On Sat, Jun 19, 2010 at 9:12 PM, Raymond Hettinger
wrote:
>
> On Jun 19, 2010, at 5:39 PM, geremy condra wrote:
>> Bottom line, what I'd really like to do is kick them all off of #python,
>
> This is so profoundly wrong on so many levels it is hard to know how to
> respond.
Alright, so, yeah- I
On Sun, Jun 20, 2010 at 11:19 AM, Jacob Kaplan-Moss wrote:
> Let's all try to simmer down here a little bit and cut each other some
> slack: this is a frustration situation, and we're not going to help it
> by heaping more fuel on the fire.
The other thing to keep in mind is that there was a time
On Sun, Jun 20, 2010 at 5:55 AM, Simon de Vlieger wrote:
> As for the potentially harmful text on Python 3 which is included on the
> python-commandments website I do get the hint that it might not be clear
> enough that the text does not apply to people who are porting libraries.
> This is a comp
On 6/19/2010 8:56 PM, Glyph Lefkowitz wrote:
> On Jun 19, 2010, at 5:39 PM, geremy condra wrote:
>
>> Bottom line, what I'd really like to do is kick them all off of
>> #python, but
>> practically I see very little that can be done to rectify the
>> situation at this
>> point.
Given the experienc
On Sat, Jun 19, 2010 at 3:31 PM, Alexander Belopolsky
wrote:
> On Jun 19, 2010, at 6:12 PM, Guido van Rossum wrote:
>> But what if they are used intentionally as "impossible" or sentinel
>> values?
> That would be another reason not to produce them accidently. Note that I am
> proposing disallo
On Sun, 20 Jun 2010 12:13:34 am Tres Seaver wrote:
> > I guess tutorial welcome, rather than patch welcome then ;)
>
> The only folks who can write the tutorial are the ones who have
> already drunk the koolaid. Note that I've been making my living with
> Python for about twelve years now, and wo
On Sat, 19 Jun 2010 11:55:29 pm Stephen J. Turnbull wrote:
> If you want to do Python 3 a favor,
> make sure that they understand that Python 3 is *not* an "upgrade" of
> Python 2.
[...]
> Python 3 is a Python-2-like language, but even though it's built on
> the same design principles, and uses ne
On Sat, Jun 19, 2010 at 6:12 PM, Raymond Hettinger
wrote:
> This is so profoundly wrong on so many levels it is hard to know how to
> respond.
C'mon, Raymond, that's not any more helpful.
Geremy wasn't trying to argue for that course of action; he was
expression his frustration with the culture
On Jun 19, 2010, at 5:39 PM, geremy condra wrote:
> Bottom line, what I'd really like to do is kick them all off of #python,
This is so profoundly wrong on so many levels it is hard to know how to respond.
Raymond
___
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-De
On Jun 19, 2010, at 5:39 PM, geremy condra wrote:
> Bottom line, what I'd really like to do is kick them all off of #python, but
> practically I see very little that can be done to rectify the situation at
> this
> point.
Here's something you can do: port libraries to python 3 and make the ecosy
On Sat, Jun 19, 2010 at 5:02 PM, Terry Reedy wrote:
> After reading the discussion in the previous thread, signed in to #python
> and verified that the intro message starts with a lie about python3. I also
> verified that the official #python site links to "Python Commandment Don't
> use Python 3…
On Jun 19, 2010, at 5:02 PM, Terry Reedy wrote:
> HoweverI have very little experience with IRC and consequently have little
> idea what getting a permanent, owned, channel like #python entails. Hence the
> '?' that follows.
>
> What do others think?
Sure, this is a good idea.
Technically spe
After reading the discussion in the previous thread, signed in to
#python and verified that the intro message starts with a lie about
python3. I also verified that the official #python site links to "Python
Commandment Don't use Python 3… yet". The excuse that the negative
commandment site is n
On Jun 19, 2010, at 6:12 PM, Guido van Rossum wrote:
But what if they are used intentionally as "impossible" or sentinel
values?
That would be another reason not to produce them accidently. Note
that I am proposing disallowing production of out of range years from
valid datetime o
On Jun 18, 2010, at 7:39 PM, Terry Reedy wrote:
> On 6/18/2010 6:51 PM, Raymond Hettinger wrote:
>> There has been a disappointing
>> lack of bug reports across the board for 3.x.
>
> Here is one from this week involving the interaction of array and bytearray.
> It needs a comment from someone
But what if they are used intentionally as "impossible" or sentinel values?
--Guido (on Android)
On Jun 19, 2010 2:37 PM, "Alexander Belopolsky" <
alexander.belopol...@gmail.com> wrote:
> While datetime range is limited to years from 1 through , it is
> possible to produce time tuple with yea
While datetime range is limited to years from 1 through , it is
possible to produce time tuple with year 0 or year 10,000:
>>> t1 = datetime.min.replace(tzinfo=timezone.max)
>>> t2 = datetime.max.replace(tzinfo=timezone.min)
>>> t1.utctimetuple().tm_year
0
>>> t2.utctimetuple().tm_year
1
Simon de Vlieger writes:
> As for the potentially harmful text on Python 3 which is included on
> the python-commandments website I do get the hint that it might not be
> clear enough that the text does not apply to people who are porting
> libraries.
It also doesn't apply to people wh
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Dear all,
Sorry for the maybe somewhat late response but I am not a subscriber
on the python-dev mailinglists. Someone else pointed me towards this
thread and I want to shortly clarify a few things regarding the
following two statements:
It is n
On Sat, Jun 19, 2010 at 8:14 AM, Arc Riley wrote:
> python-commandments.org is owned and hosted by the same person (Allen Short
> aka dash aka washort) as pound-python.org which is the "official" website
> for #Python and which links to it.
>
> #Python is co-managed by Stephen Thorne (aka Jerub) a
On 19/06/2010 14:43, Georg Brandl wrote:
Am 19.06.2010 15:09, schrieb Arc Riley:
Just because legacy Python needs to be kept around for a bit longer for
a few uses does not mean that "Python 3 is not ready yet". Any decent
package system can have two or more versions of Python installed at the
At 10:55 PM 6/19/2010 +0900, Stephen J. Turnbull wrote:
They really don't care that writing Python 3 was fun, and that
programming in Python 3 is more fun than ever. That doesn't
compensate for even one lingering str/bytes bogosity to most of
them, and since they don't get paid for fixing Pyth
On Sat, 19 Jun 2010 11:14:51 -0400
Arc Riley wrote:
> python-commandments.org is owned and hosted by the same person (Allen Short
> aka dash aka washort) as pound-python.org which is the "official" website
> for #Python and which links to it.
>
> #Python is co-managed by Stephen Thorne (aka Jerub
python-commandments.org is owned and hosted by the same person (Allen Short
aka dash aka washort) as pound-python.org which is the "official" website
for #Python and which links to it.
#Python is co-managed by Stephen Thorne (aka Jerub) and Allen Short (aka
dash aka washort). According to Freenod
On Sat, Jun 19, 2010 at 10:59 AM, Jesse Noller wrote:
>
>
> On Jun 19, 2010, at 10:13 AM, Tres Seaver wrote:
>
>> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
>> Hash: SHA1
>>
>> Jesse Noller wrote:
>>>
>>> On Fri, Jun 18, 2010 at 4:48 PM, P.J. Eby wrote:
At 05:22 PM 6/18/2010 +, l...@rmi.ne
On Jun 19, 2010, at 10:13 AM, Tres Seaver wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Jesse Noller wrote:
On Fri, Jun 18, 2010 at 4:48 PM, P.J. Eby
wrote:
At 05:22 PM 6/18/2010 +, l...@rmi.net wrote:
So here it is: The prevailing view is that 3.X developers hoisted
things
On 01:09 pm, arcri...@gmail.com wrote:
[snip]
It is not "critical self-evaluation" to repeat "Python 3 is not ready"
as
litany in #Python and your supporting website. I use the word "litany"
here
because #Python refers users to what appears to be a religious website
http://python-commandments
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Jesse Noller wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 18, 2010 at 4:48 PM, P.J. Eby wrote:
>> At 05:22 PM 6/18/2010 +, l...@rmi.net wrote:
>>> So here it is: The prevailing view is that 3.X developers hoisted things
>>> on users that they did not fully work through t
l...@rmi.net writes:
> I agree that 3.X isn't all bad, and I very much hope it succeeds. And
> no, I have no answers; I'm just reporting the perception from downwind.
The fact is, though, that many of your "downwind" readers are not the
audience for Python 3, not yet. If you want to do Pytho
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Michael Foord wrote:
> I didn't make myself clear. The expected disappointment I was referring
> to was about the rate of adoption, not about the quality of the product.
>
> I'm still baffled as to how a bug in the cgi module (along with the
> ackn
Am 19.06.2010 15:09, schrieb Arc Riley:
> Just because legacy Python needs to be kept around for a bit longer for
> a few uses does not mean that "Python 3 is not ready yet". Any decent
> package system can have two or more versions of Python installed at the
> same time.
>
> It is not "critical
Am 19.06.2010 15:05, schrieb James Mills:
On Sat, Jun 19, 2010 at 10:42 PM, Antoine Pitrou wrote:
I should point out that I am in no way responsible for the migration.
I think Dirkjan and Brett said they would tackle this after the 2.7
release. But they'd better answer by themselves :)
I'm wi
This anti-Py3 rhetoric is damaging to the community and needs to stop.
We're moving forward toward Python 3.2 and beyond, complaining about
it only
saps valuable developer time (including your own) from getting these
libraries you need ported faster.
No, it's not damaging. Critical self-evaluati
Just because legacy Python needs to be kept around for a bit longer for a
few uses does not mean that "Python 3 is not ready yet". Any decent package
system can have two or more versions of Python installed at the same time.
It is not "critical self-evaluation" to repeat "Python 3 is not ready" a
Am 19.06.2010 14:33, schrieb Barry Warsaw:
On Jun 19, 2010, at 05:43 PM, Senthil Kumaran wrote:
On Sat, Jun 19, 2010 at 01:51:04PM +0200, Antoine Pitrou wrote:
FWIW, the EOL extension is now part of Mercurial:
http://mercurial.selenic.com/wiki/EolExtension
Should we all move soon now?
Any ta
On Sat, Jun 19, 2010 at 10:42 PM, Antoine Pitrou wrote:
> I should point out that I am in no way responsible for the migration.
> I think Dirkjan and Brett said they would tackle this after the 2.7
> release. But they'd better answer by themselves :)
I'm willing to help out if needed. Can't hurt
On Sat, 19 Jun 2010 17:43:02 +0530
Senthil Kumaran wrote:
> On Sat, Jun 19, 2010 at 01:51:04PM +0200, Antoine Pitrou wrote:
> > FWIW, the EOL extension is now part of Mercurial:
> > http://mercurial.selenic.com/wiki/EolExtension
>
> Should we all move soon now?
> Any target date you have in mind
On Jun 19, 2010, at 05:43 PM, Senthil Kumaran wrote:
>On Sat, Jun 19, 2010 at 01:51:04PM +0200, Antoine Pitrou wrote:
>> FWIW, the EOL extension is now part of Mercurial:
>> http://mercurial.selenic.com/wiki/EolExtension
>
>Should we all move soon now?
>Any target date you have in mind, Antoine?
On Sat, Jun 19, 2010 at 01:51:04PM +0200, Antoine Pitrou wrote:
> FWIW, the EOL extension is now part of Mercurial:
> http://mercurial.selenic.com/wiki/EolExtension
Should we all move soon now?
Any target date you have in mind, Antoine?
--
Senthil
___
On 10:59 am, arcri...@gmail.com wrote:
You mean Twisted support, because library support is at the point where
there are fewer actively maintained packages not yet ported than those
which
are. Of course if your Python experience is hyper-focused to one
framework
that isn't ported yet, it will
On Sat, 19 Jun 2010 20:34:41 +0900
"Stephen J. Turnbull" wrote:
>
> And even now
> implementation is hanging up on the requirement that it not affect
> Windows-based developers adversely ... and it turns out that even
> being Python-based is nowhere near enough to guarantee that, but
> rather it
anatoly techtonik writes:
> I do not know what are you intending to do, but my opinion that
> fund raising for patching library is a waste of money.
Of course it's not a waste of money. The need is real, so as long as
the PSF and other organizations (GSoC) choose reasonable projects/
people to
On 19/06/2010 11:59, Arc Riley wrote:
You mean Twisted support, because library support is at the point where
there are fewer actively maintained packages not yet ported than those which
are. Of course if your Python experience is hyper-focused to one framework
that isn't ported yet, it will cer
You mean Twisted support, because library support is at the point where
there are fewer actively maintained packages not yet ported than those which
are. Of course if your Python experience is hyper-focused to one framework
that isn't ported yet, it will certainly seem like a lot, and you guys who
Am 18.06.2010 um 22:53 schrieb Terry Reedy :
On 6/18/2010 12:32 PM, Walter Dörwald wrote:
http://coverage.livinglogic.de/
I am a bit puzzled as to the meaning of the gray/red/green bars
since the correlation between coverage % and bars is not very high.
The gray bar is the uncoverable
45 matches
Mail list logo
