on 12.07.2006 07:53 Martin v. Löwis said the following:
> Anthony Baxter wrote:
>>> The right thing to do is IRIs.
>> For 2.5, should we at least detect that it's unicode and raise a
>> useful error?
>
> That can certainly be done, sure.
>
> Martin
That would be great.
And I agree that updati
>> Python 2.3:
>>
>> >>> import time
>> >>> time.strftime("%Y-%m-%d", (2005, 6, 4) + (0,)*6)
>> '2005-06-04'
Martin> Is there any specific reason you couldn't write
Martin> "%d-%02d-%02d" % (2005, 6, 4)
Martin> (i.e. not use strftime at all)?
Sure, but that was
Fredrik Lundh wrote:
> Georg Brandl wrote:
>
>> I've just closed a bug report wishing for long option support,
>> pointing to a patch sitting in the patch tracker implementing
>> this.
>>
>> Should we accept at least the very common options "--help" and
>> "--version" in 2.5?
>
> Guido pronounced
Georg Brandl wrote:
> Late it comes, but here is a patch for getopt.c implementing
> this pronouncement. I think there's no need to wait for 2.6 with it,
> or is there?
check it in already.
___
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python.org
http://
During my testing of Python 2.5b2, I've found something that may be worthy of discussion. I suspect that recent GC and finalization changes have altered the behavior of the Popen object in subprocess.py. I am now getting many many many finalization warnings in my code like:
Exception exceptions.A
Terry Reedy wrote:
> "Boris Borcic" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> I agree with you (and argued it in "scopes vs augmented assignment vs
>> sets"
>> recently) that mutating would be sufficient /if/ the compiler would view
>> augmented assignment as mutations oper
Why do I have the feeling you sent this to the wrong list?
On 7/10/06, Perkins, Christopher <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> John,
>
> I see what you are doing with the algorithm now, and I can easily re-factor
> it. What I am having issues with is how structured it is. 5 minute
> windows? Then run
On Wednesday 12 July 2006 21:55, Georg Brandl wrote:
> >> Should we accept at least the very common options "--help" and
> >> "--version" in 2.5?
> >
> > Guido pronounced on this in May
>
> Late it comes, but here is a patch for getopt.c implementing
> this pronouncement. I think there's no need to
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Jul 10, 2006, at 9:52 PM, Barry Warsaw wrote:
> Patch #1520294 adds support for attributes defined with PyGetSetDef
> in extension modules to pydoc, specifically so things like help
> (array.array.typecode) gives something useful, like the attri
Hi Brett,
On Tue, Jul 11, 2006 at 06:05:21PM -0700, Brett Cannon wrote:
> It is the last point in the first paragraph on time.strftime() discussing
> what changed in Python 2.4 as to what the change was. It's also in
> Misc/NEWS . Basically the guy didn't read the release notes or the docs to
>
On 7/12/06, Armin Rigo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Only two breakages is certainly nice, and I know that we all try quite
> hard to minimize that; that's probably still two breakages too much.
I agree, but some of this responsibility has to fall to users.
Sometimes these breakages are bugs, pur
Ka-Ping Yee writes:
> A. The interpreter will not crash no matter what Python code
> it is given to execute.
Why?
We don't want it to crash the embedding app (which might be another
python interpreter), but if the sandboxed interpreter itself crashes,
is that so bad? The embedding app
On Jul 12, 2006, at 2:23 PM, Jim Jewett wrote:
> Ka-Ping Yee writes:
>
>> A. The interpreter will not crash no matter what Python code
>> it is given to execute.
>
> Why?
>
> We don't want it to crash the embedding app (which might be another
> python interpreter), but if the sandboxed i
Boris Borcic wrote:
>> note that most examples of this type already work, if the target type is
>> mutable, and implement the right operations:
>>
>> def counter(num):
>> num = mutable_int(num)
>> def inc():
>> num += 1
>> return num
>>
On Thu, 13 Jul 2006, Fredrik Lundh wrote:
> Boris Borcic wrote:
>
> >> note that most examples of this type already work, if the target type is
> >> mutable, and implement the right operations:
> >>
> >> def counter(num):
> >> num = mutable_int(num)
> >> def inc():
> >>
On 7/12/06, Armin Rigo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hi Brett,On Tue, Jul 11, 2006 at 06:05:21PM -0700, Brett Cannon wrote:> It is the last point in the first paragraph on time.strftime() discussing> what changed in Python 2.4 as to what the change was. It's also in
> Misc/NEWS . Basically the guy d
On 7/12/06, Jim Jewett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Ka-Ping Yee writes:> A. The interpreter will not crash no matter what Python code> it is given to execute.Why?We don't want it to crash the embedding app (which might be another
python interpreter), but if the sandboxed interpreter itself c
On 7/12/06, Armin Rigo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I guess I'm going to side with Greg Black on his blog entry.
I seem to recall that that particular one wass *not* an accidental
bug. I believe I fell over exactly the problem that Greg Black
complained about (or almost the same; maybe my problem
On 7/12/06, Guido van Rossum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 7/12/06, Armin Rigo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:> I guess I'm going to side with Greg Black on his blog entry.I seem to recall that that particular one wass *not* an accidental
bug. I believe I fell over exactly the problem that Greg Blackcom
On 7/12/06, Brett Cannon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 7/12/06, Guido van Rossum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > On 7/12/06, Armin Rigo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > I guess I'm going to side with Greg Black on his blog entry.
> >
> > I seem to recall that that particular one wass *not* an ac
On Thursday 13 July 2006 14:46, Guido van Rossum wrote:
> Thanks for confirming memory! So it was an intentional regression;
> "bugs happen" doesn't apply in this case. And an unfortunate
> regression at that -- not because one guy writes a silly blog entry
> about it, but because it breaks real c
On 7/12/06, Anthony Baxter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Thursday 13 July 2006 14:46, Guido van Rossum wrote:> Thanks for confirming memory! So it was an intentional regression;> "bugs happen" doesn't apply in this case. And an unfortunate> regression at that -- not because one guy writes a silly
On 7/5/06, Neal Norwitz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> For example, we heard grumblings about the releases coming too often.
> Once we went to an 18 month release schedule, there was minimal
> complaining. It should be fairly safe to assume this silence means
> people think we are doing a good job.
On 7/12/06, Jeroen Ruigrok van der Werven <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 7/5/06, Neal Norwitz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > For example, we heard grumblings about the releases coming too often.
> > Once we went to an 18 month release schedule, there was minimal
> > complaining. It should be fair
24 matches
Mail list logo
