Jim Jewett writes:
> If you're going to get rid of the pun, you might as well change the
> whole sentence...
In fact, he should, since this is such a well-known pun that many
people will consciously make the reverse substitution, and wonder WTF
python-dev was thinking when they put the amended
On Tue, Jul 5, 2011 at 12:12 PM, Mark Hammond wrote:
> If the launcher is such that we can unconditionally recommend its use, IMO
> we should just install it with Python. I'll go with the consensus though...
I've installed other WIndows apps that create multiple add/remove
programs entries from
On 5/07/2011 11:23 AM, Greg Ewing wrote:
Vinay Sajip wrote:
the installation of a pre-3.3 version of Python after Python 3.3 is
installed with the launcher will, if the user selects "Register
Extensions",
hijack the laumcher's associations to that earlier Python. Then bye
bye launcher
I don't
Vinay Sajip wrote:
the installation of a pre-3.3 version of Python after Python 3.3 is
installed with the launcher will, if the user selects "Register Extensions",
hijack the laumcher's associations to that earlier Python. Then bye bye launcher
I don't see how anything can be done about that. I
One more thing about associations - we've got pyw.exe for Python.NoConFile
and py.exe for Python.file, but how do we handle Python.CompiledFile? It
doesn't really make sense to have the association not handled by the launcher.
Unfortunately, of course, both pyw and py compile to pyo, so we don't kn
If you're going to get rid of the pun, you might as well change the
whole sentence...
On Sun, Jul 3, 2011 at 1:22 PM, georg.brandl wrote:
> http://hg.python.org/cpython/rev/76452b892838
> changeset: 71146:76452b892838
> parent: 71144:ce52310f61a0
> user: Georg Brandl
> date:
Mark Hammond gmail.com> writes:
> > It might be better to look in the registry for other Python
> > installations and ask the user which one to restore if there
> > is more than one. Trying to restore the "last" one would be
> > prone to breakage if the user didn't uninstall versions in
> > preci
On Tue, Jun 28, 2011 at 10:30:14AM +1000, Nick Coghlan wrote:
> Rather than fighting that convention, we should probably just confront
> the ambiguity head on and update
> http://docs.python.org/dev/glossary.html#term-attribute to describe
> both uses of the term (and add a separate entry for "dat
On Mon, Jul 4, 2011 at 2:27 AM, Mark Hammond wrote:
> While that makes alot of sense, the fact we are already "broken" in exactly
> the same way means I hope we can treat the restoration of associations as a
> separate issue - a worthwhile one, but not a pre-requisite for this PEP
> being approved
Le lundi 04 juillet 2011 à 18:23 +0200, Antoine Pitrou a écrit :
> On Mon, 04 Jul 2011 18:06:53 +0200
> victor.stinner wrote:
> > http://hg.python.org/cpython/rev/7eef821ab20d
> > changeset: 71197:7eef821ab20d
> > user:Victor Stinner
> > date:Mon Jul 04 18:06:35 2011 +0200
> > s
On Mon, Jul 4, 2011 at 9:23 AM, Antoine Pitrou wrote:
> On Mon, 04 Jul 2011 18:06:53 +0200
> victor.stinner wrote:
> > http://hg.python.org/cpython/rev/7eef821ab20d
> > changeset: 71197:7eef821ab20d
> > user:Victor Stinner
> > date:Mon Jul 04 18:06:35 2011 +0200
> > summary:
>
On behalf of the Python development team, I am pleased to announce the
second release candidate of Python 3.2.1.
Python 3.2.1 will the first bugfix release for Python 3.2, fixing over 120
bugs and regressions in Python 3.2.
For an extensive list of changes and features in the 3.2 line, see
h
Am 04.07.2011 18:23, schrieb Antoine Pitrou:
> On Mon, 04 Jul 2011 18:06:53 +0200
> victor.stinner wrote:
>> http://hg.python.org/cpython/rev/7eef821ab20d
>> changeset: 71197:7eef821ab20d
>> user:Victor Stinner
>> date:Mon Jul 04 18:06:35 2011 +0200
>> summary:
>> Issue #12469
On Mon, 04 Jul 2011 18:06:53 +0200
victor.stinner wrote:
> http://hg.python.org/cpython/rev/7eef821ab20d
> changeset: 71197:7eef821ab20d
> user:Victor Stinner
> date:Mon Jul 04 18:06:35 2011 +0200
> summary:
> Issue #12469: replace assertions by explicit if+raise
Instead of g
Now that we have the machine, we need to start working on
collecting/organizing the resources needed to get a shared codespeed
system in place. After speaking with various people, we felt that
overloading codespeed-dev, pypy-dev or python-dev with the discussions
around this would be sub optimal. I
I am out of the office until 07/15/2011.
I am out of the office traveling Monday July 4 through Friday, July 15
I will have little or no access to email during this time, so I will be
delayed in responding.
Note: This is an automated response to your message "Python-Dev Digest,
Vol 96, Issue
Hello,
2011/7/4 Aigars Mahinovs
> I have been doing some multithreaded work lately and have found that
often what I find wanting to do is to call a function, have it check
> it's arguments, possibly do some work and then return to the caller,
> but still do some extra processing right after tha
Short version: Could we get
def funct( args ):
if args == 'good':
return 'good'
async_return "I'll think about it"
if args == '123':
do_x()
elif args == 'abc':
do_y()
else:
do_z()
as equivalent to
def do_thinking( args ):
if args == '123':
18 matches
Mail list logo
