> Quite an interesting question recently popped up in pygame community
> that I'd like to ask to Python developers.
>
> How many of you use IDLE?
I do, sometimes.
> What's wrong with it?
AFAICT, nothing.
>>From my side I like the idea of having default Python editor that is
> small, fast, conv
> data = "GIF89a(..."
>
> Is there a potentially automated path from where the code is today to
> something Python 3 (and 2to3) will like?
Not sure how you'll fix these; I personally always provided a b()
function that will do the right thing in both 2.x and 3.x. This can
get eventually repla
I think in a prior discussion, it was suggested that build slave
updates were ok for this list - I apologize to those who may not be
interested.
I've just completed some updates to my two build slaves.
XP-4 is now running XP Pro SP3 (was SP2) and is using the full version
of VS 2008 (was previous
anatoly techtonik writes:
> Quite an interesting question recently popped up in pygame community
> that I'd like to ask to Python developers.
This forum is specifically about development *of* Python.
You would do better to ask on the discussion forum for Python users
http://www.python.org/commu
Hello,
Quite an interesting question recently popped up in pygame community
that I'd like to ask to Python developers.
How many of you use IDLE?
What's wrong with it?
>From my side I like the idea of having default Python editor that is
small, fast, convenient and extensible/embeddable. IDLE is
On Fri, Nov 6, 2009 at 12:27 AM, Mark Dickinson wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 6, 2009 at 3:53 AM, R. David Murray wrote:
>
>> (2) issue 4970: consistent signal 32 error on the norwitz-x86 Gentoo
>> buildslave in 3.1 and 3.x. This may be due to the box
>> running an old threading library,
Antoine Pitrou wrote:
Stefan Krah bytereef.org> writes:
Are there cases where == and != are actually needed to give a result
for NaNs?
It is a common expectation that == and != always succeed. They return True or
False, but don't raise an exception even on unrelated operands:
It is a common
On Sun, Nov 8, 2009 at 9:41 PM, Guido van Rossum wrote:
> On Sun, Nov 8, 2009 at 5:45 PM, geremy condra wrote:
>> I quote:
>>
>> "This PEP proposes a temporary moratorium (suspension) of all changes
>> to the Python language syntax, semantics, and built-ins for a period
>> of *at least two years*
Guido van Rossum wrote:
> On Sun, Nov 8, 2009 at 3:06 PM, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
>> No new language features in odd-numbered point releases (3.3, 3.5, ...).
>> Even-numbered point releases (3.4, 3.6, ...) may include new language
>> features provided they meet the usual standards for new features.
Guido> But if you're happy with only supporting 2.6, you can use b"..." and
Guido> the right thing will happen.
SpamBayes still supports 2.4...
Thanks for the feedback. I'll update the source manually, then run 2to3.
S
___
Python-Dev mailing
On Sun, Nov 8, 2009 at 5:48 PM, Benjamin Peterson wrote:
> 2009/11/8 :
>>
>> SpamBayes has several files which contain raw 8-bit data embedded in
>> string literals. Before I do manual work to make them parseable by 2to3
>> I thought I would ask if there was either a fixer available which I'm
>>
On Sun, Nov 8, 2009 at 5:45 PM, geremy condra wrote:
> I quote:
>
> "This PEP proposes a temporary moratorium (suspension) of all changes
> to the Python language syntax, semantics, and built-ins for a period
> of *at least two years* from the release of Python 3.1."
>
> Emphasis mine.
I since ad
On Sun, Nov 8, 2009 at 3:06 PM, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
> No new language features in odd-numbered point releases (3.3, 3.5, ...).
> Even-numbered point releases (3.4, 3.6, ...) may include new language
> features provided they meet the usual standards for new features.
Oh no, not the eve/odd numb
2009/11/8 :
>
> SpamBayes has several files which contain raw 8-bit data embedded in
> string literals. Before I do manual work to make them parseable by 2to3
> I thought I would ask if there was either a fixer available which I'm
> not getting by default or if there is an opportunity to add a ne
On Sun, Nov 8, 2009 at 8:22 PM, Jesse Noller wrote:
>
>
> On Nov 8, 2009, at 7:01 PM, geremy condra wrote:
>
>> On Sun, Nov 8, 2009 at 6:06 PM, Steven D'Aprano
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> On Sun, 8 Nov 2009 11:14:59 am Steven D'Aprano wrote:
At the very least, I believe, any moratorium should ha
SpamBayes has several files which contain raw 8-bit data embedded in
string literals. Before I do manual work to make them parseable by 2to3
I thought I would ask if there was either a fixer available which I'm
not getting by default or if there is an opportunity to add a new fixer
to 2to3.
The
On Nov 8, 2009, at 7:01 PM, geremy condra wrote:
On Sun, Nov 8, 2009 at 6:06 PM, Steven D'Aprano
wrote:
On Sun, 8 Nov 2009 11:14:59 am Steven D'Aprano wrote:
At the very least, I believe, any moratorium should have a clear end
date. A clear end date will be a powerful counter to the impre
On Sun, Nov 8, 2009 at 6:06 PM, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
> On Sun, 8 Nov 2009 11:14:59 am Steven D'Aprano wrote:
>> At the very least, I believe, any moratorium should have a clear end
>> date. A clear end date will be a powerful counter to the impression
>> that Python the language is moribund. It
On Sun, 8 Nov 2009 11:14:59 am Steven D'Aprano wrote:
> At the very least, I believe, any moratorium should have a clear end
> date. A clear end date will be a powerful counter to the impression
> that Python the language is moribund. It says, this is an exceptional
> pause, not a permanent halt.
Greg Ewing canterbury.ac.nz> writes:
>
> If anonymous code blocks still get discussed even when
> they have no chance of being accepted, this suggests that
> a moratorium is *not* going to stop discussion of new
> features.
Well, if they get discussed, it's probably that some people can't help
p
Gregory P. Smith schrieb:
> On Thu, Nov 5, 2009 at 4:13 PM, Yuvgoog Greenle wrote:
>> On Fri, Nov 6, 2009 at 1:55 AM, Bobby R. Ward wrote:
>>>
>>> A switch to ENABLE those warnings?
>>>
>>
>> I think a few people I know would still be raising strings like exceptions
>> if not for the deprecation
John Arbash Meinel wrote:
He wanted to introduce a moratorium at least partially because he was
tired of endless threads about anonymous code blocks, etc. Which aren't
going to be included in the language anyway, so he may as well make a
point to say "and neither will anything else for a while".
Guido van Rossum schrieb:
> On Fri, Nov 6, 2009 at 2:36 PM, wrote:
>> Also, for Python 2.5 and earlier, any SSL-based code is vulnerable to a MitM
>> anyway, so this can only be an issue for code using the new APIs in Python
>> 2.6.
>
> That's not going to stop the
> wannabe-self-proclaimed-so-c
On Thu, Nov 5, 2009 at 4:13 PM, Yuvgoog Greenle wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 6, 2009 at 1:55 AM, Bobby R. Ward wrote:
>>
>> A switch to ENABLE those warnings?
>>
>
> I think a few people I know would still be raising strings like exceptions
> if not for the deprecation warnings. Most people won't turn on
On Sun, 8 Nov 2009 at 19:44, "Martin v. L?wis" wrote:
JFTR, I didn't set up the IRC bot (I assume that credit goes to Martin,
even if it's only one line in the buildbot config :). I just tried to
get it to say something :)
Yes, it was always "on". I don't use IRC regularly, so I don't know
whe
John Arbash Meinel wrote:
He wanted to introduce a moratorium at least partially because he was
tired of endless threads about anonymous code blocks, etc. Which aren't
going to be included in the language anyway, so he may as well make a
point to say "and neither will anything else for a while".
Stefan Krah bytereef.org> writes:
>
> Are there cases where == and != are actually needed to give a result
> for NaNs?
It is a common expectation that == and != always succeed. They return True or
False, but don't raise an exception even on unrelated operands:
>>> b"a" == "a"
False
>>> "5" == 5
>> Also, for Python 2.5 and earlier, any SSL-based code is vulnerable to a MitM
>> anyway, so this can only be an issue for code using the new APIs in Python
>> 2.6.
>
> That's not going to stop the
> wannabe-self-proclaimed-so-called-vulnerability-"experts" from whining
> about Python not releasi
[Stefan Krah]
in a (misguided) bugreport (http://bugs.python.org/issue7279) I was
questioning the reasons for allowing NaN comparisons with == and !=
rather than raising InvalidOperation.
Do you have any actual use case issues or are these theoretical musings?
I ask only because a good use cas
> JFTR, I didn't set up the IRC bot (I assume that credit goes to Martin,
> even if it's only one line in the buildbot config :). I just tried to
> get it to say something :)
Yes, it was always "on". I don't use IRC regularly, so I don't know
whether it's useful.
Regards,
Martin
Hi,
in a (misguided) bugreport (http://bugs.python.org/issue7279) I was
questioning the reasons for allowing NaN comparisons with == and !=
rather than raising InvalidOperation.
I think two main issues emerge from the brief discussion:
1. Should the comparison operators follow the 'compare' fun
Baptiste Lepilleur gmail.com> writes:
>
> I've tried, but there is no change in result (the regexp does not use \w &
> co but specify a lot unicode ranges). All strings are already of unicode
> type in 2.6.
No they aren't. You should add "from __future__ import unicode_literals" at the
start of
2009/11/7 Antoine Pitrou
>
> Hello again,
>
> > It shows that, on my platform for this specific benchmark:
> > * newgil manage to leverage a significant amount of parallelism
> > (1.7) where python 3.1 does not (3.1 is 80% slower)
>
> I think you are mistaken:
>
> -j0 (main thread
33 matches
Mail list logo
