Benjamin Peterson wrote:
> 2010/2/12 Nick Coghlan :
>> Of course, PEP 291 could do with a list of 2.5 and 2.6 specific features
>> first...
>
> I think that section is rather pointless to keep updated, since a good
> list can be found in the what's new documents. What people really need
> to do is
> I personally like 2to3 in a separate repo because it fits well with my
> view that 2to3 is an extra application that happens to also be
> distributed with python.
But isn't that just a theoretical property? I know that's how 2to3
started, but who, other than the committers, actually accesses the
>> On Fri, Feb 12, 2010 at 11:17, "Martin v. Löwis" wrote:
>>> IMO, it is realistic to predict that this will not actually happen. If
>>> we can agree to give up the 2to3 sandbox, we should incorporate
>>> find_pattern into the tree, and perhaps test.py as well.
>> I vote on giving up the 2to3 san
On Fri, Feb 12, 2010 at 7:04 PM, Collin Winter wrote:
> Hey Maciej,
>
> On Thu, Feb 11, 2010 at 6:39 AM, Maciej Fijalkowski wrote:
>> Snippet from:
>>
>> http://codereview.appspot.com/186247/diff2/5014:8003/7002
>>
>> *PyPy*: PyPy [#pypy]_ has good performance on numerical code, but is
>> slower
On Feb 11, 2010, at 1:11 PM, Guido van Rossum wrote:
> I have skimmed this thread (hence this reply to the first rather than
> the last message), but in general I am baffled by the hostility of
> testing framework developers towards their users. The arguments
> against class- and module-level seUp
It's about time for another 3.1 bug fix release. I propose this schedule:
March 6: Release Candidate (same day as 2.7a4)
March 20: 3.1.2 Final release
--
Regards,
Benjamin
___
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailm
2010/2/12 Nick Coghlan :
> Benjamin Peterson wrote:
>> 2010/2/12 Nick Coghlan :
>>> Brett Cannon wrote:
On Fri, Feb 12, 2010 at 11:17, "Martin v. Löwis"
wrote:
I vote on giving up the 2to3 sandbox.
>>> One other point - is there a Python 2.6 backwards compatibility
>>> restriction
Benjamin Peterson wrote:
> 2010/2/12 Nick Coghlan :
>> Brett Cannon wrote:
>>> On Fri, Feb 12, 2010 at 11:17, "Martin v. Löwis" wrote:
>>> I vote on giving up the 2to3 sandbox.
>> One other point - is there a Python 2.6 backwards compatibility
>> restriction on 2to3 at the moment? If there isn't,
2010/2/12 Nick Coghlan :
> Brett Cannon wrote:
>> On Fri, Feb 12, 2010 at 11:17, "Martin v. Löwis" wrote:
>> I vote on giving up the 2to3 sandbox.
>
> One other point - is there a Python 2.6 backwards compatibility
> restriction on 2to3 at the moment? If there isn't, should there be?
I try to kee
2010/2/12 Nick Coghlan :
> Brett Cannon wrote:
>> On Fri, Feb 12, 2010 at 11:17, "Martin v. Löwis" wrote:
>>> IMO, it is realistic to predict that this will not actually happen. If
>>> we can agree to give up the 2to3 sandbox, we should incorporate
>>> find_pattern into the tree, and perhaps test.
Brett Cannon wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 12, 2010 at 11:17, "Martin v. Löwis" wrote:
> I vote on giving up the 2to3 sandbox.
One other point - is there a Python 2.6 backwards compatibility
restriction on 2to3 at the moment? If there isn't, should there be?
Cheers,
Nick.
--
Nick Coghlan | ncogh...
Brett Cannon wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 12, 2010 at 11:17, "Martin v. Löwis" wrote:
>> IMO, it is realistic to predict that this will not actually happen. If
>> we can agree to give up the 2to3 sandbox, we should incorporate
>> find_pattern into the tree, and perhaps test.py as well.
>
> I vote on givi
Collin Winter wrote:
> Hey Maciej,
>
> On Thu, Feb 11, 2010 at 6:39 AM, Maciej Fijalkowski wrote:
>> Snippet from:
>>
>> http://codereview.appspot.com/186247/diff2/5014:8003/7002
>>
>> *PyPy*: PyPy [#pypy]_ has good performance on numerical code, but is
>> slower than Unladen Swallow on non-numer
On 12/02/2010 19:48, Guido van Rossum wrote:
[snip...]
Here's a current minimal example of using Test Resources. It could be
simplified further with helper functions and by some of the functionality
moving into unittest itself. OptimisingTestSuite here ensures that the
resource is created before
Hey Maciej,
On Thu, Feb 11, 2010 at 6:39 AM, Maciej Fijalkowski wrote:
> Snippet from:
>
> http://codereview.appspot.com/186247/diff2/5014:8003/7002
>
> *PyPy*: PyPy [#pypy]_ has good performance on numerical code, but is
> slower than Unladen Swallow on non-numerical workloads. PyPy only
> suppo
On 08:27 pm, gu...@python.org wrote:
On Fri, Feb 12, 2010 at 12:20 PM, wrote:
The idea is that you're declaring what the tests need in order to
work.
You're not explicitly defining the order in which things are set up
and torn
down. �That is left up to another part of the library to determin
Michael Foord writes:
> The advantage of setUpClass and setUpModule is that they allow you to
> have shared fixtures shared between tests, essential for certain kinds
> of testing. […]
Yes, this would be very useful for non-unit tests.
> My *hope* is that we provide a general solution, possibly
On Fri, Feb 12, 2010 at 12:20 PM, wrote:
> The idea is that you're declaring what the tests need in order to work.
> You're not explicitly defining the order in which things are set up and torn
> down. That is left up to another part of the library to determine.
>
> One such other part, Optimisi
On 07:48 pm, gu...@python.org wrote:
On Fri, Feb 12, 2010 at 7:49 AM, Michael Foord
wrote:
My *hope* is that we provide a general solution, possibly based on all
or
part of Test Resources, with an easy mechanism for the setUpClass and
setUpModule but also solves the more general case of sharin
On Fri, Feb 12, 2010 at 7:49 AM, Michael Foord
wrote:
> My *hope* is that we provide a general solution, possibly based on all or
> part of Test Resources, with an easy mechanism for the setUpClass and
> setUpModule but also solves the more general case of sharing fixtures
> between tests. If that
On Fri, Feb 12, 2010 at 11:17, "Martin v. Löwis" wrote:
>> Why even keep 2to3 in the sandbox? It should be mature enough now to be
>> maintained directly in the tree.
>
> I think the original plan was to make standalone releases, so that
> people could upgrade their installation from a newer rele
> Why even keep 2to3 in the sandbox? It should be mature enough now to be
> maintained directly in the tree.
I think the original plan was to make standalone releases, so that
people could upgrade their installation from a newer release of 2to3.
IMO, it is realistic to predict that this will not
ACTIVITY SUMMARY (02/05/10 - 02/12/10)
Python tracker at http://bugs.python.org/
To view or respond to any of the issues listed below, click on the issue
number. Do NOT respond to this message.
2602 open (+33) / 17137 closed (+25) / 19739 total (+58)
Open issues with patches: 1069
Average
On 11/02/2010 18:11, Guido van Rossum wrote:
On Tue, Feb 9, 2010 at 8:42 AM, Michael Foord wrote:
The next 'big' change to unittest will (may?) be the introduction of class
and module level setUp and tearDown. This was discussed on Python-ideas and
Guido supported them. They can be useful b
On Tue, Feb 9, 2010 at 2:04 PM, Michael Foord wrote:
> On 09/02/2010 19:00, Olemis Lang wrote:
>>
>> Sorry. I had not finished the previous message
>>
>> On Tue, Feb 9, 2010 at 1:55 PM, Olemis Lang wrote:
>>> On Tue, Feb 9, 2010 at 1:29 PM, Olemis Lang wrote:
On Tue, Feb 9, 2010 at 11:42 AM
Holger Krekel wrote:
> In my experience, integration and
> functional testing is a complex and evolving topic, usually requiring
> more from the tool or framework than classic unit-testing.
Assignment for the reader: compare and contrast unittest and
test.regrtest (including test.support and frie
R. David Murray wrote:
> would be easier to write, be more maintainable, and be easier to
> understand when reading the code than the equivalent setUp and tearDown
> methods would be.
>
> I'm not saying it would be easy to implement, and as you say backward
> compatibility is a key concern.
That'
On Fri, Feb 12, 2010 at 09:39, Georg Brandl wrote:
> No, it does not. This is also a concern for the Python 2 -> Python 3 merging,
> where (I think) we decided not to have shared history. Transplant already
I don't think this is similar to 2 vs. 3, because 2 vs. 3 are full
branching (so you cou
Am 09.02.2010 04:39, schrieb "Martin v. Löwis":
> Benjamin Peterson wrote:
>> 2010/2/8 Dirkjan Ochtman :
>>> On Sun, Feb 7, 2010 at 22:51, Benjamin Peterson wrote:
Will you do test conversions of the sandbox projects, too?
>>> Got any particular projects in mind?
>>
>> 2to3.
>
> Does Mercur
Am 09.02.2010 04:47, schrieb Benjamin Peterson:
> 2010/2/8 "Martin v. Löwis" :
>> Benjamin Peterson wrote:
>>> 2010/2/8 Dirkjan Ochtman :
On Sun, Feb 7, 2010 at 22:51, Benjamin Peterson
wrote:
> Will you do test conversions of the sandbox projects, too?
Got any particular proje
30 matches
Mail list logo
