On Mon, Jul 18, 2011 at 3:03 AM, Ned Deily n...@acm.org wrote:
I think adding the requirement to mandate hard link vs soft link usage
is an unnecessary and unwarranted attempt at optimization. For
instance, IIRC, the OS X installers don't use any hard links: that may
complicate the install,
$ svn diff
Index: pep-0394.txt
===
--- pep-0394.txt(revision 88866)
+++ pep-0394.txt(working copy)
@@ -1,5 +1,5 @@
PEP: 394
-Title: The python command on Unix-Like Systems
+Title: The python Command on Unix-Like
On 20 July 2011 03:21, Terry Reedy tjre...@udel.edu wrote:
Suppose for Windows there were one '.../python' directory wherever the user
first asks it to be put and that all pythons, not just cpython, are
installed in directories below that and that the small startup file is
copied into or
In article
canawp3zfhpaagdgnuhd4diffja2qmnkf+7wkw7qby_f2vby...@mail.gmail.com,
Kerrick Staley m...@kerrickstaley.com wrote:
On Mon, Jul 18, 2011 at 3:03 AM, Ned Deily n...@acm.org wrote:
I think adding the requirement to mandate hard link vs soft link usage
is an unnecessary and unwarranted
On Wed, Jul 20, 2011 at 4:53 PM, Kerrick Staley m...@kerrickstaley.com wrote:
Nick, can you please apply the patch (will be sent in the following
email) to the PEP SVN as soon as we get the hard-link issue is figured
out? Alternatively, could you provide me write access to just the
On Wed, Jul 20, 2011 at 1:58 PM, P.J. Eby p...@telecommunity.com wrote:
So, without further ado, here it is:
I pushed this version up to the PEPs repo, so it now has a number
(402) and can be read in prettier HTML format:
http://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0402/
Cheers,
Nick.
--
Nick Coghlan
+1 (and yay!)
--
Piotr Ożarowski Debian GNU/Linux Developer
www.ozarowski.pl www.griffith.cc www.debian.org
GPG Fingerprint: 1D2F A898 58DA AF62 1786 2DF7 AEF6 F1A2 A745 7645
___
Python-Dev mailing list
On 7/19/2011 8:58 PM, P.J. Eby wrote:
Standard Library Changes/Additions
--
The ``pkgutil`` module should be updated to handle this
specification appropriately, including any necessary changes to
``extend_path()``, ``iter_modules()``, etc.
Specifically the
On 7/18/2011 6:41 PM, Vinay Sajip wrote:
So I can fix my machine, now that I understand what went wrong
(delete py.exe entries from HCU, and put them in HLM instead).
Then the other problem I have, is why py.exe launched py 2.6.4
instead of py 3.2.1 when 3.2.1 is
On 20 July 2011 10:17, Glenn Linderman v+pyt...@g.nevcal.com wrote:
However, the following fails: py foo.py
It fails, because foo.py is not found. Instead, I have to specify: py
d:\path\to\foo.py
This is annoying, py should walk the PATH for unqualified files (the Windows
PATH implicitly
At 06:46 PM 7/20/2011 +1000, Nick Coghlan wrote:
On Wed, Jul 20, 2011 at 1:58 PM, P.J. Eby p...@telecommunity.com wrote:
So, without further ado, here it is:
I pushed this version up to the PEPs repo, so it now has a number
(402) and can be read in prettier HTML format:
At 02:24 AM 7/20/2011 -0700, Glenn Linderman wrote:
When I read about creating __path__ from sys.path, I immediately
thought of the issue of programs that extend sys.path, and the above
is the workaround for such programs. but it requires such
programs to do work, and there are a lot of such
On 07/20/2011 08:57 AM, P.J. Eby wrote:
At 06:46 PM 7/20/2011 +1000, Nick Coghlan wrote:
On Wed, Jul 20, 2011 at 1:58 PM, P.J. Eby p...@telecommunity.com wrote:
So, without further ado, here it is:
I pushed this version up to the PEPs repo, so it now has a number
(402) and can be read in
On Tue, 19 Jul 2011 23:58:55 -0400, P.J. Eby p...@telecommunity.com wrote:
Worse, this is not just a problem for new users: it prevents *anyone*
from easily splitting a package into separately-installable
components. In Perl terms, it would be as if every possible ``Net::``
module on CPAN
Glenn Linderman v+python at g.nevcal.com writes:
Since I don't yet have associations set up that point at the
launcher, I thought I'd play with saying py in front of the
command.
Why don't you have any associations pointing to the launcher? Did you delete
them? If you uninstall
Hi,
changeset: 3903:728660b53208
user:pje
date:Wed Jul 20 09:56:48 2011 -0400
summary:
Restore whitespace characters lost via email transmission.
[...]
diff --git a/pep-0402.txt b/pep-0402.txt
--- a/pep-0402.txt
+++ b/pep-0402.txt
@@ -38,13 +38,13 @@
..
I wonder if this fixes the long-standing issue in OS vendor's distributions.
In
Fedora, for example, there is both arch-specific and non-arch directories:
/usr/lib/python2.7 + /usr/lib64/python2.7, for example. Pure python goes into
/usr/lib/python2.7, and code including binaries goes into
At 10:40 AM 7/20/2011 -0400, Neal Becker wrote:
I wonder if this fixes the long-standing issue in OS vendor's
distributions. In
Fedora, for example, there is both arch-specific and non-arch directories:
/usr/lib/python2.7 + /usr/lib64/python2.7, for example. Pure python
goes into
At 04:21 PM 7/20/2011 +0200, Ãric Araujo wrote:
FYI, reST uses three-space indents, not four (so that blocks align
nicely under the leading two dots + one space), so I think the change
was intentional. The âDocumenting Pythonâ guide tells this (in the
standard docs), and I think it applies
Le 20/07/2011 16:40, P.J. Eby a écrit :
PEP 12 prescribes four-space indents for PEPs, actually, wherever it
mentions an specific indentation depth.
Ah, thanks. I see in my docutils docs that David Goodger used three and
four-space indents (three for indenting the body of a directive, four
for
On Tue, Jul 19, 2011 at 8:58 PM, P.J. Eby p...@telecommunity.com wrote:
The biggest likely exception to the above would be when a piece of
code tries to check whether some package is installed by importing
it. If this is done *only* by importing a top-level module (i.e., not
checking for a
Hello everyone,
I’ve seen recent commits in the default branch (3.3) that improve test
coverage (for example logging) or add new test files (cgitb, committed
by Brian). Do we have a policy of not adding new test files to stable
branches? For existing test files that get more tests, is the
On Wed, Jul 20, 2011 at 11:56 AM, Jeff Hardy jdha...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Jul 19, 2011 at 8:58 PM, P.J. Eby p...@telecommunity.com wrote:
The biggest likely exception to the above would be when a piece of
code tries to check whether some package is installed by importing
it. If this is
Le 20/07/2011 17:58, Éric Araujo a écrit :
Do we have a policy of not adding new test files to stable branches?
New logging tests failed during some weeks. If we add new tests, we may
also break some stable buildbots. I don't think that we need to add
these new tests to a stable version.
At 08:56 AM 7/20/2011 -0700, Jeff Hardy wrote:
On Tue, Jul 19, 2011 at 8:58 PM, P.J. Eby p...@telecommunity.com wrote:
The biggest likely exception to the above would be when a piece of
code tries to check whether some package is installed by importing
it. If this is done *only* by importing
At 12:37 PM 7/20/2011 -0400, Erik wrote:
The best solution I can think of would be to have a way for a module
to mark itself as finalized (I'm not sure if that's the best
term--just the first that popped into my head). This would prevent
its __path__ from being created or extended in any way.
On Wed, Jul 20, 2011 at 3:28 AM, Nick Coghlan ncogh...@gmail.com wrote:
Done: http://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0394/
Quick question: When I do svn up, it doesn't show any changes. Has
it been switched over to Mercurial recently?
Thanks,
Kerrick Staley
On Wed, Jul 20, 2011 at 12:03 PM, Kerrick Staley m...@kerrickstaley.com wrote:
On Wed, Jul 20, 2011 at 3:28 AM, Nick Coghlan ncogh...@gmail.com wrote:
Done: http://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0394/
Quick question: When I do svn up, it doesn't show any changes. Has
it been switched over to
On 7/20/2011 3:22 AM, Paul Moore wrote:
On 20 July 2011 03:21, Terry Reedytjre...@udel.edu wrote:
Suppose for Windows there were one '.../python' directory wherever the user
first asks it to be put and that all pythons, not just cpython, are
installed in directories below that and that the
On 7/20/2011 12:25 PM, Victor Stinner wrote:
Le 20/07/2011 17:58, Éric Araujo a écrit :
Do we have a policy of not adding new test files to stable branches?
New logging tests failed during some weeks. If we add new tests, we may
also break some stable buildbots. I don't think that we need to
On 07/20/11 17:05, Éric Araujo wrote:
Le 20/07/2011 16:40, P.J. Eby a écrit :
PEP 12 prescribes four-space indents for PEPs, actually, wherever it
mentions an specific indentation depth.
Ah, thanks. I see in my docutils docs that David Goodger used three and
four-space indents (three for
On 7/20/2011 11:41 AM, r.david.murray wrote:
diff --git a/Lib/email/utils.py b/Lib/email/utils.py
# We need wormarounds for bugs in these methods in older Pythons (see below)
Is 'wormaround' (variation of workaround) an intentional play on the
fact that some worms prey on other 'bugs'
On Wed, Jul 20, 2011 at 11:04 AM, P.J. Eby p...@telecommunity.com wrote:
Hm. Here's another variant that might be easier to implement (even in C),
and could offer some other advantages as well.
Suppose we replace the sys.virtual_packages set() with a sys.virtual_paths
dict(): a dictionary
On 7/20/2011 1:04 PM, P.J. Eby wrote:
This part worries me slightly. Imagine a program as such:
datagen.py
json/foo.js
json/bar.js
datagen.py uses the files in json/ to generate sample data for a
database. In datagen.py is the following code:
try:
import json
except ImportError:
import
On Wed, 20 Jul 2011 14:12:42 -0400
Terry Reedy tjre...@udel.edu wrote:
On 7/20/2011 11:41 AM, r.david.murray wrote:
diff --git a/Lib/email/utils.py b/Lib/email/utils.py
# We need wormarounds for bugs in these methods in older Pythons (see
below)
Is 'wormaround' (variation of
At 01:35 PM 7/20/2011 -0600, Eric Snow wrote:
This is a really nice solution. So a virtual package is not imported
until a submodule of the virtual package is successfully imported
Correct...
(except for direct import of pure virtual packages).
Not correct. ;-) What we do is avoid
On Wed, Jul 20, 2011 at 2:44 PM, P.J. Eby p...@telecommunity.com wrote:
At 01:35 PM 7/20/2011 -0600, Eric Snow wrote:
This is a really nice solution. So a virtual package is not imported
until a submodule of the virtual package is successfully imported
Correct...
(except for direct import
On 7/20/2011 7:19 AM, Vinay Sajip wrote:
Glenn Lindermanv+pythonat g.nevcal.com writes:
Since I don't yet have associations set up that point at the
launcher, I thought I'd play with saying py in front of the
command.
Why don't you have any associations pointing to the
On Wed, 20 Jul 2011 22:40:17 +0200, Antoine Pitrou solip...@pitrou.net wrote:
On Wed, 20 Jul 2011 14:12:42 -0400
Terry Reedy tjre...@udel.edu wrote:
On 7/20/2011 11:41 AM, r.david.murray wrote:
diff --git a/Lib/email/utils.py b/Lib/email/utils.py
# We need wormarounds for bugs in
Victor Stinner victor.stinner at haypocalc.com writes:
New logging tests failed during some weeks. If we add new tests, we may
also break some stable buildbots. I don't think that we need to add
these new tests to a stable version.
Just for my information, which logging test failures are
On 7/20/2011 6:05 AM, P.J. Eby wrote:
At 02:24 AM 7/20/2011 -0700, Glenn Linderman wrote:
When I read about creating __path__ from sys.path, I immediately
thought of the issue of programs that extend sys.path, and the above
is the workaround for such programs. but it requires such
programs
On Wed, Jul 20, 2011 at 11:48, Terry Reedy tjre...@udel.edu wrote:
On 7/20/2011 12:25 PM, Victor Stinner wrote:
Le 20/07/2011 17:58, Éric Araujo a écrit :
Do we have a policy of not adding new test files to stable branches?
New logging tests failed during some weeks. If we add new tests,
Glenn Linderman wrote:
On 7/20/2011 7:19 AM, Vinay Sajip wrote:
It's not py's job to walk the path: the shell does that when you just type
foo. It locates foo.py, and then invokes py because of file association - py
then checks the file for a shebang to decide which Python to dispatch it to.
At 03:22 PM 7/20/2011 -0600, Eric Snow wrote:
On Wed, Jul 20, 2011 at 2:44 PM, P.J. Eby p...@telecommunity.com wrote:
So, yeah, actually, that's looking pretty sweet. Basically, we
just have to
throw a virtual_package_paths dict into the sys module, and do the above
along with the
At 03:09 PM 7/20/2011 -0700, Glenn Linderman wrote:
On 7/20/2011 6:05 AM, P.J. Eby wrote:
At 02:24 AM 7/20/2011 -0700, Glenn Linderman wrote:
When I read about creating __path__ from sys.path, I immediately
thought of the issue of programs that extend sys.path, and the
above is the workaround
On 7/20/2011 4:03 PM, P.J. Eby wrote:
I'd recommend *always* using it, outside of simple startup code.
So that is a burden on every program. Documentation would help, but it
certainly makes updating sys.path much more complex -- 3 lines (counting
import of pkgutil) instead of one, and the
On 21/07/2011 7:43 AM, Glenn Linderman wrote:
...
I still get the same behavior. Is there any debugging output produced
by py.exe that would tell what py.ini it looks in, and what the content
is? What diagnostic steps might I take to produce additional
information that would help you (or me,
On Thu, Jul 21, 2011 at 8:16 AM, Brett Cannon br...@python.org wrote:
I say don't add new tests for the sake of coverage or adding new tests to
stable branches. Tests for bugfixes are practically required.
I don't *object* to enhanced tests going into maintenance branches,
but the workflow of
On 21/07/2011 4:38 AM, Terry Reedy wrote:
Many installers first make an organization directory and then an app
directory within that. This annoys me sometimes when they only have one
app to ever install, but is useful when there might really be multiple
directories, as in our case. (Ditto for
On 7/20/2011 4:41 PM, Mark Hammond wrote:
On 21/07/2011 7:43 AM, Glenn Linderman wrote:
...
I still get the same behavior. Is there any debugging output produced
by py.exe that would tell what py.ini it looks in, and what the content
is? What diagnostic steps might I take to produce
On Thu, Jul 21, 2011 at 8:51 AM, Ethan Furman et...@stoneleaf.us wrote:
I would say that would be a cool enhancement, as it could save a bit of
typing, but I think the launcher is quite useful even without path
traversal.
Two related points:
1. Walking PATH isn't necessary, but the cwd of the
On Thu, 21 Jul 2011 09:55:28 +1000
Mark Hammond skippy.hamm...@gmail.com wrote:
The two proposals
overlap but are not mutually exclusive. For future pythons, 'python33'
is easier to remember and type than 'py -v 3.3' or whatever the proposed
encantation is.
'py -3.3' - less chars to
On 21/07/2011 10:02 AM, Glenn Linderman wrote:
So this tells me that it didn't find a local py.ini (no surprise, I
don't have one) but doesn't tell me that it did find or read
c:\Windows\system32\py.ini much less whether I have the syntax correct
for my [defaults] section. It doesn't tell me
On 21/07/2011 10:08 AM, Antoine Pitrou wrote:
On Thu, 21 Jul 2011 09:55:28 +1000
Mark Hammondskippy.hamm...@gmail.com wrote:
The two proposals
overlap but are not mutually exclusive. For future pythons, 'python33'
is easier to remember and type than 'py -v 3.3' or whatever the proposed
On 7/20/2011 2:43 PM, Glenn Linderman wrote:
It's not py's job to walk the path: the shell does that when you just type
foo. It locates foo.py, and then invokes py because of file association - py
then checks the file for a shebang to decide which Python to dispatch it to.
Certainly when the
On 7/20/2011 5:07 PM, Nick Coghlan wrote:
On Thu, Jul 21, 2011 at 8:51 AM, Ethan Furmanet...@stoneleaf.us wrote:
I would say that would be a cool enhancement, as it could save a bit of
typing, but I think the launcher is quite useful even without path
traversal.
Two related points:
1.
On 7/20/2011 5:11 PM, Mark Hammond wrote:
On 21/07/2011 10:02 AM, Glenn Linderman wrote:
So this tells me that it didn't find a local py.ini (no surprise, I
don't have one) but doesn't tell me that it did find or read
c:\Windows\system32\py.ini much less whether I have the syntax correct
for my
On 21/07/2011 10:13 AM, Glenn Linderman wrote:
On 7/20/2011 2:43 PM, Glenn Linderman wrote:
It's not py's job to walk the path: the shell does that when you just type
foo. It locates foo.py, and then invokes py because of file association - py
then checks the file for a shebang to decide which
On 21/07/2011 10:18 AM, Glenn Linderman wrote:
On 7/20/2011 5:07 PM, Nick Coghlan wrote:
On Thu, Jul 21, 2011 at 8:51 AM, Ethan Furmanet...@stoneleaf.us wrote:
I would say that would be a cool enhancement, as it could save a bit of
typing, but I think the launcher is quite useful even without
Éric Araujo mer...@netwok.org writes:
FYI, reST uses three-space indents, not four (so that blocks align
nicely under the leading two dots + one space), so I think the change
was intentional.
No, reST doesn't specify any particular level of indentation. Like most
Python programmers I prefer
On Thu, Jul 21, 2011 at 9:03 AM, P.J. Eby p...@telecommunity.com wrote:
Hm. Yes, there is a way to do something like that, but it would complicate
things a bit. We'd need to:
1. Leave __path__ off of the modules, and always pull them from
sys.virtual_package_paths, and
Setting __path__ to
On Wed, Jul 20, 2011 at 20:31, Ben Finney ben+pyt...@benfinney.id.auwrote:
Éric Araujo mer...@netwok.org writes:
FYI, reST uses three-space indents, not four (so that blocks align
nicely under the leading two dots + one space), so I think the change
was intentional.
No, reST doesn't
On Wed, Jul 20, 2011 at 7:52 PM, Nick Coghlan ncogh...@gmail.com wrote:
Even better would be for these (and sys.path) to be list subclasses
that did the right thing under the hood as Glenn suggested. Code that
*replaces* rather than modifies these attributes would still
potentially break
R. David Murray writes:
Hexlify, wormaround...our Barry is just full of interesting words :)
Not full at all---there's no there there to put them in.
He's a generator!
The FLUFL-always-uses-efficient-idioms-ly y'rs,
___
Python-Dev mailing list
On Thu, 21 Jul 2011 10:27:31 +1000, Mark Hammond skippy.hamm...@gmail.com
wrote:
On 21/07/2011 10:18 AM, Glenn Linderman wrote:
On 7/20/2011 5:07 PM, Nick Coghlan wrote:
On Thu, Jul 21, 2011 at 8:51 AM, Ethan Furmanet...@stoneleaf.us wrote:
I would say that would be a cool enhancement, as
On Thu, Jul 21, 2011 at 12:52 PM, R. David Murray rdmur...@bitdance.com wrote:
Indeed. If I want to run a script with a different python version
on a unix-like system, I need to know the path to said script.
We're trying to make python as easy to use on Windows as it is on Unix.
If
66 matches
Mail list logo
