Address and
Network), or if we introduce a third one (AddressWithMask,
whatever) for added practicality; but we shouldn't blur the line
between the
Antoine Pitrou wrote:
> Peter Moody hda3.com> writes:
>> the address with all of the hosts bits masked to zero is most commonly
>> referred to as the network address. same as the address with all of
>> the host bits set to one is called the broadcast address. calling it
>> something like base_addr
Nick Coghlan wrote:
Eric Smith wrote:
Antoine Pitrou wrote:
As it is, -1 from me. Either we only keep two concepts (Address and
Network), or if we introduce a third one (AddressWithMask,
whatever) for added practicality; but we shouldn't blur the line
between the two former canonical concepts
Eric Smith wrote:
> Antoine Pitrou wrote:
>> As it is, -1 from me. Either we only keep two concepts (Address and
>> Network), or if we introduce a third one (AddressWithMask,
>> whatever) for added practicality; but we shouldn't blur the line
>> between the two former canonical concepts under the
Antoine Pitrou wrote:
Le Thu, 17 Sep 2009 14:30:28 +1200, Greg Ewing a écrit :
3) an Address with an attached Network
An Address could be constructed in three ways:
Address(ip_number)
Address(ip_number, network = )
Address(ip_number, mask = )
# constructs and attaches a suitabl
Le Thu, 17 Sep 2009 14:30:28 +1200, Greg Ewing a écrit :
>
> 3) an Address with an attached Network
>
> An Address could be constructed in three ways:
>
>Address(ip_number)
>
>Address(ip_number, network = )
>
>Address(ip_number, mask = )
> # constructs and attaches a suitably-
Peter Moody hda3.com> writes:
>
> the address with all of the hosts bits masked to zero is most commonly
> referred to as the network address. same as the address with all of
> the host bits set to one is called the broadcast address. calling it
> something like base_address or min_address will c
Hello,
How about allowing all authenticated users update dependency field in
Python tracker?
http://bugs.python.org/iss...@sort0=dependencies&@sortdir0=on&@sort1=&@group0=priority&@group1=&@columns=title,id,activity,dependencies,status&@pagesize=150&@startwith=0
Looks like developers with access
2009/9/17 Peter Moody :
> On Wed, Sep 16, 2009 at 8:21 PM, Andrew McNamara
> wrote:
I think we're in a painful middle ground now - we should either go back
to the idea of a single class (per protocol), or make the distinctions
clear (networks are containers and addresses are singlet
> > As the module stands, we have a pair of address-without-mask classes
> > called *Address, and a pair of address-with-mask classes called
> > *Network. So, sometimes when you want to record an *address* you use
> > a class called Network, and that class comes with a behaviours that
> > make no s
81 matches
Mail list logo
