I added a page to wiki.python.org:
http://wiki.python.org/moin/CPythonVmInternals
This incorporates most of Martin v. Löwis's additions (except for a
few bits which
I need to look into more).
In any case, thanks for the feedback!
Cheers,
-jakob
___
Py
On Tue, 22 Jul 2008, Cameron Simpson wrote:
[...]
Leaving aside the 0.2 => 0 converstion, shouldn't read() raise an
exception if asked for < 1 bytes? Or is there a legitimate use for read(0)
with which I was not previously aware?
http://docs.python.org/lib/bltin-file-objects.html
read([size])
On 22Jul2008 20:56, John J Lee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Tue, 22 Jul 2008, Cameron Simpson wrote:
> [...]
>> Leaving aside the 0.2 => 0 converstion, shouldn't read() raise an
>> exception if asked for < 1 bytes? Or is there a legitimate use for read(0)
>> with which I was not previously aware
On Wed, 23 Jul 2008, Cameron Simpson wrote:
On 22Jul2008 20:56, John J Lee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Tue, 22 Jul 2008, Cameron Simpson wrote:
[...]
Leaving aside the 0.2 => 0 converstion, shouldn't read() raise an
exception if asked for < 1 bytes? Or is there a legitimate use for read(0)
wi
On 21Jul2008 23:35, Leif Walsh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
| On Tue, 22 Jul 2008, Cameron Simpson wrote:
| > Leaving aside the 0.2 => 0 converstion, shouldn't read() raise an
| > exception if asked for < 1 bytes? Or is there a legitimate use for
| > read(0) with which I was not previously aware?
|
Le Monday 21 July 2008 21:23:21, vous avez écrit :
> > It should raises an error instead of a warning, it has no sense to read a
> > partial byte :-) But that should breaks some applications?
>
> This doesn't come into effect until 3.0.
Would it possible to create an option "strict mode" which dis
On Tue, Jul 22, 2008 at 6:43 PM, Victor Stinner <
[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Le Monday 21 July 2008 21:23:21, vous avez écrit :
> > > It should raises an error instead of a warning, it has no sense to read
> a
> > > partial byte :-) But that should breaks some applications?
> >
> > This doesn't c
On Tue, Jul 22, 2008 at 6:47 PM, Benjamin Peterson <
[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
> On Tue, Jul 22, 2008 at 6:43 PM, Victor Stinner <
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> Le Monday 21 July 2008 21:23:21, vous avez écrit :
>> > > It should raises an error instead of a warning, it has no sense to
>> re
On Tue, Jul 22, 2008 at 3:46 PM, Cameron Simpson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> [ Don't you mean "min()"? Unimportant. ]
Haha, that's what I get for not actually _running_ the code example.
> I see the convenience here, but doubt I'd ever do that myself.
> I'd write the above like this:
>
> while
