On Sat, 26 Jun 2010 23:49:11 -0400
P.J. Eby p...@telecommunity.com wrote:
Remember, bytes and strings already have to detect mixed-type
operations.
Not in Python 3. They just raise a TypeError on bad
(mixed-type) arguments.
Regards
Antoine.
___
Stefan Behnel wrote:
Greg Ewing, 26.06.2010 09:58:
Would there be any sanity in having an option to compile
Python with UTF-8 as the internal string representation?
It would break Py_UNICODE, because the internal size of a unicode
character would no longer be fixed.
It's not fixed anyway
Am 26.06.2010 00:38, schrieb Steve Holden:
I was pretty stunned when I tried this. Remember that the Tools
subdirectory is distributed with Windows, so this means we got through
almost two releases without anyone realizing that 2to3 does not appear
to have touched this code.
Yes, I have:
Am 22.06.2010 01:01, schrieb Terry Reedy:
On 6/21/2010 3:59 PM, Steve Holden wrote:
Terry Reedy wrote:
On 6/21/2010 8:33 AM, Nick Coghlan wrote:
P.S. (We're going to have a tough decision to make somewhere along the
line where docs.python.org is concerned, too - when do we flick the
switch
On Sun, Jun 27, 2010 at 10:41 AM, Georg Brandl g.bra...@gmx.net wrote:
So -- if every dev adopted a Tool or Demo, that would be quite a
manageable piece of work, and maybe a few demos can be brought up
to scratch instead of be deleted.
I'll go ahead and promise to care for the Demo/classes
On 6/27/2010 5:48 AM, Greg Ewing wrote:
Stefan Behnel wrote:
Greg Ewing, 26.06.2010 09:58:
Would there be any sanity in having an option to compile
Python with UTF-8 as the internal string representation?
It would break Py_UNICODE, because the internal size of a unicode
character would no
P.J. Eby writes:
At 12:42 PM 6/26/2010 +0900, Stephen J. Turnbull wrote:
What I'm saying here is that if bytes are the signal of validity, and
the stdlib functions preserve validity, then it's better to have the
stdlib functions object to unicode data as an argument. Compare the
On Sun, Jun 27, 2010 at 5:57 AM, Mark Dickinson dicki...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sun, Jun 27, 2010 at 10:41 AM, Georg Brandl g.bra...@gmx.net wrote:
So -- if every dev adopted a Tool or Demo, that would be quite a
manageable piece of work, and maybe a few demos can be brought up
to scratch instead
Alexander Belopolsky wrote:
On Sun, Jun 27, 2010 at 5:57 AM, Mark Dickinson dicki...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sun, Jun 27, 2010 at 10:41 AM, Georg Brandl g.bra...@gmx.net wrote:
So -- if every dev adopted a Tool or Demo, that would be quite a
manageable piece of work, and maybe a few demos can be
At 03:53 PM 6/27/2010 +1000, Nick Coghlan wrote:
We could talk about this even longer, but the most effective way
forward is going to be a patch that improves the URL parsing
situation.
Certainly, it's the only practical solution for the immediate problems in 3.2.
I only mentioned that I hate
On Sun, 27 Jun 2010 10:47:08 -0400
Alexander Belopolsky alexander.belopol...@gmail.com wrote:
I have a patch for pybench attached to a not so related issue at
http://bugs.python.org/issue5180 . All it took was a 2to3 run and a
one line change. Of course it need a review before it can go in,
On 6/27/2010 5:44 AM, Georg Brandl wrote:
Am 22.06.2010 01:01, schrieb Terry Reedy:
On 6/21/2010 3:59 PM, Steve Holden wrote:
Terry Reedy wrote:
On 6/21/2010 8:33 AM, Nick Coghlan wrote:
P.S. (We're going to have a tough decision to make somewhere along the
line where docs.python.org is
Am 21.06.2010 17:13, schrieb Stephan Richter:
On Monday, June 21, 2010, Nick Coghlan wrote:
A decent listing of major packages that already support Python 3 would
be very handy for the new Python2orPython3 page I created on the wiki,
and easier to keep up-to-date. (the old Early2to3Migrations
Brett Cannon wrote:
On Sat, Jun 26, 2010 at 16:37, M.-A. Lemburgm...@egenix.com wrote:
Brett Cannon wrote:
On Wed, Jun 23, 2010 at 14:53, Brett Cannonbr...@python.org wrote:
[SKIP]
Since no one objected I swapped the order in r82259. In case anyone
else uses clang to compile Python, this
On Sun, Jun 27, 2010 at 12:37 AM, M.-A. Lemburg m...@egenix.com wrote:
Brett Cannon wrote:
On Wed, Jun 23, 2010 at 14:53, Brett Cannon br...@python.org wrote:
I finally realized why clang has not been silencing its warnings about
unused return values: I have -Wno-unused-value set in CFLAGS
On Sun, Jun 27, 2010 at 6:46 AM, Jeffrey Yasskin jyass...@gmail.com wrote:
AC_PROG_CC is the macro that sets CFLAGS to -g -O2 on gcc-based
systems
(http://www.gnu.org/software/hello/manual/autoconf/C-Compiler.html#index-AC_005fPROG_005fCC-842).
If Python's configure.in sets an otherwise-empty
Sure. Since I expect that the argument for treating 3.2 as a regular
production-use-ready release will be stronger then than now, I agree on
differing discussion.
I meant 'deferring'
--
Terry Jan Reedy
___
Python-Dev mailing list
On Sun, Jun 27, 2010 at 1:04 PM, Mark Dickinson dicki...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sun, Jun 27, 2010 at 6:46 AM, Jeffrey Yasskin jyass...@gmail.com wrote:
AC_PROG_CC is the macro that sets CFLAGS to -g -O2 on gcc-based
systems
On Sun, Jun 27, 2010 at 13:37, Jeffrey Yasskin jyass...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sun, Jun 27, 2010 at 1:04 PM, Mark Dickinson dicki...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sun, Jun 27, 2010 at 6:46 AM, Jeffrey Yasskin jyass...@gmail.com wrote:
AC_PROG_CC is the macro that sets CFLAGS to -g -O2 on gcc-based
systems
On Sun, Jun 27, 2010 at 9:37 PM, Jeffrey Yasskin jyass...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sun, Jun 27, 2010 at 1:04 PM, Mark Dickinson dicki...@gmail.com wrote:
I think saving and restoring CFLAGS across AC_PROG_CC was attempted in
http://bugs.python.org/issue8211 . It turned out that it broke OS X
Eric Smith wrote:
But isn't this currently ignored everywhere in python's code?
It's true that code using a utf-8 build would have to be
aware of the fact much more often. But I'm thinking of
applications that would otherwise want to keep all their
strings encoded to save memory. If they do
I've been watching this discussion with intense interest, but have
been so lagged in following the thread that I haven't replied.
I got caught up today
On Sun, 27 Jun 2010 15:53:59 +1000, Nick Coghlan ncogh...@gmail.com wrote:
The difference is that we have three classes of algorithm here:
On Fri, 25 Jun 2010 15:40:52 -0700, Bill Janssen jans...@parc.com wrote:
Guido van Rossum gu...@python.org wrote:
So you're really just worried about space consumption. I'd like to see
a lot of hard memory profiling data before I got overly worried about
that.
While I've seen some big
On Fri, 18 Jun 2010 18:52:45 -, l...@rmi.net wrote:
What I'm suggesting is that extreme caution be exercised from
this point forward with all things 3.X-related. Whether you
wish to accept this or not, 3.X has a negative image to many.
This suggestion specifically includes not abandoning
fyi - newthreading has been picked up by lwn.
http://lwn.net/Articles/393822/#Comments
___
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe:
25 matches
Mail list logo
