I see that the documentation for the time module has this to say about
time.clock:
On Unix, return the current processor time as a floating
point number expressed in seconds. The precision, and in fact
the very definition of the meaning of “processor time”,
depends on that of
A change that I made (a49bda5ff3d5) to the documentation 3 days ago does
not appear to have propagated to
http://docs.python.org/dev/library/multiprocessing.html
Building the docs locally shows the change. Am I doing something wrong?
Cheers
Ross
___
On 18.03.2011 07:15, Ross Lagerwall wrote:
A change that I made (a49bda5ff3d5) to the documentation 3 days ago does
not appear to have propagated to
http://docs.python.org/dev/library/multiprocessing.html
Building the docs locally shows the change. Am I doing something wrong?
Nope, that
I get unknown revision (listing the full expression text) when using
Mercurial 1.6.3 (default version in Ubuntu 10.10).
Based on Baptiste's approach, I propose the script below to compute a
patch. Please report whether it works for you.
Regards,
Martin
#!/bin/sh
base=`hg log --template
On Fri, 18 Mar 2011 17:06:50 +1100
Steven D'Aprano st...@pearwood.info wrote:
In contrast, timeit defaults to using time.time() under all operating
systems other than Windows, and says:
...on Windows, clock() has microsecond granularity but
time()'s granularity is 1/60th of a
On Fri, Mar 18, 2011 at 00:23, Terry Reedy tjre...@udel.edu wrote:
People should retest their stuff with each micro
(bugfix) release anyway.
That would be creating an insane burden on library developers.
Besides, I've so far not have things break between micro releases, it
must be very unusual.
On Thu, Mar 17, 2011 at 7:28 PM, Terry Reedy tjre...@udel.edu wrote:
On 3/17/2011 1:45 PM, Benjamin Peterson wrote:
2011/3/16 Thomas Hellerthel...@ctypes.org:
I would like my committer rights to be retracted.
I have been contributing to Python here and there for 10 years now,
and it was a
On Mar 18, 2011, at 9:59 AM, Jesse Noller wrote:
On Thu, Mar 17, 2011 at 7:28 PM, Terry Reedy tjre...@udel.edu wrote:
On 3/17/2011 1:45 PM, Benjamin Peterson wrote:
2011/3/16 Thomas Hellerthel...@ctypes.org:
I would like my committer rights to be retracted.
I have been contributing to
On Thu, Mar 17, 2011 at 7:28 PM, Terry Reedy tjre...@udel.edu wrote:
..
In the meanwhile, it would be nice to have another ctypes maintainer, as
there are several open issues. There is certainly a opening for a new person
with C experience.
I am not ready to volunteer as maintainer, but if
On Fri, 18 Mar 2011 10:18:06 -0400
Alexander Belopolsky alexander.belopol...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Mar 17, 2011 at 7:28 PM, Terry Reedy tjre...@udel.edu wrote:
..
In the meanwhile, it would be nice to have another ctypes maintainer, as
there are several open issues. There is certainly a
Doug Hellmann wrote:
On Mar 18, 2011, at 9:59 AM, Jesse Noller wrote:
Terry Reedy wrote:
there are several open issues. There is certainly a opening for a new
person
with C experience.
about on the PSF blog. Having another ctypes expert is pretty
critical (everyone I know is
On Thu, 17 Mar 2011 20:00:29 +0100, Jesus Cea j...@jcea.es wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 17/03/11 14:45, R. David Murray wrote:
Not if the cpython repo is in a fully merged stated. And if it
isn't, I will wait until it is. (The update notifications on the
IRC
Just now I was trapped by the Importing the main module twice problem
for a while, and then I searched on web and go into here. It seems pretty
good to fix this problem, since it is really difficult to find out this
problem. Anyway, a module should not be initialized twice which results in
ACTIVITY SUMMARY (2011-03-11 - 2011-03-18)
Python tracker at http://bugs.python.org/
To view or respond to any of the issues listed below, click on the issue.
Do NOT respond to this message.
Issues counts and deltas:
open2723 (+14)
closed 20655 (+115)
total 23378 (+129)
Open issues
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 18/03/11 01:01, Larry Hastings wrote:
In 2.7.1 PyCObject_FromVoidPtr() now calls PyErr_WarnPy3k(). This means
it's been promoted to throwing DeprecationWarning! But that's also
guarded with Py_Py3kWarningFlag so it's not active unless you ask
On 3/18/2011 10:48 AM, Senthil Kumaran wrote:
Doug Hellmann wrote:
On Mar 18, 2011, at 9:59 AM, Jesse Noller wrote:
Terry Reedy wrote:
there are several open issues. There is certainly a opening for a new person
with C experience.
about on the PSF blog. Having another ctypes expert is
Some of those who are relative new to regexes sometimes ask how to write
a regex which checks that a number is in a range or is a valid date.
Although this may be possible, it certainly isn't easy.
From what I've read, Perl has a way of including code in a regex, but I
don't think that's a
On 3/18/2011 10:17 AM, Doug Hellmann wrote:
Is there a job description for a ctypes maintainer?
I would say a knowledge of C and C implementations, a tolerance of OS
idiosyncrasies, and an interest bridging C to Python and in particular
the way ctpes does it. (I intentionally omitted
On Fri, Mar 18, 2011 at 1:38 PM, Guido van Rossum gu...@python.org wrote:
But seriously, I think an additional function or additional flag in the
current functions/method in the parse module is sufficient than going
for another module.
I vote for a new function, not a flag. (Others can
On 03/18/2011 11:20 AM, Jesus Cea wrote:
I kind of remember doing this change myself. Since no 2.8 is planned, it
seemed sensible to mark PyCObject as a py3k warning.
It's all fine by me, and yeah I think you did the change. I'm sure it
wasn't me.
PS: I am the maintainer of (externally
Probably best discussed on python-ideas...
On Fri, Mar 18, 2011 at 4:04 PM, MRAB pyt...@mrabarnett.plus.com wrote:
Some of those who are relative new to regexes sometimes ask how to write a
regex which checks that a number is in a range or is a valid date. Although
this may be possible, it
On Fri, Mar 18, 2011 at 5:32 PM, Nick Coghlan ncogh...@gmail.com wrote:
On Fri, Mar 18, 2011 at 1:38 PM, Guido van Rossum gu...@python.org wrote:
But seriously, I think an additional function or additional flag in the
current functions/method in the parse module is sufficient than going
for
On Mar 18, 2011, at 8:41 PM, Guido van Rossum wrote:
Really. Do they still call them URIs? :-)
Well, by RFC 398*7* they're calling them IRIs instead. 'irilib', perhaps? ;-)
___
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python.org
On Fri, Mar 18, 2011 at 08:57:42PM -0400, Glyph Lefkowitz wrote:
Well, by RFC 398*7* they're calling them IRIs instead. 'irilib', perhaps? ;-)
Yes, and it involves huge lot of unicode character handling /parsing
rules in Resource Indentifiers. 'irilib' sounds like a good plan.
--
Senthil
On Fri, Mar 18, 2011 at 5:00 AM, Jesus Cea j...@jcea.es wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 17/03/11 14:45, R. David Murray wrote:
Not if the cpython repo is in a fully merged stated. And if it
isn't, I will wait until it is. (The update notifications on the
IRC
Tres Seaver wrote:
I'm not even sure why you would want __version__ in 99% of modules: in
the ordinary cases, a module's version should be either the Python
version (for a module shipped in the stdlib), or the release of the
distribution which shipped it.
It's useful to be able to find out
On Fri, Mar 18, 2011 at 7:28 PM, Greg Ewing greg.ew...@canterbury.ac.nz wrote:
Tres Seaver wrote:
I'm not even sure why you would want __version__ in 99% of modules: in
the ordinary cases, a module's version should be either the Python
version (for a module shipped in the stdlib), or the
On Fri, Mar 18, 2011 at 1:04 AM, Guido van Rossum gu...@python.org wrote:
I don't want to be alarmist and I don't want to start another
moratorium, but I do think that we need to be aware of people coming
in sideways into Python 3 and missing the nice deprecations. So
let's be conservative
On Sat, Mar 19, 2011 at 12:48 AM, Senthil Kumaran orsent...@gmail.com wrote:
I am the only one who is finding the following phrases amusing?!
- opening for a new person
- another ctypes expert is pretty critical
- job description
- send people to..
Come join python-dev - we have plenty of
On Thu, Mar 17, 2011 at 5:44 AM, Raymond Hettinger
raymond.hettin...@gmail.com wrote:
You will be missed.
Thanks for all your efforts.
Indeed!
Cheers,
Nick.
--
Nick Coghlan | ncogh...@gmail.com | Brisbane, Australia
___
Python-Dev mailing
Hello
Will it be okay to make you nosy on a bug report to ask for an expert
opinion when the current developers need it? If yes, I’ll mark your
name as “retired” in the experts file, if not I’ll remove it.
Thanks for your contributions, and have fun in your next adventures!
[Alexander]
On Fri, Mar 18, 2011 at 07:40:43PM -0700, Guido van Rossum wrote:
On Fri, Mar 18, 2011 at 7:28 PM, Greg Ewing greg.ew...@canterbury.ac.nz
wrote:
Tres Seaver wrote:
I'm not even sure why you would want __version__ in 99% of modules: in
the ordinary cases, a module's version should be
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 19/03/11 03:14, Nick Coghlan wrote:
What may actually be better for buildbot experimentation purposes is
to allow us to request running a build-and-test cycle from branches in
*any* of the repositories hosted on hg.python.org, rather than having
The short summary is that the Parrot VM is a very good semantic fit for
Python (AFAICT, a better fit than it is for Perl 6, though I haven't
done the feature-by-feature comparison).
Thanks for the write-up. The point quoted above is especially useful,
since I vaguely remembered reading that
On Sat, Mar 19, 2011 at 1:22 PM, Jesus Cea j...@jcea.es wrote:
This is a good suggestion. I kind of remember that when working in SVN
you could request a particular build from a particular branch. If that
was true, we should consider something similar with mercurial. I am
offline and can't
I did just poke around on the buildbot pages, but couldn't find
anything resembling the old buiild a branch form.
MvL/Antoine/Georg, any ideas?
Kelsey Hightower is already working on it. There is the buildbot 'try'
feature, but there may be other options as well.
Regards,
Martin
On Sat, Mar 12, 2011 at 06:43, Nick Coghlan ncogh...@gmail.com wrote:
I posted my rough notes and additional write-ups for Wednesday's VM
summit and Thursday's language summit:
http://www.boredomandlaziness.org/2011/03/python-vm-summit-rough-notes.html
On Fri, Mar 18, 2011 at 8:12 PM, Toshio Kuratomi a.bad...@gmail.com wrote:
On Fri, Mar 18, 2011 at 07:40:43PM -0700, Guido van Rossum wrote:
On Fri, Mar 18, 2011 at 7:28 PM, Greg Ewing greg.ew...@canterbury.ac.nz
wrote:
Tres Seaver wrote:
I'm not even sure why you would want __version__
The timing of these new refleaks being triggered by test_os and by
test_posix is suspicious, making me think that #10812 is the likely
culprit.
Cheers,
Nick.
--
Nick Coghlan | ncogh...@gmail.com | Brisbane, Australia
___
Python-Dev mailing
39 matches
Mail list logo
