Re: [Python-Dev] python 3.0, tp_compare not used for == test?

2009-02-02 Thread Martin v. Löwis
> Understood. My worry was that we'd get a lot of false positives--- > i.e., warnings about pieces of Python 2.7 that don't need to change. > But I guess that's okay. I don't personally use the -3 flag, but I would expect that these would indeed be annoying. We could arrange to exempt them, by in

Re: [Python-Dev] python 3.0, tp_compare not used for == test?

2009-02-02 Thread Martin v. Löwis
> I'm wondering if Mark should add the exception he recently removed back > in as a Deprecation Warning when tp_compare is defined, but > tp_richcompare is not. Such a warning should also be present when > running with -3 in 2.7 (assuming it isn't already there). > > Otherwise we're going to get m

Re: [Python-Dev] python 3.0, tp_compare not used for == test?

2009-02-02 Thread Mark Dickinson
On Mon, Feb 2, 2009 at 11:38 AM, Nick Coghlan wrote: > That's what the -3 command line switch is for - it sets a boolean flag > that C code can check to see if it should emit warnings for things that > are going to break in Python 3.x. Understood. My worry was that we'd get a lot of false positi

Re: [Python-Dev] python 3.0, tp_compare not used for == test?

2009-02-02 Thread Nick Coghlan
Mark Dickinson wrote: > On Mon, Feb 2, 2009 at 10:36 AM, Nick Coghlan wrote: >> Such a warning should also be present when >> running with -3 in 2.7 (assuming it isn't already there). > > I'm not sure how/whether that would work, given that there are > probably still plenty of 2.7 modules in the

Re: [Python-Dev] python 3.0, tp_compare not used for == test?

2009-02-02 Thread Mark Dickinson
On Mon, Feb 2, 2009 at 10:36 AM, Nick Coghlan wrote: > I'm wondering if Mark should add the exception he recently removed back > in as a Deprecation Warning when tp_compare is defined, but > tp_richcompare is not. This sounds reasonable to me. A third-party module that implements tp_compare but

Re: [Python-Dev] python 3.0, tp_compare not used for == test?

2009-02-02 Thread Nick Coghlan
Terry Reedy wrote: > Campbell Barton wrote: > In 3.0, the build-in cmp() should have been removed and will be for > 3.0.1. Do not use it. I believe the tp_compare slot should not be used > either. It will become reserved. It will not be removed only because > that would change the binary layout

Re: [Python-Dev] python 3.0, tp_compare not used for == test?

2009-02-01 Thread Terry Reedy
Campbell Barton wrote: Hi, I have been writing a new C api that can build with both python 2.6 and 3.0 Questions about using current releases should be directed to the python-list (or comp.lang.python or gmane.comp.python.general), not python-dev, which is for development of future releases.

[Python-Dev] python 3.0, tp_compare not used for == test?

2009-02-01 Thread Campbell Barton
Hi, I have been writing a new C api that can build with both python 2.6 and 3.0 I found that when building with python 2.6, doing "a==b" between 2 different pyrna_struct_Type's would run tp_compare But with python 3.0, "a==b" will always be false and tp_compare function would not even run. The on