On Wed, Dec 19, 2012 at 7:16 AM, andrew.svetlov
wrote:
> http://hg.python.org/cpython/rev/a6ea6f803017
> changeset: 80934:a6ea6f803017
> user:Andrew Svetlov
> date:Tue Dec 18 23:16:44 2012 +0200
> summary:
> Mention OSError instead of IOError in the docs.
>
> files:
> Doc/fa
Good plan!
On Tue, Dec 18, 2012 at 11:35 PM, Raymond Hettinger
wrote:
>
> On Dec 11, 2012, at 1:13 AM, Antoine Pitrou wrote:
>
>
> On Dec 10, 2012, at 2:48 AM, Christian Heimes
> wrote:
>
> On the other hand every lookup and collision checks needs an
> additional multiplication, addition and po
On 08/08/2012 11:47, Stefan Krah wrote:
Nick Coghlan wrote:
It does place a constraint on consumers that they can't assume those
fields will be NULL just because they didn't ask for them, but I'm
struggling to think of any reason why a client would actually *check*
that instead of just assuming
On Dec 11, 2012, at 1:13 AM, Antoine Pitrou wrote:
>>
>> On Dec 10, 2012, at 2:48 AM, Christian Heimes
>> wrote:
>>
>>> On the other hand every lookup and collision checks needs an
>>> additional multiplication, addition and pointer dereferencing:
>>>
>>> entry = entries_baseaddr + sizeof(Py
Looks like Windows buildbots broken by this commit.
On Tue, Dec 18, 2012 at 12:07 AM, antoine.pitrou
wrote:
> http://hg.python.org/cpython/rev/a85673b55177
> changeset: 80923:a85673b55177
> user:Antoine Pitrou
> date:Mon Dec 17 23:05:59 2012 +0100
> summary:
> Following issue
