I just wondered, with the recent flood of new MSDN subscriptions loosed
on the developer community, how many people have installed the required
version of Visual Studio and built Python for Windows from source? Not
being that familiar with the process myself I was hoping for some advice
from the in
[Stephen Turbull]
> The resources available for language evolution have dried up;
> *you* who want more language evolution are going to have to
> supply them.
That's the idea I've been advocating- a code-first-jaw-later
approach and the sandbox to support it. Its not even that
hard to find where I
geremy condra writes:
> On Wed, Oct 28, 2009 at 12:34 PM, average wrote:
> > [I wrote:]
> >> If Python3 were to have this feature it would make it worth
> >> migrating to
> >
> > Sorry that may have sounded more harsh than I expected. If I had more
> > resources,
> This is effectively th
On Wed, Oct 28, 2009 at 4:39 PM, Thomas Heller wrote:
> Olemis Lang schrieb:
>> Hello !
>>
>> Recently I found a code snippet [1]_ illustrating integration between
>> Python and COM technology in Win32 systems. I tried to reproduce it
>> and I can't import module `ctypes.com`.
>
> First, the pytho
Olemis Lang schrieb:
> Hello !
>
> Recently I found a code snippet [1]_ illustrating integration between
> Python and COM technology in Win32 systems. I tried to reproduce it
> and I can't import module `ctypes.com`.
First, the python-dev mailing list is used for developing the Python language
it
Hello !
Recently I found a code snippet [1]_ illustrating integration between
Python and COM technology in Win32 systems. I tried to reproduce it
and I can't import module `ctypes.com`.
Q:
- Is it (`ctypes.com`) distributed with stdlib ?
If that's true then I'm affraid that those py files wer
On Wed, Oct 28, 2009 at 12:34 PM, average wrote:
> [I wrote:]
>> If Python3 were to have this feature it would make it worth
>> migrating to
>
> Sorry that may have sounded more harsh than I expected. If I had more
> resources, I'd propose (and volunteer) a python3000 branch where any
> and all w
M.-A. Lemburg wrote:
> +1
On Oct 28, 2009, at 7:02 AM, Michael Foord wrote:
> Also +1. It seems like this would make things easier for the alternative
> implementations.
On Wed, Oct 28, 2009 at 3:30 PM, sstein...@gmail.com
wrote:
> +1
Ok then I'll work on a patch for that change and start an i
[I wrote:]
> If Python3 were to have this feature it would make it worth
> migrating to
Sorry that may have sounded more harsh than I expected. If I had more
resources, I'd propose (and volunteer) a python3000 branch where any
and all who were disappointed at the *lack* of compatability changes
c
[Guido wrote:]
> - If sets were to grow an API to non-destructively access the object
> stored in the set for a particular key, then dicts should have such a
> method too.
> - I still wish we could go back in time and unify sets and dicts, if
> only to find out how that experiment would turn out.
pobox.com> writes:
>
> >> So 2.7 support will for the most part be a case not of supporting
> >> Python versions, but Python *users*.
>
> Antoine> That's still not a good reason to backport nonlocal. The same
> Antoine> reasoning could be used to backport new features to the 2.6
On Oct 28, 2009, at 7:02 AM, Michael Foord wrote:
M.-A. Lemburg wrote:
Tarek Ziadé wrote:
Hello,
Since the addition of PEP 370, (per-user site packages), site.py and
distutils/command/install.py are *both* providing the various
installation directories for Python,
depending on the system an
>> So 2.7 support will for the most part be a case not of supporting
>> Python versions, but Python *users*.
Antoine> That's still not a good reason to backport nonlocal. The same
Antoine> reasoning could be used to backport new features to the 2.6
Antoine> branch after all.
Kristján Valur Jónsson ccpgames.com> writes:
>
> In my experience (from stackless python) using priority wakeup for IO can
result in very erratic
> scheduling when there is much IO going on, every IO trumping another.
I whipped up a trivial multithreaded HTTP server using
socketserver.ThreadingM
M.-A. Lemburg wrote:
Tarek Ziadé wrote:
Hello,
Since the addition of PEP 370, (per-user site packages), site.py and
distutils/command/install.py are *both* providing the various
installation directories for Python,
depending on the system and the Python version.
We have also started to disc
>> (*) Remember, however, that Tarek and work on Distribute, and also on
>> bringing pieces of setuptools/Distribute functionality into distutils.
>
> But if that's the case then why not work on any third party tool..? like
> pip or setuptools?
>
> It seems are very longwinded process if the only w
Tarek Ziadé wrote:
> Hello,
>
> Since the addition of PEP 370, (per-user site packages), site.py and
> distutils/command/install.py are *both* providing the various
> installation directories for Python,
> depending on the system and the Python version.
>
> We have also started to discuss lately
Lennart Regebro gmail.com> writes:
>
> So 2.7 support will for the most part be a case not of supporting
> Python versions, but Python *users*.
That's still not a good reason to backport nonlocal. The same reasoning could be
used to backport new features to the 2.6 branch after all.
Regards
An
Steven D'Aprano wrote:
> On Tue, 27 Oct 2009 10:09:14 am Guido van Rossum wrote:
>> On Mon, Oct 26, 2009 at 4:06 PM, Antoine Pitrou
> wrote:
>>> Steven D'Aprano pearwood.info> writes:
I don't understand that rationale. Let's take a concrete example.
The new `yield from` syntax was acce
19 matches
Mail list logo
