M.-A. Lemburg wrote:
I haven't followed the thread, so many I'm repeating things.
Has anyone considered using e.g. MediaWiki (the wiki used for
Wikipedia) for Python documentation ?
I'm asking because this wiki has proven to be ideally suited
for creating complex documentation tasks and
ConfigParser saves the data in a not-predefined order. This is because
it keeps, internally, the information in dictionaries.
I opened a patch in SF 1399309 that orders the info to be saved in the
file through the ConfigParser write() method.
This patch does not let the user to specify the
[moving to python-dev]
On 1/7/06, Reinhold Birkenfeld [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Well, it is not the test that's broken... it's compiler.
[In reference to:
http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-checkins/2006-January/048715.html]
In the past, we haven't checked in tests which are known to be
because I was reminded of them recently, because they may be useful
landmarks in the prospective of future discussions, because expanding
one's understanding of the problem/solution space of language design
is quite a good thing if one is interested in such things...
1)
Gilad Bracha. Pluggable
[Neal Norwitz]
...
In the past, we haven't checked in tests which are known to be broken.
It's an absolute rule that you never check in a change (whether a test
or anything else) that causes ``regretst.py -uall`` to fail. Even if
it passes on your development box, but fails on someone else's
On 1/7/06, Neal Norwitz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'm proposing something like add two files to Lib/test:
outstanding_bugs.py and outstanding_crashes.py. Both would be normal
test files with info about the bug report and the code that causes
problems.
I like this approach. regrtest.py won't
On 1/6/06, von Löwis Martin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I just found that the intel compiler (icc 9.0)
also supports compiler warnings for portability
problems.
Cool. Thanks for the info. It would be nice if Intel would provide
Python developers with a permanent icc license for Python. Can
On 1/7/06, Neal Norwitz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Cool. Thanks for the info. It would be nice if Intel would provide
Python developers with a permanent icc license for Python. Can anyone
help with that?
I'll try. A dutch friend from long ago (CWI) is now working for
Intel's compiler group
I think it's moot unless you also preserve comments. Ideally would be
something that prserved everything (ordering, blank lines, comments
etc.) from how it was read in. Modifying a value should keep its
position. Adding a value should add it to the end of the section it's
in (unless there are
On 1/6/06, Kay Schluehr [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Then simply reject the PEP and the discussion can be stopped on
comp.lang.python too.
Only in the most severe cases does it make sense to create a PEP
specifically to be rejected.
Or why do you think it should be discussed there
again and
Samuele Pedroni wrote:
because I was reminded of them recently, because they may be useful
landmarks in the prospective of future discussions, because expanding
one's understanding of the problem/solution space of language design
is quite a good thing if one is interested in such things...
At 02:01 PM 1/8/2006 +1000, Nick Coghlan wrote:
Samuele Pedroni wrote:
2)
http://homepages.cwi.nl/~ralf/OOHaskell/
state of the art experiment on trying to reconcile object orientation,
type inference and as much as possible expressiveness
PS: I think 1 is much more relevant than 2 for
12 matches
Mail list logo
