Guido van Rossum wrote:
I wonder if it wouldn't make sense to change urlencode() to generate
URLs that don't depend on the hash order, for all versions of Python
that support PYTHONHASHSEED? It seems a one-line fix:
query = query.items()
with this:
query = sorted(query.items())
On Sat, 18 Aug 2012 14:23:13 +0900
Stephen J. Turnbull step...@xemacs.org wrote:
Joao S. O. Bueno writes:
I don't think this behavior is only desirable to unit tests: having
URL's been formed in predictable way a good thing in any way one
thinks about it.
Especially if you're a
On 18 August 2012 02:23, Stephen J. Turnbull step...@xemacs.org wrote:
Joao S. O. Bueno writes:
I don't think this behavior is only desirable to unit tests: having
URL's been formed in predictable way a good thing in any way one
thinks about it.
Especially if you're a hacker. One
Am 17.08.2012 21:27, schrieb Guido van Rossum:
I wonder if it wouldn't make sense to change urlencode() to generate
URLs that don't depend on the hash order, for all versions of Python
that support PYTHONHASHSEED? It seems a one-line fix:
query = query.items()
with this:
On Sat, Aug 18, 2012 at 6:28 AM, Christian Heimes li...@cheimes.de wrote:
Am 17.08.2012 21:27, schrieb Guido van Rossum:
I wonder if it wouldn't make sense to change urlencode() to generate
URLs that don't depend on the hash order, for all versions of Python
that support PYTHONHASHSEED? It
On 18/08/2012 18:34, Guido van Rossum wrote:
On Sat, Aug 18, 2012 at 6:28 AM, Christian Heimes li...@cheimes.de wrote:
Am 17.08.2012 21:27, schrieb Guido van Rossum:
I wonder if it wouldn't make sense to change urlencode() to generate
URLs that don't depend on the hash order, for all versions
On Saturday, August 18, 2012, MRAB wrote:
On 18/08/2012 18:34, Guido van Rossum wrote:
On Sat, Aug 18, 2012 at 6:28 AM, Christian Heimes li...@cheimes.de
wrote:
Am 17.08.2012 21:27, schrieb Guido van Rossum:
I wonder if it wouldn't make sense to change urlencode() to generate
URLs that
On 8/18/2012 11:47 AM, MRAB wrote:
I vote -0. The issue can also be addressed with a small and simple
helper function that wraps urlparse and compares the query parameter. Or
you cann urlencode() with `sorted(qs.items)` instead of `qs` in the
application.
Hm. That's actually a good point.
The issue came up in python-list about string operations being slower in
3.3. (The categorical claim is false as some things are actually
faster.) Some things I understand, this one I do not.
Win7-64, 3.3.0b2 versus 3.2.3
print(timeit(c in a, c = '…'; a = 'a'*1000+c)) # ord(c) = 8230
# .6 in
On Sat, 18 Aug 2012 17:17:14 -0400
Terry Reedy tjre...@udel.edu wrote:
The issue came up in python-list about string operations being slower in
3.3. (The categorical claim is false as some things are actually
faster.) Some things I understand, this one I do not.
Win7-64, 3.3.0b2 versus
Zitat von Terry Reedy tjre...@udel.edu:
Is this worth a tracker issue (I searched and could not find one) or
is there a known and un-fixable cause?
There is a third option: it's not known, but it's also unimportant.
I'd say posting it to python-dev is enough: either there is somebody
with
On Sat, 18 Aug 2012 17:17:14 -0400, Terry Reedy tjre...@udel.edu wrote:
print(timeit(a.encode(), a = 'a'*1000))
# 1.5 in 3.2, .26 in 3.3
print(timeit(a.encode(encoding='utf-8'), a = 'a'*1000))
# 1.7 in 3.2, .51 in 3.3
This is one of the 3.3 improvements. But since the results are equal:
On 8/18/2012 5:27 PM, Antoine Pitrou wrote:
On Sat, 18 Aug 2012 17:17:14 -0400
Terry Reedy tjre...@udel.edu wrote:
The issue came up in python-list about string operations being slower in
3.3. (The categorical claim is false as some things are actually
faster.) Some things I understand, this
13 matches
Mail list logo
