On Mon, Apr 16, 2012 at 8:30 AM, Barry Warsaw ba...@python.org wrote:
On Apr 15, 2012, at 01:13 PM, Raymond Hettinger wrote:
We should publish some advice on creating content managers.
I agree, I'm just not sure PEP 8 is the right place for it.
PEP 8 seems like it is structured more as
On 16.4.2012 18:10, Nam Nguyen wrote:
a_list[pos + 1 : -1]
or other way around
a_list[pos+1:-1]
?
Matěj
___
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe:
On 16 April 2012 17:10, Nam Nguyen bits...@gmail.com wrote:
PEP 8 suggests no extra spaces after and before square brackets, and
colons. So code like this is appropriate:
a_list[1:3]
But I find it less readable in the case of:
a_list[pos + 1:-1]
The colon is seemingly lost in the right.
On Sun, Apr 15, 2012 at 6:18 PM, Victor Stinner victor.stin...@gmail.comwrote:
Here is a simplified version of the first draft of the PEP 418. The
full version can be read online.
http://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0418/
FYI there is no time.thread_time() function. It would only be
On Mon, 16 Apr 2012 20:41:56 -0400
Brett Cannon br...@python.org wrote:
On Mon, Apr 16, 2012 at 20:27, Antoine Pitrou solip...@pitrou.net wrote:
On Tue, 17 Apr 2012 01:11:14 +0200
Georg Brandl g.bra...@gmx.net wrote:
No, it's not just an existing Python, it is (at least currently) the
On Tue, 17 Apr 2012 04:11:31 +0200
brett.cannon python-check...@python.org wrote:
http://hg.python.org/cpython/rev/3b5b4b4bb43c
changeset: 76371:3b5b4b4bb43c
user:Brett Cannon br...@python.org
date:Mon Apr 16 22:11:25 2012 -0400
summary:
Issue #13959: Re-implement
On 4/17/2012 5:52 AM, Antoine Pitrou wrote:
On Mon, 16 Apr 2012 20:41:56 -0400
Brett Cannon br...@python.org wrote:
On Mon, Apr 16, 2012 at 20:27, Antoine Pitrou solip...@pitrou.net wrote:
On Tue, 17 Apr 2012 01:11:14 +0200
Georg Brandl g.bra...@gmx.net wrote:
No, it's not just an existing
Hello there.
For those familiar with the intricacies of the gcmodule.c, I would like to draw
your attention to http://bugs.python.org/issue9141.
I would like to consult with you to find out more about finalizers/gc in order
to improve the in-file documentation.
Traditionally, it has not been
On Tue, 17 Apr 2012 01:11:14 +0200, Georg Brandl g.bra...@gmx.net wrote:
On 16.04.2012 18:15, R. David Murray wrote:
I don't see how depending on Cython is better than depending on having
an existing Python.
No, it's not just an existing Python, it is (at least currently) the same
version
On Tue, 17 Apr 2012 08:53:43 +0200, Matej Cepl mc...@redhat.com wrote:
On 16.4.2012 18:10, Nam Nguyen wrote:
a_list[pos + 1 : -1]
or other way around
a_list[pos+1:-1]
That's what I always use. No spaces inside the brackets for me :)
If the expression gets unreadable that way, factor
On Tue, 17 Apr 2012 14:48:22 +1000, Cameron Simpson c...@zip.com.au wrote:
On 16Apr2012 01:25, Victor Stinner victor.stin...@gmail.com wrote:
| I suppose that most people don't care that resolution and
| precision are different things.
If we're using the same definitions we discussed
On Tue, Apr 17, 2012 at 2:48 PM, Cameron Simpson c...@zip.com.au wrote:
On 16Apr2012 01:25, Victor Stinner victor.stin...@gmail.com wrote:
| I suppose that most people don't care that resolution and
| precision are different things.
If we're using the same definitions we discussed offline,
On Tue, Apr 17, 2012 at 12:14 AM, Paul Moore p.f.mo...@gmail.com wrote:
On 16 April 2012 17:10, Nam Nguyen bits...@gmail.com wrote:
PEP 8 suggests no extra spaces after and before square brackets, and
colons. So code like this is appropriate:
a_list[1:3]
But I find it less readable in the
What I want to know is, why is this limitation in place? Here are
two possibilities:
1) The order of calling finalizers in a cycle is undefined so
it is not a solvable problem. But this would allow a single
object, with only internal cycles to be collected. Currently this
is not
On Apr 17, 2012, at 08:25 AM, R. David Murray wrote:
On Tue, 17 Apr 2012 08:53:43 +0200, Matej Cepl mc...@redhat.com wrote:
On 16.4.2012 18:10, Nam Nguyen wrote:
a_list[pos + 1 : -1]
or other way around
a_list[pos+1:-1]
That's what I always use. No spaces inside the brackets for me :)
On Tue, Apr 17, 2012 at 05:53, Antoine Pitrou solip...@pitrou.net wrote:
On Tue, 17 Apr 2012 04:11:31 +0200
brett.cannon python-check...@python.org wrote:
http://hg.python.org/cpython/rev/3b5b4b4bb43c
changeset: 76371:3b5b4b4bb43c
user:Brett Cannon br...@python.org
date:
On Tue, Apr 17, 2012 at 06:43, Eric V. Smith e...@trueblade.com wrote:
On 4/17/2012 5:52 AM, Antoine Pitrou wrote:
On Mon, 16 Apr 2012 20:41:56 -0400
Brett Cannon br...@python.org wrote:
On Mon, Apr 16, 2012 at 20:27, Antoine Pitrou solip...@pitrou.net
wrote:
On Tue, 17 Apr 2012
The only people to bring up worries about this thread were Eric and Nick
and they both seem fine with making stuff explicit and changing the meaning
of None in sys.path_importer_cache, so I have created
http://bugs.python.org/issue14605 and will plan on implementing the ideas
for it before Python
Anyone other than Eric have something to say on this proposal? Obviously
the discussion went tangential before I saw a clear consensus that what I
was proposing was fine with people.
On Sat, Apr 14, 2012 at 16:56, Brett Cannon br...@python.org wrote:
An open issue in PEP 302 is whether to
On Tue, 17 Apr 2012 11:41:32 -0400
Brett Cannon br...@python.org wrote:
Actually Cython would help with a subtle maintenance burden of maintaining
*any* C code for import. Right now,
Python/import.c:PyImport_ImportModuleLevelObject() is an accelerated C
version of importlib.__import__()
On Apr 14, 2012, at 1:03 PM, Brett Cannon wrote:
And lastly, sticking None in sys.path_importer_cache would no longer mean do
the implicit thing and instead would mean the same as NullImporter does now
(which also means import can put None into sys.path_importer_cache instead of
On Tue, Apr 17, 2012 at 13:45, Philip Jenvey pjen...@underboss.org wrote:
On Apr 14, 2012, at 1:03 PM, Brett Cannon wrote:
And lastly, sticking None in sys.path_importer_cache would no longer
mean do the implicit thing and instead would mean the same as
NullImporter does now (which also
-Original Message-
No, that's not the case at all. As Antoine explains in the issue, there are
plenty of ways in which Python code can be run when breaking a cycle. Not
only weakrefs, but also objects released as a consequence of tp_clear which
weren't *in* the cycle (but hung
On Tue, 17 Apr 2012 17:22:57 +
Kristján Valur Jónsson krist...@ccpgames.com wrote:
We are all consenting adults. Everything is allowed - you just have to live
with
the consequences.
Well, we specifically decided that objects with __del__ methods that are part
of a cycle cannot
On Tue, Apr 17, 2012 at 13:39, Antoine Pitrou solip...@pitrou.net wrote:
On Tue, 17 Apr 2012 11:41:32 -0400
Brett Cannon br...@python.org wrote:
Actually Cython would help with a subtle maintenance burden of
maintaining
*any* C code for import. Right now,
On Tue, Apr 17, 2012 at 8:30 PM, Antoine Pitrou solip...@pitrou.net wrote:
On Tue, 17 Apr 2012 17:22:57 +
Kristján Valur Jónsson krist...@ccpgames.com wrote:
We are all consenting adults. Everything is allowed - you just have to
live with
the consequences.
Well, we
+1 for initial proposition.
On Tue, Apr 17, 2012 at 6:59 PM, Brett Cannon br...@python.org wrote:
Anyone other than Eric have something to say on this proposal? Obviously the
discussion went tangential before I saw a clear consensus that what I was
proposing was fine with people.
On Sat,
On 4/17/2012 2:01 PM, Brett Cannon wrote:
Isn't it clearer to say
``sys.path_importer_cache[path] is None`` than
``isinstance(sys.path_importer_cache[path], imp.NullImporter)``?
Yes. Great work. Thanks for helping with the Idle breakage.
--
Terry Jan Reedy
+1 here. Previously, it wasn't a reasonable requirement, since CPython
itself didn't comply with it.
--
Sent from my phone, thus the relative brevity :)
___
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
I think what the user cares about is what is the smallest tick that
this clock result will faithfully represent?. If the number of bits
returned is larger than the clock accuracy, you want the clock accuracy.
If the number of bits returned is smaller than the clock accuracy,
you want the
On 18Apr2012 00:18, Chris Angelico ros...@gmail.com wrote:
| On Tue, Apr 17, 2012 at 2:48 PM, Cameron Simpson c...@zip.com.au wrote:
| On 16Apr2012 01:25, Victor Stinner victor.stin...@gmail.com wrote:
| | I suppose that most people don't care that resolution and
| | precision are different
On 17Apr2012 08:35, R. David Murray rdmur...@bitdance.com wrote:
| On Tue, 17 Apr 2012 14:48:22 +1000, Cameron Simpson c...@zip.com.au wrote:
| On 16Apr2012 01:25, Victor Stinner victor.stin...@gmail.com wrote:
| | I suppose that most people don't care that resolution and
| | precision are
Here is a simplified version of the first draft of the PEP 418. The
full version can be read online.
http://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0418/
The implementation of the PEP can be found in this issue:
http://bugs.python.org/issue14428
The PEP is now fully ready: I just finished the
I'll do it. Give me a few days (tomorrow is fully booked with horrible
meetings).
On Tue, Apr 17, 2012 at 5:06 PM, Victor Stinner
victor.stin...@gmail.com wrote:
Here is a simplified version of the first draft of the PEP 418. The
full version can be read online.
Hi,
On Tue, Apr 17, 2012 at 8:48 PM, raymond.hettinger
python-check...@python.org wrote:
http://hg.python.org/cpython/rev/d229032dc213
changeset: 76387:d229032dc213
branch: 2.7
user: Raymond Hettinger pyt...@rcn.com
date: Tue Apr 17 22:48:06 2012 -0400
summary:
35 matches
Mail list logo
