On Fri, Nov 6, 2009 at 1:55 AM, Bobby R. Ward wrote:
>
> A switch to ENABLE those warnings?
>
>
I think a few people I know would still be raising strings like exceptions
if not for the deprecation warnings. Most people won't turn on the switch
with the extra warnings.
--yuv
On Fri, Nov 6, 2009 at 1:17 AM, James Y Knight wrote:
>
> Is this thread over yet?
>
>
Sorry, I just had to point out that pop/add has a side effect that would be
apparent on a set that multiple threads access - it loses an item and then
gets it back. Sounds like a sleeper race condition that's g
On Tue, Nov 3, 2009 at 12:19 AM, Greg Ewing wrote:
> Cameron Simpson wrote:
>
> Personally, I'm for the iteration spec in a lot of ways.
>>
>> Firstly, a .get()/.pick() that always returns the same element feels
>> horrible. Is there anyone here who _likes_ it?
>>
>
>
State might cause people to
On Fri, Oct 23, 2009 at 1:09 PM, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
> Is there any point? Even if accepted, it's too late to make it into 3.1,
> and with the overwhelming approval for a moratorium on changes to
> built-ins, it is likely to just sit in the tracker, forgotten, until
> 2013 or later. How likely
On Thu, Oct 22, 2009 at 7:12 PM, Guido van Rossum wrote:
> Yes.
Why?
--yuv
___
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe:
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40ma
This thread moved to python-ideas so please post only there.
http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-ideas/2009-October/005924.html
--yuv
___
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe:
On Sat, Oct 3, 2009 at 8:29 PM, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
> I could show a thousand other examples. It simply isn't true that all,
> or even most, modules have their own exception types.
I might be wrong on this. Your point is extra true for modules in the
standard library (which is what we're talki
On Sat, Oct 3, 2009 at 7:21 PM, Michael Foord wrote:
> [snip...]
> Why not just catch SystemExit? If you want a custom exception the overriding
> .exit() should be sufficient.
> I'd be much more interested in Guido's suggestion of auto-generated custom
> help messages for sub-commands.
Check it
I haven't checked if it's possible, but I suggest Argparse have it's
own exception class that inherits from SystemExit and that exception
would be thrown.
ParseError, or something similar.
I suggest this just because it would be more readable I guess and
would exactly explain why this code exits.
I like how python has a minimalistic and powerful syntax (-1 for the break
___ PEP).
Also, I really dislike the for/else ambiguity "butterflies".
When is the else after a loop executed?1. When the loop isn't entered at
all.
2. When the loop terminates through exhaustion of the list (does this
inclu
for a live demo of how getopt is useful and flexible, I like how Audacity
uses it:
http://www.google.com/codesearch/p?hl=en&sa=N&cd=6&ct=rc#_hWFOhGz9lE/mezzo/scons/sconsign.py&q=getopt%20%22import%20getopt%22%20file:%5C.py$&l=264
To answer your question, it goes like this:
options, args = geto
>
> * Would you be opposed to a note in the getopt documentation suggesting
> argparse as an alternative?
from the top of http://docs.python.org/library/getopt.html - "A more
convenient, flexible, and powerful alternative is the optparse module."I
think this statement should be emphasized better
-1 for deprecating getopt. getopt is super-simple and especially useful for
c programmers learning python.
+1 for argparse.+1 for eventual deprecation of optparse - optparse and
argparse have a very similar syntax and having both is just
confusing. tsboapooowtdi
On Mon, Sep 28, 2009 at 6:46 AM,
13 matches
Mail list logo
