2010/1/13 :
>
> Just out of curiosity, is the static build stuff (use the old Modules/Setup
> file to build modules) exercised at all any more?
Exercised as in used in the build process? Yes.
--
Regards,
Benjamin
___
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-De
Just out of curiosity, is the static build stuff (use the old Modules/Setup
file to build modules) exercised at all any more?
Skip
___
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe:
http:/
On 13/01/2010 19:13, "Martin v. Löwis" wrote:
* Python 2.6.4 Windows X86-64 installer (Windows AMD64 / Intel 64 /
X86-64 binary -- does not include source)
instead of:
* Python 2.6.4 Windows AMD64 installer (Windows AMD64 binary -- does
not include source)
-1. AMD doesn't want
Lennart> What do you need to do in the PYTHONSTARTUP file?
Just reading off stuff from my own personal startup file... I use it for
stuff I want available during interactive sessions:
1. Enable true division.
2. Conditionally define "help" from back in the days when there was no
On 13 Jan 2010, at 13:43, Nick Coghlan wrote:
> Guido van Rossum wrote:
>> On Wed, Jan 13, 2010 at 9:57 AM, sstein...@gmail.com > Or, how about
>> just removing the antiquated use of environment variables altogether
>> from Python 3 and avoid the issue completely.
>>
>> -1. They have their use, bu
On Wed, Jan 13, 2010 at 1:43 PM, Nick Coghlan wrote:
> Guido van Rossum wrote:
>> On Wed, Jan 13, 2010 at 9:57 AM, sstein...@gmail.com > Or, how about
>> just removing the antiquated use of environment variables altogether
>> from Python 3 and avoid the issue completely.
>>
>> -1. They have their
Guido van Rossum wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 13, 2010 at 9:57 AM, sstein...@gmail.com > Or, how about
> just removing the antiquated use of environment variables altogether
> from Python 3 and avoid the issue completely.
>
> -1. They have their use, but more in controlled situations. If you
> have "globa
Lennart Regebro wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 13, 2010 at 18:40, Ralf Schmitt wrote:
>> The first thing I got while trying to run a python3 prompt few days ago,
>> was an error. python3 tried to read my $PYTHONSTARTUP file, which used
>> print statements. people will have to run both python 2 and python 3
Lennart Regebro writes:
> On Wed, Jan 13, 2010 at 18:40, Ralf Schmitt wrote:
>> The first thing I got while trying to run a python3 prompt few days ago,
>> was an error. python3 tried to read my $PYTHONSTARTUP file, which used
>> print statements. people will have to run both python 2 and python
On Wed, Jan 13, 2010 at 21:08, Oleg Broytman wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 13, 2010 at 08:50:59PM +0100, Lennart Regebro wrote:
>> What do you need to do in the PYTHONSTARTUP file?
>> Ten years of Python programming, and I didn't even know it existed. :-)
>
> See http://phd.pp.ru/Software/dotfiles/init.p
On Wed, Jan 13, 2010 at 13:45, "Martin v. Löwis" wrote:
>> So to echo what Michael said, the Microsoft nomenclature is "x64"
>> regardless of yours and Martin's objections to that name. Nobody who
>> uses Windows would be confused by "x64" since that is *the* Microsoft
>> naming scheme.
>
> That's
On Wed, Jan 13, 2010 at 08:50:59PM +0100, Lennart Regebro wrote:
> What do you need to do in the PYTHONSTARTUP file?
> Ten years of Python programming, and I didn't even know it existed. :-)
See http://phd.pp.ru/Software/dotfiles/init.py.html for an example.
Oleg.
--
Oleg Broytman
On Wed, Jan 13, 2010 at 18:40, Ralf Schmitt wrote:
> The first thing I got while trying to run a python3 prompt few days ago,
> was an error. python3 tried to read my $PYTHONSTARTUP file, which used
> print statements. people will have to run both python 2 and python 3
> code at the same time. Usi
> So to echo what Michael said, the Microsoft nomenclature is "x64"
> regardless of yours and Martin's objections to that name. Nobody who
> uses Windows would be confused by "x64" since that is *the* Microsoft
> naming scheme.
That's actually not entirely true. There are several places in the
API
> As Windows doesn't run on non-x86 architectures, their naming is
> generally just Windows (32 bit) and Windows (64 bit).
Windows actually does - it runs on IA-64 (which is a non-x86 architecture).
However, end users are unlikely to use such hardware, so distinguishing
between 32-bit and 64-bi
On 1/13/2010 2:13 PM, "Martin v. Löwis" wrote:
I think we should use whatever is most informative and least confusing
to our users - we owe our allegiance to them and not to a processor vendor.
And why do you think this is x86-64?
I do not believe I have personally seen, or at least noticed,
> Note that increased 3.x compatibility in the most recent 2.x release
> will always help in two scenarios:
>
> 1. New projects that want to use 2.x only libraries but want to be ready
> for the Py3k transition in their own code (e.g. new 2.7 features like
> set literals, dict and set comprehensio
>>> * Python 2.6.4 Windows X86-64 installer (Windows AMD64 / Intel 64 /
>>> X86-64 binary -- does not include source)
>>>
>>> instead of:
>>>
>>> * Python 2.6.4 Windows AMD64 installer (Windows AMD64 binary -- does
>>> not include source)
>>>
>> -1. AMD doesn't want us to use the term x86
Please mail me topics you'd like to hear me talk about in my keynote
at PyCon this year.
--
--Guido van Rossum (python.org/~guido)
___
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe:
http://
On Wed, Jan 13, 2010 at 12:57:42PM -0500, sstein...@gmail.com wrote:
> Or, how about just removing the antiquated use of environment variables
"antiquated"? You are kidding, aren't you?!
Oleg.
--
Oleg Broytmanhttp://phd.pp.ru/p...@phd.pp.ru
Programmers
On Wed, Jan 13, 2010 at 4:24 AM, Vinay Sajip wrote:
> Brett Cannon python.org> writes:
>
>> If there is something missing from the stdlib discussion that you think
>> should
> be brought up at the summit let me know. And if there is something here you
> want
> to discuss before the summit let m
On 1/13/2010 9:04 AM, Nick Coghlan wrote:
> As Windows doesn't run on non-x86 architectures, their naming is
> generally just Windows (32 bit) and Windows (64 bit).
That is not correct. There are IA-64 versions of Window Server.
>From [1]:
"Backward compatibility is a key point differentiating
On Wed, Jan 13, 2010 at 9:57 AM, sstein...@gmail.com > Or, how about
just removing the antiquated use of environment variables altogether
from Python 3 and avoid the issue completely.
-1. They have their use, but more in controlled situations. If you
have "global" env vars that you only want to us
Steven Bethard writes:
>
> How complicated is your PYTHONSTARTUP file? My suspicion is that you
> could easily write it to work for both Python 2.X and 3.X.
sure. that's exactly what I did. My point is that sharing those
environment variables will cause pain for some people.
Memories of days past... Python had several regular expression
implementations before, one of which was called "regex".
But I would rather not have a new module -- I would much rather have a
flag specifying the new (backwards incompatible) syntax/semantics. The
flag would have a long name (e.g. re
On Jan 13, 2010, at 12:40 PM, Ralf Schmitt wrote:
> "R. David Murray" writes:
>
>> Please review issue 2375 [1], which is an enhancement request to add a
>> PYTHON3PATH environment variable. Because we have elected to have both
>> a python and a python3 command, I think this is an issue worth
On Wed, Jan 13, 2010 at 9:40 AM, Ralf Schmitt wrote:
> "R. David Murray" writes:
>
>> Please review issue 2375 [1], which is an enhancement request to add a
>> PYTHON3PATH environment variable. Because we have elected to have both
>> a python and a python3 command, I think this is an issue worth
Guido van Rossum writes:
> Somehow the bug site doesn't load for me right now, but I'm -1 on
> this. There are maybe a dozen PYTHON... variables -- we really
> shouldn't try to add PYTHON3 variants for all of them.
>
> Specifically for PYTHONPATH, I feel that its use is always a
> short-time or l
"R. David Murray" writes:
> Please review issue 2375 [1], which is an enhancement request to add a
> PYTHON3PATH environment variable. Because we have elected to have both
> a python and a python3 command, I think this is an issue worth thinking
> about carefully to make sure we are serving the
On Sat, Jan 9, 2010 at 18:29, Benjamin Peterson wrote:
> Please consider trying Python 2.7 with your code and reporting any bugs you
> may
I ran the Mercurial test suite on current trunk, and it worked
alright. There was a small issue with the fact that mimetypes got
fooled by the lack of Import
Somehow the bug site doesn't load for me right now, but I'm -1 on
this. There are maybe a dozen PYTHON... variables -- we really
shouldn't try to add PYTHON3 variants for all of them.
Specifically for PYTHONPATH, I feel that its use is always a
short-time or localized hack, not something you set i
Please review issue 2375 [1], which is an enhancement request to add a
PYTHON3PATH environment variable. Because we have elected to have both
a python and a python3 command, I think this is an issue worth thinking
about carefully to make sure we are serving the Python user community
and easing the
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Nick Coghlan wrote:
> Tres Seaver wrote:
>> There is an obnoxious deprecation warning out of the distutils:
>>
>> DeprecationWarning: 'compiler' specifies the compiler type in
>> build_ext. If you want to get the compiler object itself, use
>> 'c
Michael Urman wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 13, 2010 at 00:11, "Martin v. Löwis" wrote:
>> -1. AMD doesn't want us to use the term x86-64 anymore, but wants us
>> to use AMD64 instead. I think we should comply - they invented the
>> architecture, so they have the right to give it a name. Neither
>> Microso
On Wed, Jan 13, 2010 at 00:11, "Martin v. Löwis" wrote:
> -1. AMD doesn't want us to use the term x86-64 anymore, but wants us
> to use AMD64 instead. I think we should comply - they invented the
> architecture, so they have the right to give it a name. Neither
> Microsoft nor Intel have such a ri
Brett Cannon python.org> writes:
> If there is something missing from the stdlib discussion that you think should
be brought up at the summit let me know. And if there is something here you want
to discuss before the summit let me know and I can start a separate thread on
it.
I'm sorry I won't
Tres Seaver wrote:
> There is an obnoxious deprecation warning out of the distutils:
>
> DeprecationWarning: 'compiler' specifies the compiler type in
> build_ext. If you want to get the compiler object itself, use
> 'compiler_obj'
>
> which is likely a simple one-line fix, if I only knew w
Antoine Pitrou wrote:
> Christian Heimes cheimes.de> writes:
>> How about:
>>
>> * Python 2.6.4 Windows X86-64 installer (Windows AMD64 / Intel 64 /
>> X86-64 binary -- does not include source)
>
> +1. I don't care about trademarks or official names, we should call it
> whatever
> is obvious fo
Michael Foord wrote:
> I agree with Martin that the *perception* is that to use Python 2.6 to
> help you port to Python 3 you have to be willing to drop support for
> earlier versions of Python.
Note that increased 3.x compatibility in the most recent 2.x release
will always help in two scenarios:
On 13/01/2010 06:11, "Martin v. Löwis" wrote:
How about:
* Python 2.6.4 Windows X86-64 installer (Windows AMD64 / Intel 64 /
X86-64 binary -- does not include source)
instead of:
* Python 2.6.4 Windows AMD64 installer (Windows AMD64 binary -- does
not include source)
-1. AMD doesn't
40 matches
Mail list logo
