On Thu, 2 Jul 2020 at 09:28, Matthias Bussonnier
wrote:
>
> It's still weird user experience as if you swap case .z and case z you don't
> get the Unbound error anymore. SO it can work w/o global.
For some value of work: if z comes before .z, the .z branch will never
get evaluated, because the b
Hi Leandro, it seems that your email is probably more about how to use the
existing PyEval_SetTrace API, not about developing or changing Python
itself. May I direct you to the "Got a Python problem or question?" section
from https://www.python.org/about/help/ web page, where you are likely to
get
On Fri, 24 Jan 2020 at 14:46, Ethan Furman wrote:
> On 01/23/2020 03:36 PM, Barry Warsaw wrote:
> > On Jan 23, 2020, at 14:03, Victor Stinner wrote:
>
> >> It's not only about specific changes, but more a discussion about a
> >> general policy to decide if a deprecated feature should stay until
>
This vector exists today for all new stdlib modules: once added, any
existing dependency could include that name to cater it to be imported on
prior python versions.
Rob
On Wed, 22 May 2019, 17:03 Stephen J. Turnbull, <
turnbull.stephen...@u.tsukuba.ac.jp> wrote:
> Christian Heimes writes:
>
>
They were never needed 😁
Removal is fine with me.
On Wed, 1 May 2019, 09:27 Chris Withers, wrote:
> Hi All,
>
> I have a crazy idea of getting unittest.mock up to 100% code coverage.
>
> I noticed at the bottom of all of the test files in testmock/, there's a:
>
> if __name__ == '__main__':
>
Share your own username with Michael or I and we'll add you there.
Rob
On Mon, 29 Apr 2019, 09:55 Chris Withers, wrote:
> On 28/04/2019 22:21, Robert Collins wrote:
> > Thank you!
>
> Thank me when we get there ;-) Currently in Dec 2018 with a won
Thank you!
If I understand correctly this is just the hg style branch backport
consequence, multiple copies of a change. Should be safe to skip those.
Rob
On Sun, 28 Apr 2019, 07:11 Chris Withers, wrote:
> Hi All,
>
> I'm in the process of bringing the mock backport up to date, but this
> has
One question..
On Thu., 29 Mar. 2018, 07:42 Antoine Pitrou, wrote:
> ...
>
===
>
> Mutability
> --
>
> PEP 3118 buffers [#pep-3118]_ can be readonly or writable. Some objects,
> such as Numpy arrays, need to be backed by a mutable buffer for full
> operation. Pickle consumers that
Plus 1 from me. I'm not 100% sure the signature / inspect backport does
this, but as you say, it should be trivial to do, to whatever extent the
python version we're hosted on does it.
Rob
On 28 Nov. 2017 07:14, "Larry Hastings" wrote:
>
>
> First, a thirty-second refresher, so we're all using
On 24 March 2017 at 04:59, INADA Naoki wrote:
> And this issue is relating to it too: http://bugs.python.org/issue29716
>
> In short, "namespace package" is for make it possible to `pip install
> foo_bar foo_baz`,
> when foo_bar provides `foo.bar` and foo_baz provides `foo.baz`
> package. (foo is
On 17 December 2016 at 08:24, Guido van Rossum wrote:
> I am beginning to think that `from __future__ import unicode_literals` does
> more harm than good. I don't recall exactly why we introduced it, but with
> the restoration of u"" literals in Python 3.3 we have a much better story
> for writing
On 14 December 2016 at 18:10, Sesha Narayanan Subbiah
wrote:
> Hi Rob
>
> Thanks for your reply.
>
> From http://legacy.python.org/download/, I could see that the current
> production releases are Python 3.4 and Python 2.7.6.
Nope - https://www.python.org/downloads/ - 2.7.12 and 3.5.2 are
current
On 14 December 2016 at 01:26, Sesha Narayanan Subbiah
wrote:
> Hello
>
>
> I have some implementation that currently uses python 2.6.4, which I m
> trying to upgrade to Python 2.7.6. After upgrade, I get the following error:
>
>
> "expected string or Unicode object, memoryview found"
>
>
> On chec
On 16 Jun 2016 6:55 PM, "Larry Hastings" wrote:
>
>
> Why do you call it only "semi-fixed"? As far as I understand it, the
semantics of os.urandom() in 3.5.2rc1 are indistinguishable from reading
from /dev/urandom directly, except it may not need to use a file handle.
Which is a contract change
On 11 June 2016 at 04:09, Victor Stinner wrote:
..> We should design a CLI command to do timeit+compare at once.
http://judge.readthedocs.io/en/latest/ might offer some inspiration
There's also ministat -
https://www.freebsd.org/cgi/man.cgi?query=ministat&apropos=0&sektion=0&manpath=FreeBSD+8-cu
On 6 April 2016 at 15:03, Stephen J. Turnbull wrote:
> Robert Collins writes:
>
> > Sadly that has the ordering bug of assigning __wrapped__ first and appears
> > a little unmaintained based on the bug tracker :(
>
> You can fix two problems with one patch, then!
>
thetype.append((obj, type))
return None
classIwant.query = gettype()
classIwant().query
thetype[0][1]...
but you've already gotten to classIwant there.
-Rob
--
Robert Collins
Distinguished Technologist
HP Converged Cloud
___
P
Sadly that has the ordering bug of assigning __wrapped__ first and appears
a little unmaintained based on the bug tracker :(
On 5 Apr 2016 8:10 PM, "Victor Stinner" wrote:
> See https://pypi.python.org/pypi/functools32 for the functools backport
> for Python 2.7.
>
> Victor
>
eypatching functools.wraps, which would tend to be subject to
import ordering races and general ick. I'll likely prep such a
monkeypatch for folk that are stuck on older versions of 2.7 anyhow...
so its not a huge win...
-Rob
--
Robert Collins
Distinguished Technologist
HP
list
> Python-Dev@python.org
> https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
> Unsubscribe:
> https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/robertc%40robertcollins.net
>
--
Robert Collins
Distinguished Technologist
HP Converged Cloud
On 18 December 2015 at 06:13, Carlos Barera wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I'm using install_requires in setup.py to specify a specific package my
> project is dependant on.
> When running python setup.py install, apparently the simple index is used
> as an older package is taken from pypi. While
>
What's hap
the box be a good fit. This seems to fly in
the exact opposite direction: we're explicitly making it so that
Python builds on these vendor's platforms will not be the same as you
get by checking out the Python source code.
Ugh.
-Rob
--
Robert Collins
Distinguished Technologist
HP Conve
On 26 July 2015 at 07:28, Robert Collins wrote:
> On 21 July 2015 at 19:40, Nick Coghlan wrote:
>
>> All of this is why the chart that I believe should be worrying people
>> is the topmost one on this page:
>> http://bugs.python.org/issue?@template=stats
>>
>>
or 'yes and this
is what needs to happen next'.
-Rob
--
Robert Collins
Distinguished Technologist
HP Converged Cloud
___
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python.org
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe:
https://mai
On 7 August 2015 at 03:28, Donald Stufft wrote:
>
>> On Aug 6, 2015, at 5:04 AM, Robert Collins wrote:
>>
>> Yes: but the logic chain from 'its a bad idea' to 'we don't include
>> wheel but we do include setuptools' is the bit I'm
> ensurepip bundle would be a good idea for upstream, but I can also see
> why it's a near certainty downstream Linux distros (including Fedora)
> would take it out again in at least some situations to better meet the
Does Fedora also take out setuptools? If not, why not?
> needs
ad to folk having a poorer
experience.
Is this a simple bug, or do we need to update the PEP?
-Rob
--
Robert Collins
Distinguished Technologist
HP Converged Cloud
___
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python.org
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listi
claim such entitlement, who does? Whose entitlement are
you arguing for? If its Guido's, I think we can stop arguing - sure,
he is entitled to ask for a lot, but I don't want to argue about what
entitlements someone else has: they can argue on their own.
-Rob
--
Robert Collins
Distinguish
iew it, but I think it would be great if other committers were to
also to do this: if we had 5 of us doing 1 a day, I think we'd burn
down this 45 patch backlog rapidly without significant individual
cost. At which point, we can fairly say to folk doing triage that
we're ready for patche
On 22 July 2015 at 08:07, Robert Collins wrote:
> On 22 July 2015 at 05:08, Larry Hastings wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 07/21/2015 06:35 PM, Robert Collins wrote:
>>
>> Cool. http://bugs.python.org/issue21750 is in a bad state right now.
>>
>> I landed a pat
On 22 July 2015 at 05:08, Larry Hastings wrote:
>
>
> On 07/21/2015 06:35 PM, Robert Collins wrote:
>
> Cool. http://bugs.python.org/issue21750 is in a bad state right now.
>
> I landed a patch to fix it, which when exposed to users had some
> defects. I'm working on
hon.org
> https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
> Unsubscribe:
> https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/robertc%40robertcollins.net
>
--
Robert Collins
Distinguished Technologist
HP Converged Cloud
___
P
e his solution,
> but if not, you could open one and add him as nosy.
I did: http://bugs.python.org/issue24651
-Rob
--
Robert Collins
Distinguished Technologist
HP Converged Cloud
___
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python.org
https://
On 21 July 2015 at 19:40, Nick Coghlan wrote:
> On 20 July 2015 at 22:34, Ben Finney wrote:
>> Paul Moore writes:
>>
>>> Again, I'm sorry to pick on one sentence out of context, but it cut
>>> straight to my biggest fear when doing a commit (on any project) -
>>> what if, after all the worrying
for PYthon core committers?
What's the goal here: what actual problem are we trying to solve for?
More contributors? A better Python more people can use? Keeping up
with the contributions we've already received but not actioned? [...]
Like: pick one thing. What we /really/ want to achie
hich case open a new ticket at
https://bugs.python.org/ linked to the github issue, and either close
the github issue or label it upstream (or both)).
THAT would be valuable, and improve users experience of unittest.mock
[and mock] much more than making a_mock.assret_called_once *not
error*.
On 17 Jul 2015 08:34, "Michael Foord" wrote:
>
>
>
> On Wednesday, 15 July 2015, Robert Collins
wrote:
> > On 15 July 2015 at 12:59, Nick Coghlan wrote:
> >>
> >> There is zero urgency here, so nothing needs to change for 3.5.
> >> Rober
On 15 July 2015 at 19:17, Antoine Pitrou wrote:
> On Wed, 15 Jul 2015 10:22:14 +1200
> Robert Collins wrote:
>>
>> For clarity, I think we should:
>> - remove the assret check, it is I think spurious.
>> - add a set of functions to the mock module that shou
On 15 July 2015 at 12:59, Nick Coghlan wrote:
>
> There is zero urgency here, so nothing needs to change for 3.5.
> Robert's plan is a fine one to propose for 3.6 (and the PyPI mock
> backport).
Right - the bad API goes back to the very beginning. I'm not planning
on writing the new thing I sketc
On 15 July 2015 at 15:00, Stephen J. Turnbull wrote:
> Robert Collins writes:
>
> > What I am doing is rejecting the argument that because we can't fix
> > every mis-use users might make, we therefore should not fix the cases
> > where we can fix it.
>
> Th
On 15 July 2015 at 10:05, Ethan Furman wrote:
> On 07/14/2015 02:53 PM, Robert Collins wrote:
...
>>> I don't think unittest can protect its users from such things.
>>
>>
>> It can't, but there is a sliding scale of API usability, and we should
>>
such things.
It can't, but there is a sliding scale of API usability, and we should
try to be up the good end of that :).
http://sweng.the-davies.net/Home/rustys-api-design-manifesto
-Rob
--
Robert Collins
Distinguished Technologist
HP Converged Cloud
__
On 15 July 2015 at 07:39, Paul Moore wrote:
> On 14 July 2015 at 20:27, Robert Collins wrote:
>>> In effect, this patch is "reserving" all attributes starting with
>>> "assert" or "assret" as actual methods of the mock object, and not
>&g
ltimately I'm +1 on reserving "assert" (given that a more radical
> fix isn't possible) and +0 on adding "assret" (simply on the basis
> that someone more knowledgeable than me says it makes sense).
Since assret is solely a 'you may not use this' case, I think
On 14 July 2015 at 14:25, R. David Murray wrote:
> On Tue, 14 Jul 2015 14:01:25 +1200, Robert Collins
> wrote:
>> So unittest.mock regressed during 3.5, and I found out when I released
>> the mock backport.
>>
>> The regression is pretty shallow - I've applied
retty much every OpenStack project got git
with it when I released mock 1.1).
-Rob
--
Robert Collins
Distinguished Technologist
HP Converged Cloud
___
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python.org
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubs
tly.
-Rob
--
Robert Collins
Distinguished Technologist
HP Converged Cloud
___
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python.org
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe:
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/arch
gt; create a bunch of make-work for everybody?
>
> Monitoring the progress of our experiment,
When I next get tuits, it will be on 3.6; I like the branch early even
though I haven't used it.
-Rob
--
Robert Collins
Distinguished Technologist
HP Converged Cloud
_
bash fun was very good evidence of that.
OTOH if someones environment is at risk, PATH and PYTHONPATH are
already very effective attack vectors.
-Rob
--
Robert Collins
Distinguished Technologist
HP Converged Cloud
___
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@py
ols, traceback2,
linecache2) to get something small enough to work and experiment with.
-Rob
--
Robert Collins
Distinguished Technologist
HP Converged Cloud
___
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python.org
https://mail.python.org/mailman/list
st. (The
> type checker would be responsible for pointing out bugs. :-P )
What about major changes to existing modules? I have a backlog of
intended feature uplifts from testtools into unittest - if the type
hints thing works out I am likely to put them into testtools. Whats
your view on type hint
rently seeing stubs as a necessary *evil*
> they're missing points where they're a better backwards compatible solution
> for people who want to give users with capable IDEs the ability to use stub
> (or hint) files.
-Rob
--
Robert Collins
Distinguished Technologist
HP Conver
ts the fundamental design. Stubs don't annotate python code,
they *are* annotated code themselves. They aren't merged with the
observed code at all.
Could they be? Possibly. I don't know how much work that would be.
-Rob
--
Robert Collins
Distinguishe
atic analysis instead of the actual source. Likely I've got it
modelled wrong in my head :)
-Rob
--
Robert Collins
Distinguished Technologist
HP Converged Cloud
___
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python.org
https://mail.python.org/mailman
ntly break, but that seems like a fairly shallow bug to
me, rather than something that shouldn't work. The advantage of that
route is that editors which make comments appear in subtle colours,
makes the type hints be unobtrusive without specific syntax colouring
support.
-Rob
--
Robert
e name of the package to
process.
Since discovery is recursive, sub namespace packages should work, but
I note there are no explicit tests to this effect.
I'm sorry I didn't respond earlier on the tracker, didn't see the
issue in my inbox for some
cts makes checking back on them later easier, should we need to.
One question, if you will - I don't think this was asked so far - is
authenticode verifiable from Linux, without Windows? And does it work
for users of WINE ?
-Rob
--
Robert Collins
Distinguished Technologist
HP Converged C
On 9 February 2015 at 09:11, Maciej Fijalkowski wrote:
> Hi Francis
>
> Feel free to steal most of vmprof code, it should generally work
> without requiring to patch cpython (python 3 patches appreciated :-).
> As far as timer goes - it seems not to be going anywhere, I would
> rather use a backgr
ard: can we get that changed (or
is there some historical need for it - if so, perhaps we should use
python-dev or some other list) ?"""
-Rob
--
Robert Collins
Distinguished Technologist
HP Converged Cloud
___
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev
moderated,
so...
Bill"
- nothing to see here, move right along, and sorry for the noise.
-Rob
On 21 September 2014 10:19, Robert Collins wrote:
> I'm not sure of the right place to bring this up - I tried to on the
> web-sig list itself, but the moderator rejected the post.
>
Indeed - my suggestion is applicable to people using the library
-Rob
On 10 Aug 2014 18:21, "Larry Hastings" wrote:
> On 08/09/2014 10:40 PM, Robert Collins wrote:
>
> A small tip from my bzr days - cd into the directory before scanning it
>
>
> I doubt that
st when working with trees on the scale of a full Fedora or RHEL
> build hosted on an NFS share).
>
> Cheers,
> Nick.
>
> --
> Nick Coghlan | ncogh...@gmail.com | Brisbane, Australia
> ___
> Python-Dev mailing list
>
e physical disc?
CDROMs - Joliet IIRC - so yes, physical disc.
-Rob
--
Robert Collins
Distinguished Technologist
HP Cloud Services
___
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe:
http://mail.py
On 5 March 2013 20:02, Lennart Regebro wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 5, 2013 at 1:41 AM, Robert Collins
> wrote:
>> So that is interesting, but its not sufficient to meet the automation
>> need Barry is calling out, unless all test suites can be run by
>> 'python -m unittest
e core use cases and differences to what
TestResult is in pretty short order. We can spider out from there as
folk desire.
-Rob
--
Robert Collins
Distinguished Technologist
HP Cloud Services
___
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python.org
http://mai
hat was
> discussed, and my email was in this context.
So that is interesting, but its not sufficient to meet the automation
need Barry is calling out, unless all test suites can be run by
'python -m unittest discover' with no additional parameters [and a
pretty large subset cannot].
ther see how we can
> make the TestResult play *better* with those requirements. That discussion
> probably belongs in another thread - or at
> the summit.
Right - all I wanted was to flag that you and I and any other
interested parties should discuss this at the summit :).
-Rob
On 5 March 2013 12:49, Eli Bendersky wrote:
>
> On Mon, Mar 4, 2013 at 2:14 PM, Barry Warsaw wrote:
>>
>> On Mar 05, 2013, at 11:01 AM, Robert Collins wrote:
>>
>> >The big thing is automated tools, not developers.
>>
>> Exactly.
>
> I don'
stribute packages they want to be sure
they work. Running the tests is a pretty good signal for that, but
having every package slightly different adds to the work they need to
do. Being able to do 'setup.py test' consistently, everywhere - that
would be great.
-Rob
--
Robert Collins
Di
tr init; testr run'. Thats
the defined entry point for testr, and .testr.conf can specify running
make, or setup.py build or whatever else is needed to run tests.
I would love to see a declaritive interface so that you can tell that
is what you should run.
On 5 March 2013 05:34, Brett Cannon wrote:
>
>
>
> On Mon, Mar 4, 2013 at 11:29 AM, Barry Warsaw wrote:
>>
>> On Mar 04, 2013, at 07:26 PM, Robert Collins wrote:
>>
>> >It is of course possible for subunit and related tools to run their
>> >own im
iew if that would be useful.
-Rob
--
Robert Collins
Distinguished Technologist
HP Cloud Services
___
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe:
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/pyth
On 4 March 2013 18:54, Guido van Rossum wrote:
> On Sun, Mar 3, 2013 at 9:24 PM, Robert Collins
> wrote:
>> I'd like to talk about overhauling - not tweaking, overhauling - the
>> standard library testing facilities.
>
> That seems like too big a topic and too v
- Barry Warsaw
> * The argument clinic - Larry Hastings
>
> If you have other items you'd like to discuss please let me know and I can
> add them to the agenda.
I'd like to talk about overhauling - not tweaking, overhauling - the
standard library testing facil
On Mon, Oct 1, 2012 at 2:35 PM, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
> On Sun, Sep 30, 2012 at 07:12:47PM -0400, Brett Cannon wrote:
>
>> > python3 perf.py -T --basedir ../benchmarks -f -b py3k
>> ../cpython/builds/2.7-wide/bin/python ../cpython/builds/3.3/bin/python3.3
>
>> ### call_method ###
>> Min: 0.491433
On Thu, Sep 13, 2012 at 7:02 AM, Éric Araujo wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Lib/packaging is in the repository history, and in my backup clones, but
> it’s not visible in any branch head as we have no branch for 3.4 yet. I
> can bring the directory back with a simple Mercurial command.
>
> However, it’s not cl
On Fri, Jan 6, 2012 at 11:17 AM, Antoine Pitrou wrote:
>> >From what I understand, the biggest motivation for pure Python
>> versions is cooperation with the other Python implementations. See
>> http://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0399/
>
> Apologies, I didn't remember it was written down in PEP.
On Mon, Nov 7, 2011 at 8:16 AM, Antoine Pitrou wrote:
> Either that or fix the error message. I can't find much benefit in
> accepting None, that said (nor in refusing it).
Its very convenient when working with slices to not have to special
case the end points. +1 on accepting None, FWIW.
-Rob
_
On Thu, May 19, 2011 at 4:16 AM, Stephen J. Turnbull wrote:
> Robert Collins writes:
>
> > Its probably too late to change, but please don't try to argue that
> > its correct: the continued confusion of folk running into this is
> > evidence that confusion
On Wed, May 18, 2011 at 3:13 PM, Nick Coghlan wrote:
> On Wed, May 18, 2011 at 8:27 AM, Ethan Furman wrote:
>> On the one hand we have the 'bytes are ascii data' type interface, and on
>> the other we have the 'bytes are a list of integers between 0 - 256'
>> interface.
>
> No. Bytes are a list o
On Fri, Apr 8, 2011 at 8:12 AM, Michael Foord wrote:
> On 07/04/2011 20:18, Robert Collins wrote:
>>
>> On Fri, Apr 8, 2011 at 4:49 AM, Michael Foord
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> You mean that the test run keeps the test instances alive for the whole
>>> t
On Fri, Apr 8, 2011 at 4:49 AM, Michael Foord wrote:
> You mean that the test run keeps the test instances alive for the whole test
> run so instance attributes are also kept alive. How would you solve this -
> by having calling a TestSuite (which is how a test run is executed) remove
> members fr
On Tue, Mar 22, 2011 at 3:10 PM, Senthil Kumaran wrote:
> Doug Hellmann wrote:
>> We are nearly ready to launch the new blog for python-dev.
>
> Cool. But I always thought planet.python.org was a kind of blog for
> python-dev. How will python-dev blog be different? Will add additional
> redundancy
On Sun, Feb 27, 2011 at 3:45 AM, cool-RR wrote:
> I think that if someone calls `__enter__` directly, he takes the
> responsibility of calling `__exit__`, so we don't really have to help him
> with `__del__`.
> But other than that I understand the motivation for making it start on
> `__init__` ra
On Sat, Sep 18, 2010 at 8:24 PM, Greg Ewing wrote:
> Victor Stinner wrote:
>
>> I'm still developing irregulary my sandbox project since last june.
>
>> Today, the biggest problem is the creation of a read only view of the
>> __builtins__ dictionary.
>
> Why do you think you need to do this? What
On pypi - testscenarios; Its been discussed on TIP before.
Its a 'run a function to parameterise some tests' API, it changes the
id() of the test to include the parameters, and it can be hooked in
via load_tests quite trivially.
Cheers,
Rob
___
Python-D
On Wed, Jun 23, 2010 at 12:25 PM, Glyph Lefkowitz
wrote:
> I can also appreciate what's been said in this thread a bunch of times: to my
> knowledge, nobody has actually shown a profile of an application where
> encoding is significant overhead. I believe that encoding _will_ be a
> significan
On Wed, Jun 23, 2010 at 6:09 AM, M.-A. Lemburg wrote:
>> return constant.encode('utf-8')
>>
>> So now you can write x.split(literal_as('&', x)).
>
> This polymorphism is what we used in Python2 a lot to write
> code that works for both Unicode and 8-bit strings.
>
> Unfortunately, this
2010/6/21 Stephen J. Turnbull :
> Robert Collins writes:
>
> > Also, url's are bytestrings - by definition;
>
> Eh? RFC 3896 explicitly says
?Definitions of Managed Objects for the DS3/E3 Interface Type
Perhaps you mean 3986 ? :)
> A URI is an identifier c
Also, url's are bytestrings - by definition; if the standard library
has made them unicode objects in 3, I expect a lot of pain in the
webserver space.
-Rob
___
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-
On Sun, May 23, 2010 at 10:15 PM, Brian Quinlan wrote:
>> Also, you can't fix bugs except by
>> releasing new versions of Python. Therefore the API must be completely
>> stable, and the product virtually bugfree before it should be in
>> stdlib. The best way of ensuring that is to release it as a
I'd really like to see a fix that works with loadTestsFromNames - generating
failing tests, for instance, and the failing tests having the full import
error string in them. This doesn't preclude raising ImportError from
loadTestFromName, and in fact I'd encourage that as a step towards the
aforemen
On Sun, 2010-02-28 at 18:11 -0800, Brett Cannon wrote:
...
> So then looking for a .pyc alongside a .py or vice versa
> should be almost free, and we shouldn't be worrying about
> it.
> But that is making the assumption that all filesystems operate this
> way (.e.g does NF
On Mon, 2010-03-01 at 12:35 +1300, Greg Ewing wrote:
>
> Yes, although that would then incur higher stat overheads for
> people distributing .pyc files. There doesn't seem to be a
> way of pleasing everyone.
>
> This is all assuming that the extra stat calls are actually
> a problem. Does anyone
On Sun, 2010-02-28 at 12:21 -0800, Brett Cannon wrote:
>
> Actually it's four: name/__init__.py, name/__init__.pyc, name.py, and
> then name.pyc. And just so people have terminology to go with all of
> this, this search is what the finder does to say whether it can or
> cannot handle the requested
with setUpClass in 2.7 (and document the
> > recipe - although I expect it will just mean that TestSuite.run
> > should call a single method if it exists).
> >
>
>
> This is something that I hope Jonathan Lange or Robert Collins will
> chime in to comment on: expan
On Sat, 2010-02-13 at 10:42 +, Antoine Pitrou wrote:
> Robert Collins robertcollins.net> writes:
> >
> > I'm not personally very keen on inspecting everything in self.__dict__,
> > I suspect it would tickle bugs in other unittest extensions. However I'm
>
On Fri, 2010-02-12 at 12:27 -0800, Guido van Rossum wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 12, 2010 at 12:20 PM, wrote:
> > The idea is that you're declaring what the tests need in order to work.
> > You're not explicitly defining the order in which things are set up and torn
> > down. That is left up to another
On Sat, 2010-02-13 at 01:04 +, Michael Foord wrote:
> > However from this example I *cannot* guess whether those resources are
> > set up and torn down per test or per test class.
> This particular example is the equivalent of setUpClass - so by
> declaring the resource as a class attribute
On Thu, 2009-11-12 at 08:25 -0600, Barry Warsaw wrote:
>
>
> That's distressing. For better or worse PyPI is the central
> repository of 3rd party packages. It should be easy, desirable, fun
> and socially encouraged to get your packages there.
Its already socially encouraged: heck, if pac
1 - 100 of 111 matches
Mail list logo
