Re: [Python-Dev] [Python-checkins] bpo-34203: FAQ now recommends python 3.x over 2.x (GH-9796)

> On Oct 12, 2018, at 7:03 PM, Martin Panter wrote: > >> On 12/10/2018, Eric V. Smith wrote: >>> On 10/12/2018 5:17 AM, Tal Einat wrote: >>> >>> The latest stable releases can always be found on the `Python download page >>> -`_. There are two recommended

Re: [Python-Dev] [Python-checkins] bpo-34203: FAQ now recommends python 3.x over 2.x (GH-9796)

On 12/10/2018, Eric V. Smith wrote: > On 10/12/2018 5:17 AM, Tal Einat wrote: > >> The latest stable releases can always be found on the `Python download page >> -`_. There are two recommended >> production-ready >> -versions at this point in time, because at

Re: [Python-Dev] [Python-checkins] bpo-34203: FAQ now recommends python 3.x over 2.x (GH-9796)

On 10/12/2018 5:17 AM, Tal Einat wrote: The latest stable releases can always be found on the `Python download page -`_. There are two recommended production-ready -versions at this point in time, because at the moment there are two branches of -stable rele

Re: [Python-Dev] [Python-checkins] bpo-34171: Prevent creating Lib/trace.cover when run the trace module. (GH-8841)

On Mon, Aug 27, 2018 at 7:26 AM Victor Stinner wrote: > > Jemery: would you mind to revert this commit since nobody fixed the > buildbot since 2 days? > https://pythondev.readthedocs.io/ci.html#revert-on-fail I think you meant Serhiy :) Anyway, a commit has finally landed that addresses the buil

Re: [Python-Dev] [Python-checkins] bpo-34171: Prevent creating Lib/trace.cover when run the trace module. (GH-8841)

Jemery: would you mind to revert this commit since nobody fixed the buildbot since 2 days? https://pythondev.readthedocs.io/ci.html#revert-on-fail Victor Le sam. 25 août 2018 à 22:50, Jeremy Kloth a écrit : > > On Sat, Aug 25, 2018 at 1:28 AM Serhiy Storchaka > wrote: > > > > https://github.com/

Re: [Python-Dev] [Python-checkins] bpo-34171: Prevent creating Lib/trace.cover when run the trace module. (GH-8841)

On Sat, Aug 25, 2018 at 1:28 AM Serhiy Storchaka wrote: > > https://github.com/python/cpython/commit/c406d5cd74002964a64c3eb7d9e2445a7fd3a03f > commit: c406d5cd74002964a64c3eb7d9e2445a7fd3a03f > branch: master > author: Serhiy Storchaka > committer: GitHub > date: 2018-08-25T10:27:55+03:00 > sum

Re: [Python-Dev] [Python-checkins] bpo-34239: Convert test_bz2 to use tempfile (#8485)

On 28/07/2018 23:54, Chris Jerdonek wrote: On Thu, Jul 26, 2018 at 2:05 PM, Tim Golden wrote: https://github.com/python/cpython/commit/6a62e1d365934de82ff7c634981b3fbf218b4d5f commit: 6a62e1d365934de82ff7c634981b3fbf218b4d5f branch: master author: Tim Golden committer: GitHub date: 2018-07-26

Re: [Python-Dev] [Python-checkins] bpo-34239: Convert test_bz2 to use tempfile (#8485)

On Thu, Jul 26, 2018 at 2:05 PM, Tim Golden wrote: > https://github.com/python/cpython/commit/6a62e1d365934de82ff7c634981b3fbf218b4d5f > commit: 6a62e1d365934de82ff7c634981b3fbf218b4d5f > branch: master > author: Tim Golden > committer: GitHub > date: 2018-07-26T22:05:00+01:00 > summary: > > bpo

Re: [Python-Dev] [Python-checkins] bpo-33522: Enable CI builds on Visual Studio Team Services (GH-6865) (GH-6925)

On Thu, May 17, 2018 at 11:32 PM Gregory P. Smith wrote: > Why did this commit modify .py files, unittests, and test.support? > That is inappropriate for something claiming to merely enable a CI platform. I think there is probably an argument to be made that some of the changes will be improvem

Re: [Python-Dev] [Python-checkins] bpo-33522: Enable CI builds onVisual Studio Team Services (GH-6865) (GH-6925)

: Gregory P. Smith Sent: Thursday, May 17, 2018 21:32 To: python-dev@python.org Cc: python-check...@python.org Subject: Re: [Python-Dev] [Python-checkins] bpo-33522: Enable CI builds onVisual Studio Team Services (GH-6865) (GH-6925) Why did this commit modify .py files, unittests, and test.support

Re: [Python-Dev] [Python-checkins] bpo-33522: Enable CI builds on Visual Studio Team Services (GH-6865) (GH-6925)

Why did this commit modify .py files, unittests, and test.support? That is inappropriate for something claiming to merely enable a CI platform. -gps On Thu, May 17, 2018 at 6:50 AM Steve Dower wrote: > > https://github.com/python/cpython/commit/0d8f83f59c8f4cc7fe125434ca4ecdcac111810f > commit

Re: [Python-Dev] [Python-checkins] bpo-33038: Fix gzip.GzipFile for file objects with a non-string name attribute. (GH-6095)

Sorry about approving this message (I'm a python-dev list moderator)! There will be a few more like it. Looking closer, it appears to be another variation of pure-nuisance spam that's been flooding all sorts of python.org lists. You've been spared many hundreds of those here, but since this one a

Re: [Python-Dev] [Python-checkins] bpo-33038: Fix gzip.GzipFile for file objects with a non-string name attribute. (GH-6095)

From: Serhiy Storchaka To: python-check...@python.org Sent: Wednesday, 9 May 2018, 10:14 Subject: [Python-checkins] bpo-33038: Fix gzip.GzipFile for file objects with a non-string name attribute. (GH-6095) https://github.com/python/cpython/commit/afe5f633e49e0e873d42088ae56819609c803ba0c

Re: [Python-Dev] [Python-checkins] bpo-33038: Fix gzip.GzipFile for file objects with a non-string name attribute. (GH-6095)

From: Serhiy Storchaka To: python-check...@python.org Sent: Wednesday, 9 May 2018, 10:14 Subject: [Python-checkins] bpo-33038: Fix gzip.GzipFile for file objects with a non-string name attribute. (GH-6095) https://github.com/python/cpython/commit/afe5f633e49e0e873d42088ae56819609c803ba0c

Re: [Python-Dev] [Python-checkins] bpo-33038: Fix gzip.GzipFile for file objects with a non-string name attribute. (GH-6095)

From: Serhiy Storchaka To: python-check...@python.org Sent: Wednesday, 9 May 2018, 10:14 Subject: [Python-checkins] bpo-33038: Fix gzip.GzipFile for file objects with a non-string name attribute. (GH-6095) https://github.com/python/cpython/commit/afe5f633e49e0e873d42088ae56819609c803ba0c

Re: [Python-Dev] [Python-checkins] bpo-33038: Fix gzip.GzipFile for file objects with a non-string name attribute. (GH-6095)

From: Serhiy Storchaka To: python-check...@python.org Sent: Wednesday, 9 May 2018, 10:14 Subject: [Python-checkins] bpo-33038: Fix gzip.GzipFile for file objects with a non-string name attribute. (GH-6095) https://github.com/python/cpython/commit/afe5f633e49e0e873d42088ae56819609c

Re: [Python-Dev] [Python-checkins] Exhaustively test dataclass hashing when no hash= value is provided. This is in anticipation of changing how non-default hashing is handled. (GH-5834) (GH-5889)

Thanks. Do you know if this gets backported to 3.7? Eric. On 2/25/2018 1:36 PM, Terry Reedy wrote: On 2/25/2018 11:56 AM, Eric V. Smith wrote: +    # specify any value in the deecorator). I fixed this through the web interface.  The CI now knows that a comment change does not need test

Re: [Python-Dev] [Python-checkins] bpo-5001: More-informative multiprocessing error messages (#3079)

Hi! On Wed, Aug 30, 2017 at 04:32:22PM +0200, Antoine Pitrou wrote: > On Wed, 30 Aug 2017 03:16:42 -0700 > Chris Jerdonek wrote: > > https://github.com/python/cpython/commit/bd73e72b4a9f019be514954b1d40e64dc3a5e81c > > > commit: bd73e72b4a9f019be514954b1d40e64dc3a5e81c > > > branch: master > >

Re: [Python-Dev] [Python-checkins] bpo-5001: More-informative multiprocessing error messages (#3079)

On Wed, 30 Aug 2017 03:21:42 -0700 Chris Jerdonek wrote: > > https://github.com/python/cpython/commit/bd73e72b4a9f019be514954b1d40e64dc3a5e81c > > commit: bd73e72b4a9f019be514954b1d40e64dc3a5e81c > > branch: master > > author: Allen W. Smith, Ph.D > > committer: Antoine Pitrou > > date: 2017-08-

Re: [Python-Dev] [Python-checkins] bpo-5001: More-informative multiprocessing error messages (#3079)

On Wed, 30 Aug 2017 03:16:42 -0700 Chris Jerdonek wrote: > https://github.com/python/cpython/commit/bd73e72b4a9f019be514954b1d40e64dc3a5e81c > > commit: bd73e72b4a9f019be514954b1d40e64dc3a5e81c > > branch: master > > author: Allen W. Smith, Ph.D > > committer: Antoine Pitrou > > date: 2017-08-30

Re: [Python-Dev] [Python-checkins] bpo-5001: More-informative multiprocessing error messages (#3079)

> https://github.com/python/cpython/commit/bd73e72b4a9f019be514954b1d40e64dc3a5e81c > commit: bd73e72b4a9f019be514954b1d40e64dc3a5e81c > branch: master > author: Allen W. Smith, Ph.D > committer: Antoine Pitrou > date: 2017-08-30T00:52:18+02:00 > summary: > > bpo-5001: More-informative multiproce

Re: [Python-Dev] [Python-checkins] bpo-5001: More-informative multiprocessing error messages (#3079)

https://github.com/python/cpython/commit/bd73e72b4a9f019be514954b1d40e64dc3a5e81c > commit: bd73e72b4a9f019be514954b1d40e64dc3a5e81c > branch: master > author: Allen W. Smith, Ph.D > committer: Antoine Pitrou > date: 2017-08-30T00:52:18+02:00 > summary: > > ... > @@ -307,6 +309,10 @@ def imap(sel

Re: [Python-Dev] [Python-checkins] [python/cpython] 4538dd: Fix bpo-29528 Use a secure variable to stop spam (...

--Berker On Mon, Feb 13, 2017 at 8:54 PM, Brett Cannon wrote: > > > On Mon, 13 Feb 2017 at 07:10 Barry Warsaw wrote: >> >> On Feb 11, 2017, at 08:11 PM, Andrew M. Kuchling wrote: >> >> >Are we planning to include the diffs in python-checkins e-mail, or are >> >they gone for good? >> > >> >(Whil

Re: [Python-Dev] [Python-checkins] [python/cpython] 4538dd: Fix bpo-29528 Use a secure variable to stop spam (...

On Mon, 13 Feb 2017 at 07:10 Barry Warsaw wrote: > On Feb 11, 2017, at 08:11 PM, Andrew M. Kuchling wrote: > > >Are we planning to include the diffs in python-checkins e-mail, or are > >they gone for good? > > > >(While they made the list's messages and digests larger, I liked > >having the diffs

Re: [Python-Dev] [Python-checkins] [python/cpython] 4538dd: Fix bpo-29528 Use a secure variable to stop spam (...

On Feb 11, 2017, at 08:11 PM, Andrew M. Kuchling wrote: >Are we planning to include the diffs in python-checkins e-mail, or are >they gone for good? > >(While they made the list's messages and digests larger, I liked >having the diffs because you could page through them to see what >changes were m

Re: [Python-Dev] [Python-checkins] cpython (2.7): Update the porting HOWTO

On 17 December 2016 at 20:39, brett.cannon wrote: > https://hg.python.org/cpython/rev/287d4290b1b4 > changeset: 105714:287d4290b1b4 > branch: 2.7 > parent: 105677:eb02db65e148 > user:Brett Cannon > date:Sat Dec 17 12:38:54 2016 -0800 > summary: > Update the porting H

Re: [Python-Dev] [Python-checkins] Daily reference leaks (b78574cb00ab): sum=1120

On 2016-11-19 2:46 PM, Kevin Modzelewski wrote: Hi Yury, you may be interested in some leak-finding code that wrote for Pyston. It uses the GC infrastructure to show you objects that were directly leaked, ignoring indirect leaks -- ie objects that were only leaked because they were referenced

Re: [Python-Dev] [Python-checkins] Daily reference leaks (b78574cb00ab): sum=1120

Hi Yury, you may be interested in some leak-finding code that wrote for Pyston. It uses the GC infrastructure to show you objects that were directly leaked, ignoring indirect leaks -- ie objects that were only leaked because they were referenced by a leaked object. It can often give you a very sm

Re: [Python-Dev] [Python-checkins] Daily reference leaks (b78574cb00ab): sum=1120

On 2016-11-09 10:16 AM, Yury Selivanov wrote: I'm trying to fix refleaks in 3.6. So far: On 2016-11-09 4:02 AM, solip...@pitrou.net wrote: results for b78574cb00ab on branch "default" test_ast leaked [98, 98, 98] references, sum=294 test_ast lea

Re: [Python-Dev] [Python-checkins] Daily reference leaks (b78574cb00ab): sum=1120

I'm trying to fix refleaks in 3.6. So far: On 2016-11-09 4:02 AM, solip...@pitrou.net wrote: results for b78574cb00ab on branch "default" test_ast leaked [98, 98, 98] references, sum=294 test_ast leaked [98, 98, 98] memory blocks, sum=294 test_asyn

Re: [Python-Dev] [Python-checkins] cpython (3.5): remove extra PyErr_Format arguments (closes #28454)

Oops, you are right. Silly little comma... -- Jeremy Kloth ___ 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/archive%40mail-archive.com

Re: [Python-Dev] [Python-checkins] cpython (3.5): remove extra PyErr_Format arguments (closes #28454)

On Mon, Oct 17, 2016 at 12:43 PM, Jeremy Kloth wrote: > On Sun, Oct 16, 2016 at 4:42 PM, benjamin.peterson > wrote: >> --- a/Objects/unicodeobject.c >> +++ b/Objects/unicodeobject.c >> @@ -3009,7 +3009,7 @@ >> "'%.400s' decoder returned '%.400s' instead of 'str'; " >>

Re: [Python-Dev] [Python-checkins] cpython (3.5): remove extra PyErr_Format arguments (closes #28454)

On Sun, Oct 16, 2016 at 4:42 PM, benjamin.peterson wrote: > --- a/Objects/unicodeobject.c > +++ b/Objects/unicodeobject.c > @@ -3009,7 +3009,7 @@ > "'%.400s' decoder returned '%.400s' instead of 'str'; " > "use codecs.decode() to decode to arbitrary type

Re: [Python-Dev] [Python-checkins] cpython (merge 3.5 -> default): Null merge.

On 29 September 2016 at 04:26, Zachary Ware wrote: > On Wed, Sep 28, 2016 at 10:04 PM, Terry Reedy wrote: >> On 9/28/2016 9:57 PM, terry.reedy wrote: >>> https://hg.python.org/cpython/rev/02eb35b79af0 >> >> >> (2nd try) I mistakenly null merged from 3.5 to default. >> Should a now do a proper nul

Re: [Python-Dev] [Python-checkins] cpython (merge 3.5 -> default): Null merge.

On 29 September 2016 at 03:04, Terry Reedy wrote: > On 9/28/2016 9:57 PM, terry.reedy wrote: >> https://hg.python.org/cpython/rev/02eb35b79af0 > > (2nd try) I mistakenly null merged from 3.5 to default. > Should a now do a proper null merge from 3.5 to 3.6 to default? Yes, I think 3.5 needs to be

Re: [Python-Dev] [Python-checkins] cpython (2.7): properly handle the single null-byte file (closes #24022)

On Mon, Sep 19, 2016, at 01:35, Eric V. Smith wrote: > Shouldn't there be a test added for this? In fact, there is one: test_particularly_evil_undecodable in test_compile.py. No has managed to make Python crash by exploiting this particular problem—it's just ASan complaints.

Re: [Python-Dev] [Python-checkins] cpython: Use HTTP in testPythonOrg

On Sun, Sep 11, 2016 at 3:58 PM, Eric V. Smith wrote: > Hi, Berker. > > Could you add a comment to the test on why this should use http? I can see > this bouncing back and forth between http and https, as people clean an up > all http usages to be https. Hi Eric, Sorry, I missed your email. Vict

Re: [Python-Dev] [Python-checkins] cpython (2.7): properly handle the single null-byte file (closes #24022)

Shouldn't there be a test added for this? -- Eric. > On Sep 19, 2016, at 2:44 AM, benjamin.peterson > wrote: > > https://hg.python.org/cpython/rev/c6438a3df7a4 > changeset: 103950:c6438a3df7a4 > branch: 2.7 > parent: 103927:a8771f230c06 > user:Benjamin Peterson > date:

Re: [Python-Dev] [Python-checkins] cpython: Use HTTP in testPythonOrg

I just noticed a failure on a recent Windows build: http://buildbot.python.org/all/builders/x86%20Windows7%203.x/builds/11620/steps/test/logs/stdio "urllib.error.URLError: " So I guess that the change is to restrict the unit test on parsing the robot failed and not test the SSL module. Am I righ

Re: [Python-Dev] [Python-checkins] cpython: Fixes test_getargs2 to get the buildbots working again.

On 11Sep2016 1959, Martin Panter wrote: On 12 September 2016 at 02:48, Steve Dower wrote: Fixes test_getargs2 to get the buildbots working again. I'm not sure this is the fix we want to keep here, but it was sufficient to get the test going and unblock all the buildbots. I'm not entirely s

Re: [Python-Dev] [Python-checkins] cpython: Fixes test_getargs2 to get the buildbots working again.

On 12 September 2016 at 02:48, Steve Dower wrote: >> Fixes test_getargs2 to get the buildbots working again. > > I'm not sure this is the fix we want to keep here, but it was sufficient to > get the test going and unblock all the buildbots. > > I'm not entirely sure when the break appeared (esse

Re: [Python-Dev] [Python-checkins] cpython: Fixes test_getargs2 to get the buildbots working again.

On 11Sep2016 1944, steve.dower wrote: https://hg.python.org/cpython/rev/7793d34609cb changeset: 103679:7793d34609cb user:Steve Dower date:Sun Sep 11 19:43:51 2016 -0700 summary: Fixes test_getargs2 to get the buildbots working again. files: Lib/test/test_getargs2.py | 2 +

Re: [Python-Dev] [Python-checkins] cpython: Use HTTP in testPythonOrg

Hi, Berker. Could you add a comment to the test on why this should use http? I can see this bouncing back and forth between http and https, as people clean an up all http usages to be https. Thanks. Eric. On 9/11/2016 8:46 AM, berker.peksag wrote: https://hg.python.org/cpython/rev/bc085b7e8

Re: [Python-Dev] [Python-checkins] cpython: make invalid_comma_and_underscore a real prototype

Oops, thanks Benjamin. That was a copy and paste error. Eric. On 9/9/2016 11:15 PM, benjamin.peterson wrote: https://hg.python.org/cpython/rev/1e7b636b6009 changeset: 103539:1e7b636b6009 user:Benjamin Peterson date:Fri Sep 09 20:14:05 2016 -0700 summary: make invalid_comma_

Re: [Python-Dev] [Python-checkins] devguide: Star self as idlelib expert. Mark other 2 as inactive.

On 12 July 2016 at 04:14, Martin Panter wrote: > On 12 July 2016 at 03:47, terry.reedy wrote: >> https://hg.python.org/devguide/rev/cc1c0dd798e7 > > Terry it looks like you accidentally added Christian back (undoing > ) Sorry, you can ignore that,

Re: [Python-Dev] [Python-checkins] devguide: Star self as idlelib expert. Mark other 2 as inactive.

On 12 July 2016 at 03:47, terry.reedy wrote: > https://hg.python.org/devguide/rev/cc1c0dd798e7 Terry it looks like you accidentally added Christian back (undoing ) > -xml.parsers.expat > -xml.sax > +xml.parsers.expat christian.heimes > +xml.sa

Re: [Python-Dev] [Python-checkins] cpython (3.5): Fix os.urandom() using getrandom() on Linux

On 06/14/2016 08:07 AM, Steven D'Aprano wrote: Is this right? I thought we had decided that os.urandom should *not* fall back on getrandom on Linux? We decided that os.urandom() should not *block* on Linux. Which it doesn't; we now strictly call getrandom(GRND_NONBLOCK), which will never b

Re: [Python-Dev] [Python-checkins] cpython (3.5): Fix os.urandom() using getrandom() on Linux

Le 14 juin 2016 5:28 PM, "Jelle Zijlstra" a écrit : >The problem isn't that os.urandom() uses getrandom(), it's that it calls it in a mode that may block. Except if it changed very recently, os.urandom() doesn't block anymore thanks to my previous change ;-) Victor __

Re: [Python-Dev] [Python-checkins] cpython (3.5): Fix os.urandom() using getrandom() on Linux

Sorry, I don't hve the bandwith to follow the huge discussion around random in Python. If you want my help, please write a PEP to summarize the discussion. My change fixes an obvious bug. Even if the Python API changes, I don't expect that all the C code will be removed. Victor Le 14 juin 2016 5:

Re: [Python-Dev] [Python-checkins] cpython (3.5): Fix os.urandom() using getrandom() on Linux

I think this is an issue unrelated to the big discussion from a little while ago. The problem isn't that os.urandom() uses getrandom(), it's that it calls it in a mode that may block. 2016-06-14 8:07 GMT-07:00 Steven D'Aprano : > Is this right? I thought we had decided that os.urandom should *not

Re: [Python-Dev] [Python-checkins] cpython (3.5): Fix os.urandom() using getrandom() on Linux

Is this right? I thought we had decided that os.urandom should *not* fall back on getrandom on Linux? On Tue, Jun 14, 2016 at 02:36:27PM +, victor. stinner wrote: > https://hg.python.org/cpython/rev/e028e86a5b73 > changeset: 102033:e028e86a5b73 > branch: 3.5 > parent: 102031:a36

Re: [Python-Dev] [Python-checkins] peps: Short subsection on annotating coroutines (Ivan L, #225).

On Tue, 24 May 2016 at 12:20 guido.van.rossum wrote: > https://hg.python.org/peps/rev/50c3f5aefbb7 > changeset: 6341:50c3f5aefbb7 > user:Guido van Rossum > date:Tue May 24 12:18:54 2016 -0700 > summary: > Short subsection on annotating coroutines (Ivan L, #225). > > files: >

Re: [Python-Dev] [Python-checkins] cpython (2.7): Issue #25910: Fixed more links in the docs.

On 11.04.16 17:41, Tim Golden wrote: On 11/04/2016 15:38, serhiy.storchaka wrote: - `__. + `__. Is there any intended irony in our link to openssl not being via

Re: [Python-Dev] [Python-checkins] cpython (2.7): Issue #25910: Fixed more links in the docs.

On 11/04/2016 15:38, serhiy.storchaka wrote: > - `__. > + `__. Is there any intended irony in our link to openssl not being via https? :) TJG

Re: [Python-Dev] [Python-checkins] cpython: Python 8: no pep8, no chocolate!

On Apr 1, 2016, at 14:07, Brett Cannon wrote: > Are you planning on removing this after today? My worry about leaving it in > is if it's a modified copy that follows your Python 8 April Fools joke then > it will quite possibly trip people up who try and run pep8 but don't have it > installed, l

Re: [Python-Dev] [Python-checkins] cpython: merge

On 2 February 2016 at 05:21, raymond.hettinger wrote: > https://hg.python.org/cpython/rev/0731f097157b > changeset: 100142:0731f097157b > parent: 100140:c7f1acdd8be1 > user:Raymond Hettinger > date:Mon Feb 01 21:21:19 2016 -0800 > summary: > merge > > files: > Doc/libra

Re: [Python-Dev] [Python-checkins] BAD Benchmark Results for Python Default 2016-01-26

IMO the timings of the benchmark suite are a bit unstable -- this is not the fault of Intel's setup, I noticed it also when running the suite myself. On Tue, Jan 26, 2016 at 06:48:54PM +, Stewart, David C wrote: > Wow, what happened to Python default to cause such a regression? > > > > >

Re: [Python-Dev] [Python-checkins] Daily reference leaks (cbd4a6a2657e): sum=134

Hi, I pushed a fix before you sent your message. At least test_ast should be fixed. https://hg.python.org/cpython/rev/c5df914e73ad FYI I'm unable to reproduce the test_collections leak. Victor Le mardi 26 janvier 2016, Brett Cannon a écrit : > Looks like Victor's ast.Constant change introduc

Re: [Python-Dev] [Python-checkins] Daily reference leaks (cbd4a6a2657e): sum=134

Looks like Victor's ast.Constant change introduced a refleak. On Tue, 26 Jan 2016 at 00:47 wrote: > results for cbd4a6a2657e on branch "default" > > > test_ast leaked [39, 39, 39] references, sum=117 > test_ast leaked [5, 5, 5] memory blocks, sum=15 >

Re: [Python-Dev] [Python-checkins] Daily reference leaks (e5e507a357a6): sum=103

On 24.11.15 21:31, Brett Cannon wrote: Someone just added a leak to pickle. It always was here. I just added tests that expose it. http://bugs.python.org/issue25725 ___ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/l

Re: [Python-Dev] [Python-checkins] Daily reference leaks (e5e507a357a6): sum=103

Someone just added a leak to pickle. On Tue, 24 Nov 2015 at 01:45 wrote: > results for e5e507a357a6 on branch "default" > > > test_asyncio leaked [3, 0, 0] memory blocks, sum=3 > test_functools leaked [0, 2, 2] memory blocks, sum=4 > test_pickle leake

Re: [Python-Dev] [Python-checkins] cpython (3.4): asyncio.docs: Fix versionadded

On 18 November 2015 at 17:45, yury.selivanov wrote: > https://hg.python.org/cpython/rev/b34c42e46e7b > changeset: 99204:b34c42e46e7b > branch: 3.4 > parent: 99201:89d66f912671 > user:Yury Selivanov > date:Wed Nov 18 12:44:31 2015 -0500 > summary: > asyncio.docs: Fix

Re: [Python-Dev] [Python-checkins] Daily reference leaks (97e2a6810f7f): sum=10

Hi, I opened the http://bugs.python.org/issue25645 It looks like a simple regression in _pickle. I wrote a patch. Victor 2015-11-16 19:49 GMT+01:00 Brett Cannon : > Just an FYI there seems to be a consistent, minor refcount leak found by > test_capi that has been there for what seems like a cou

Re: [Python-Dev] [Python-checkins] Daily reference leaks (97e2a6810f7f): sum=10

Just an FYI there seems to be a consistent, minor refcount leak found by test_capi that has been there for what seems like a couple of weeks. On Mon, 16 Nov 2015 at 00:42 wrote: > results for 97e2a6810f7f on branch "default" > > > test_asyncio leaked

Re: [Python-Dev] [Python-checkins] cpython (2.7): Backport early-out 91259f061cfb to reduce the cost of bb1a2944bcb6

There's two instances in that file. On Thu, Nov 12, 2015, at 07:20, Raymond Hettinger wrote: > > > On Nov 11, 2015, at 10:50 PM, Benjamin Peterson wrote: > > > >> +if (Py_SIZE(deque) == 0) > >> +return; > >> + > > > > dequeue is not varsized in Python 2.7, so using Py_SIZE() is inc

Re: [Python-Dev] [Python-checkins] cpython (2.7): Backport early-out 91259f061cfb to reduce the cost of bb1a2944bcb6

> On Nov 11, 2015, at 10:50 PM, Benjamin Peterson wrote: > >> +if (Py_SIZE(deque) == 0) >> +return; >> + > > dequeue is not varsized in Python 2.7, so using Py_SIZE() is incorrect. Fixed in a2a518b6ded4. -if (Py_SIZE(deque) == 0) +if (deque->len == 0) Raymond ___

Re: [Python-Dev] [Python-checkins] cpython (2.7): Backport early-out 91259f061cfb to reduce the cost of bb1a2944bcb6

On Tue, Oct 6, 2015, at 19:12, raymond.hettinger wrote: > https://hg.python.org/cpython/rev/37aee118e1a3 > changeset: 98578:37aee118e1a3 > branch: 2.7 > parent: 98572:60c44a09c5fc > user:Raymond Hettinger > date:Tue Oct 06 23:12:02 2015 -0400 > summary: > Backport e

Re: [Python-Dev] [Python-checkins] Daily reference leaks (d7e490db8d54): sum=61494

On Wed, Oct 21, 2015 at 10:10:56AM -0700, Ethan Furman wrote: > On 10/21/2015 08:53 AM, Random832 wrote: > > >If a pure python class can cause a reference leak, doesn't that mean it > >is only a symptom rather than the real cause? Or is it that the use of > >@object.__new__ is considered "too clev

Re: [Python-Dev] [Python-checkins] Daily reference leaks (d7e490db8d54): sum=61494

On 10/21/2015 08:53 AM, Random832 wrote: If a pure python class can cause a reference leak, doesn't that mean it is only a symptom rather than the real cause? Or is it that the use of @object.__new__ is considered "too clever" to be worth fixing? Where can I find out more about using `object._

Re: [Python-Dev] [Python-checkins] Daily reference leaks (d7e490db8d54): sum=61494

On Wed, 21 Oct 2015 at 09:33 Joe Jevnik wrote: > Sorry about introducing this. Where can I subscribe to these automated > emails. > The emails are sent to the python-checkins mailing list. > Also, how do I go about running this locally? > If you look at the bottom of the email that reports th

Re: [Python-Dev] [Python-checkins] Daily reference leaks (d7e490db8d54): sum=61494

Sorry about introducing this. Where can I subscribe to these automated emails. Also, how do I go about running this locally? On default I tried running `./python -m test -l test_capi` did not print anything about leaks. I think that using `object.__new__` as a decorator here is the same as subclass

Re: [Python-Dev] [Python-checkins] Daily reference leaks (d7e490db8d54): sum=61494

Le 21/10/2015 17:32, Raymond Hettinger a écrit : > > Thanks for hunting this down. I had seen the automated reference leak posts > but didn't suspect that a pure python class would have caused the leak. Yes, it's a bit baffling at first. > I'm re-opening > https://mail.python.org/pipermail/

Re: [Python-Dev] [Python-checkins] Daily reference leaks (d7e490db8d54): sum=61494

Raymond Hettinger writes: > Thanks for hunting this down. I had seen the automated reference leak > posts but didn't suspect that a pure python class would have caused > the leak. > > I'm re-opening > https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2015-October/141993.html > and will take a look at

Re: [Python-Dev] [Python-checkins] Daily reference leaks (d7e490db8d54): sum=61494

On Wed, Oct 21, 2015 at 9:32 AM, Raymond Hettinger wrote: > I'm re-opening > https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2015-October/141993.html Presumably you meant http://bugs.python.org/issue24379. :) -eric ___ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@

Re: [Python-Dev] [Python-checkins] Daily reference leaks (d7e490db8d54): sum=61494

> On Oct 20, 2015, at 3:57 PM, Antoine Pitrou wrote: > > >> These leaks have been here a while. Anyone know the cause? >> >> On Tue, 20 Oct 2015 at 01:47 wrote: >> >>> results for d7e490db8d54 on branch "default" >>> >>> >>> test_capi leaked [541

Re: [Python-Dev] [Python-checkins] Daily reference leaks (d7e490db8d54): sum=61494

[Adding Raymond to the thread, since he doesn't always follow the lists closely.] On Tue, Oct 20, 2015 at 8:23 PM, Benjamin Peterson wrote: > > > On Tue, Oct 20, 2015, at 15:57, Antoine Pitrou wrote: > > > > > These leaks have been here a while. Anyone know the cause? > > > > > > On Tue, 20 Oct

Re: [Python-Dev] [Python-checkins] Daily reference leaks (d7e490db8d54): sum=61494

On Tue, Oct 20, 2015, at 15:57, Antoine Pitrou wrote: > > > These leaks have been here a while. Anyone know the cause? > > > > On Tue, 20 Oct 2015 at 01:47 wrote: > > > >> results for d7e490db8d54 on branch "default" > >> > >> > >> test_capi leaked

Re: [Python-Dev] [Python-checkins] Daily reference leaks (d7e490db8d54): sum=61494

> These leaks have been here a while. Anyone know the cause? > > On Tue, 20 Oct 2015 at 01:47 wrote: > >> results for d7e490db8d54 on branch "default" >> >> >> test_capi leaked [5411, 5411, 5411] references, sum=16233 >> test_capi leaked [1421, 1423,

Re: [Python-Dev] [Python-checkins] Daily reference leaks (d7e490db8d54): sum=61494

These leaks have been here a while. Anyone know the cause? On Tue, 20 Oct 2015 at 01:47 wrote: > results for d7e490db8d54 on branch "default" > > > test_capi leaked [5411, 5411, 5411] references, sum=16233 > test_capi leaked [1421, 1423, 1423] memory

Re: [Python-Dev] [Python-checkins] cpython: In-line the append operations inside deque_inplace_repeat().

On Mon, 14 Sep 2015 at 15:37 Raymond Hettinger wrote: > > > On Sep 14, 2015, at 12:49 PM, Brett Cannon wrote: > > > > Would it be worth adding a comment that the block of code is an inlined > copy of deque_append()? > > Or maybe even turn the append() function into a macro so you minimize > code

Re: [Python-Dev] [Python-checkins] cpython: In-line the append operations inside deque_inplace_repeat().

> On Sep 14, 2015, at 12:49 PM, Brett Cannon wrote: > > Would it be worth adding a comment that the block of code is an inlined copy > of deque_append()? > Or maybe even turn the append() function into a macro so you minimize code > duplication? I don't think either would be helpful. The poi

Re: [Python-Dev] [Python-checkins] cpython: In-line the append operations inside deque_inplace_repeat().

Would it be worth adding a comment that the block of code is an inlined copy of deque_append()? Or maybe even turn the append() function into a macro so you minimize code duplication? On Sat, 12 Sep 2015 at 08:00 raymond.hettinger wrote: > https://hg.python.org/cpython/rev/cb96ffe6ff10 > changes

Re: [Python-Dev] [Python-checkins] peps: We have a 3.6 release PEP.

> On Jun 1, 2015, at 11:04, Yury Selivanov wrote: > > It looks like we now have two 3.6 release PEPs: 494 & 495 Sorry about the confusion. The second checkin (for 495) has been reverted; PEP 494 will be the ongoing PEP. ___ Python-Dev mailing list

Re: [Python-Dev] [Python-checkins] peps: We have a 3.6 release PEP.

It looks like we now have two 3.6 release PEPs: 494 & 495 Yury On 2015-06-01 1:59 PM, barry.warsaw wrote: https://hg.python.org/peps/rev/a50d51e8c748 changeset: 5888:a50d51e8c748 user:Barry Warsaw date:Mon Jun 01 13:59:32 2015 -0400 summary: We have a 3.6 release PEP. fil

Re: [Python-Dev] [Python-checkins] cpython (3.4): Issue #23840: tokenize.open() now closes the temporary binary file on error to

On Tue, 26 May 2015 08:20:01 +0200, Victor Stinner wrote: > What is wrong with "except:" in this specific case? Nothing is wrong with it from a technical standpoint. However, if we use 'except BaseException' that makes it clear that someone has thought about it and decided that all exceptions s

Re: [Python-Dev] [Python-checkins] cpython (3.4): Issue #23840: tokenize.open() now closes the temporary binary file on error to

On 2015-05-26 3:54 AM, Victor Stinner wrote: 2015-05-26 8:44 GMT+02:00 Serhiy Storchaka : No, finally is not correct there. buffer shouldn't be closed if no exception is raised. Yep. The binary file must only be closed in case of error, as written in the commit message. Right. My bad, sor

Re: [Python-Dev] [Python-checkins] cpython (3.4): Issue #23840: tokenize.open() now closes the temporary binary file on error to

2015-05-26 8:44 GMT+02:00 Serhiy Storchaka : > No, finally is not correct there. buffer shouldn't be closed if no exception > is raised. Yep. The binary file must only be closed in case of error, as written in the commit message. > And this is one of the cases in which bare 'except:' is absolutel

Re: [Python-Dev] [Python-checkins] cpython (3.4): Issue #23840: tokenize.open() now closes the temporary binary file on error to

On 26.05.15 08:33, Yury Selivanov wrote: On 2015-05-26 12:26 AM, Terry Reedy wrote: +try: +encoding, lines = detect_encoding(buffer.readline) +buffer.seek(0) +text = TextIOWrapper(buffer, encoding, line_buffering=True) +text.mode = 'r' +return text +

Re: [Python-Dev] [Python-checkins] cpython (3.4): Issue #23840: tokenize.open() now closes the temporary binary file on error to

What is wrong with "except:" in this specific case? Victor Le mardi 26 mai 2015, Yury Selivanov a écrit : > > > On 2015-05-26 12:26 AM, Terry Reedy wrote: > >> +try: >>> +encoding, lines = detect_encoding(buffer.readline) >>> +buffer.seek(0) >>> +text = TextIOWrapper

Re: [Python-Dev] [Python-checkins] cpython (3.4): Issue #23840: tokenize.open() now closes the temporary binary file on error to

On 2015-05-26 12:26 AM, Terry Reedy wrote: +try: +encoding, lines = detect_encoding(buffer.readline) +buffer.seek(0) +text = TextIOWrapper(buffer, encoding, line_buffering=True) +text.mode = 'r' +return text +except: +buffer.close() +

Re: [Python-Dev] [Python-checkins] peps: PEP 489: The PEP is accepted.

Ah thanks. I just kept an eye out for your name. :) On Sat, May 23, 2015, 16:32 Eric Snow wrote: > On Sat, May 23, 2015 at 2:22 PM, Brett Cannon wrote: > > Are you also going to check the code in or is someone else doing it? > > Nick already did: > > http://bugs.python.org/issue24268 > https://

Re: [Python-Dev] [Python-checkins] peps: PEP 489: The PEP is accepted.

On Sat, May 23, 2015 at 2:22 PM, Brett Cannon wrote: > Are you also going to check the code in or is someone else doing it? Nick already did: http://bugs.python.org/issue24268 https://hg.python.org/cpython/rev/e729b946cc03 :) -eric > > > On Fri, May 22, 2015, 17:47 eric.snow wrote: >> >> htt

Re: [Python-Dev] [Python-checkins] peps: PEP 489: The PEP is accepted.

Are you also going to check the code in or is someone else doing it? On Fri, May 22, 2015, 17:47 eric.snow wrote: > https://hg.python.org/peps/rev/1fbc23a1078c > changeset: 5874:1fbc23a1078c > user:Eric Snow > date:Fri May 22 15:45:38 2015 -0600 > summary: > PEP 489: The PEP

Re: [Python-Dev] [Python-checkins] peps: Apply Chris's changes, including an acceptance mark

On Mon, May 18, 2015 at 1:04 AM, Yury Selivanov wrote: > Chris, > > Could you please add a link to the email where the PEP was accepted? Sure. A Resolution: header is the right way to do this? Done. ChrisA ___ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.

Re: [Python-Dev] [Python-checkins] peps: Apply Chris's changes, including an acceptance mark

Chris, Could you please add a link to the email where the PEP was accepted? Thanks, Yury On 2015-05-16 10:12 PM, chris.angelico wrote: https://hg.python.org/peps/rev/f876276ce076 changeset: 5854:f876276ce076 user:Chris Angelico date:Sun May 17 12:12:19 2015 +1000 summary:

Re: [Python-Dev] [Python-checkins] cpython: Issue #24064: Property() docstrings are now writeable.

On Wed, May 13, 2015 at 11:56 AM, Eric V. Smith wrote: > On 5/13/2015 4:10 AM, raymond.hettinger wrote: >> https://hg.python.org/cpython/rev/1e8a768fa0a5 >> changeset: 96010:1e8a768fa0a5 >> user:Raymond Hettinger >> date:Wed May 13 01:09:59 2015 -0700 >> summary: >> Issue #240

Re: [Python-Dev] [Python-checkins] cpython: Issue #24064: Property() docstrings are now writeable.

On 5/13/2015 4:10 AM, raymond.hettinger wrote: > https://hg.python.org/cpython/rev/1e8a768fa0a5 > changeset: 96010:1e8a768fa0a5 > user:Raymond Hettinger > date:Wed May 13 01:09:59 2015 -0700 > summary: > Issue #24064: Property() docstrings are now writeable. > (Patch by Berker

Re: [Python-Dev] [Python-checkins] cpython (3.4): asyncio: async() function is deprecated in favour of ensure_future().

On 11 May 2015 at 20:47, Yury Selivanov wrote: > Yes, I'm in the process of writing it ;) (as well as for new > set_task_factory()) Cool - sorry for being a nag :-) Paul ___ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/

Re: [Python-Dev] [Python-checkins] cpython (3.4): asyncio: async() function is deprecated in favour of ensure_future().

Yes, I'm in the process of writing it ;) (as well as for new set_task_factory()) Thanks, Yury On 2015-05-11 3:42 PM, Paul Moore wrote: On 11 May 2015 at 19:50, yury.selivanov wrote: https://hg.python.org/cpython/rev/b78127eafad7 changeset: 95956:b78127eafad7 branch: 3.4 parent:

Re: [Python-Dev] [Python-checkins] cpython (3.4): asyncio: async() function is deprecated in favour of ensure_future().

On 11 May 2015 at 19:50, yury.selivanov wrote: > https://hg.python.org/cpython/rev/b78127eafad7 > changeset: 95956:b78127eafad7 > branch: 3.4 > parent: 95953:a983d63e3321 > user:Yury Selivanov > date:Mon May 11 14:48:38 2015 -0400 > summary: > asyncio: async() functi

  1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   9   10   >