Sent from my Windows Phone___
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
On Fri, Feb 28, 2014 at 6:38 PM, Glenn Linderman v+pyt...@g.nevcal.com wrote:
Whereas the current PEP syntax has ambiguity regarding how to interpret
a-expr except except-list-b: b-expr except except-list-c: c-expr (does the
2nd except apply to a-expr or b-expr?), without parentheses, and, as
On 02/26/2014 11:13 PM, Georg Brandl wrote:
Am 26.02.2014 17:09, schrieb Ryan Gonzalez:
I like Py_DECREF_REPLACE. It gives the impression that it decrefs the original
and replaces it.
Agreed, most other suggestions are not really explicit enough.
+1 from me too. When I saw Py_SETREF I
On 2/28/2014 12:41 AM, Chris Angelico wrote:
On Fri, Feb 28, 2014 at 6:38 PM, Glenn Linderman v+pyt...@g.nevcal.com wrote:
Whereas the current PEP syntax has ambiguity regarding how to interpret
a-expr except except-list-b: b-expr except except-list-c: c-expr (does the
2nd except apply to
-Original Message-
From: Python-Dev [mailto:python-dev-
bounces+kristjan=ccpgames@python.org] On Behalf Of Skip Montanaro
Sent: 27. febrúar 2014 19:12
To: python-dev Dev
Subject: Re: [Python-Dev] Start writing inlines rather than macros?
one question though. Suppose you
On Fri, Feb 28, 2014 at 1:30 AM, Glenn Linderman v+pyt...@g.nevcal.comwrote:
value = expr except (
Exception1: default1,
Exception2: default2,
Exception3: default3,
)
except that to get the pairing aspect of some parameters for a function call,
you use =
On Fri, Feb 28, 2014 at 8:30 PM, Glenn Linderman v+pyt...@g.nevcal.com wrote:
Are there any other expressions that allow parens around a part of the
expression, without the stuff inside them becoming a completely
separate sub-expression?
Sure. Function invocation. You can claim (and it
On 28 Feb 2014 19:05, Larry Hastings la...@hastings.org wrote:
On 02/26/2014 11:13 PM, Georg Brandl wrote:
Am 26.02.2014 17:09, schrieb Ryan Gonzalez:
I like Py_DECREF_REPLACE. It gives the impression that it decrefs the
original
and replaces it.
Agreed, most other suggestions are not
On 28 February 2014 21:46, Chris Angelico ros...@gmail.com wrote:
On Fri, Feb 28, 2014 at 8:30 PM, Glenn Linderman v+pyt...@g.nevcal.com
wrote:
Are there any other expressions that allow parens around a part of the
expression, without the stuff inside them becoming a completely
separate
On Fri, Feb 28, 2014 at 11:51 PM, Nick Coghlan ncogh...@gmail.com wrote:
So I think that on balance, I actually do prefer your current
proposal. That said, I do think this is a variant worth discussing
explicitly in the PEP, if only to remind people that there's
definitely precedent for using
On 28 February 2014 23:07, Chris Angelico ros...@gmail.com wrote:
On Fri, Feb 28, 2014 at 11:51 PM, Nick Coghlan ncogh...@gmail.com wrote:
So I think that on balance, I actually do prefer your current
proposal. That said, I do think this is a variant worth discussing
explicitly in the PEP, if
On Fri, Feb 28, 2014 at 11:51 PM, Nick Coghlan ncogh...@gmail.com wrote:
Are there any other expressions that allow parens around a part of the
expression, without the stuff inside them becoming a completely
separate sub-expression?
Also generator expressions and most uses of yield or
On Sat, Mar 1, 2014 at 12:24 AM, Nick Coghlan ncogh...@gmail.com wrote:
Yeah, that works. You may also want to add a common objections
section to explicitly cover the but colons introduce suites
objection. That would provide a space to explicitly list all of the
current not introducing a suite
+1
Also, for the equivalence to hold there is no separate Py_XSETREF, the X
behaviour is implied, which I favour. Enough of this X-proliferation already!
But also see the discussion on inlines. It would be great to make this an
inline rather than a macro.
K
From: Python-Dev
On Feb 28, 2014, at 10:27 PM, Nick Coghlan wrote:
With the new macro in place, the existing Py_CLEAR(x) macro would be
equivalent to Py_SETREF(x, NULL).
Originally I was also concerned about the how will people know there's no
implicit incref?, but I've since become satisfied with the fact that
ACTIVITY SUMMARY (2014-02-21 - 2014-02-28)
Python tracker at http://bugs.python.org/
To view or respond to any of the issues listed below, click on the issue.
Do NOT respond to this message.
Issues counts and deltas:
open4582 (+24)
closed 27999 (+62)
total 32581 (+86)
Open issues
Good day Python Dev Team -
One of our users has reported the following:
I have installed the given msi on 64 bit as per the install instructions
document.
One of the shortcuts 'Start Menu\Programs\Python 3.3\ Module Docs' is not
getting launched. When I launch this shortcut, it is not opening
On 1 Mar 2014 01:22, Barry Warsaw ba...@python.org wrote:
On Feb 28, 2014, at 10:27 PM, Nick Coghlan wrote:
With the new macro in place, the existing Py_CLEAR(x) macro would be
equivalent to Py_SETREF(x, NULL).
Originally I was also concerned about the how will people know there's
no
On Mar 01, 2014, at 08:15 AM, Nick Coghlan wrote:
It *is* playing refcounting games - it's decrefing the existing target
while stealing a reference to the new target, just like the existing
SET_ITEM macros and somewhat like Py_CLEAR (although in that case, it's
more obvious that we will never
Jason:
I get that too, now I try it. The place to report bugs is:
http://bugs.python.org/
However, please take a look at http://bugs.python.org/issue14512 before
you file a new one.
Jeff Allen
On 28/02/2014 17:05, Burgoon, Jason wrote:
Good day Python Dev Team --
One of our users has
On 2/28/2014 12:05 PM, Burgoon, Jason wrote:
One of the shortcuts ‘Start Menu\Programs\Python 3.3\ Module Docs’ is
not getting launched. When I launch this shortcut, it is not opening any
window.
I have tried with admin user and non-admin user.
Is this expected behavior?
No, it is a bug that
Sent from my BlackBerry 10 smartphone on the Koodo network.
Original Message
From: Barry Warsaw
Sent: Friday, February 28, 2014 3:50 PM
To: python-dev@python.org
Subject: Re: [Python-Dev] Poll: Py_REPLACE/Py_ASSIGN/etc
On Mar 01, 2014, at 08:15 AM, Nick Coghlan wrote:
It *is* playing
On 2/28/2014 4:51 AM, Nick Coghlan wrote:
The preferred notation in the PEP most resembles the existing lambda
use case, with except instead of lambda, an exception handling
spec instead of an argument list and an additional leading expression:
(expr except Exception: default)
Lots of
On Sat, Mar 1, 2014 at 12:24 PM, Glenn Linderman v+pyt...@g.nevcal.com wrote:
You are overlooking that the keyword except provides exactly the connotation
of lazy evaluation, so if this is your only reason for preferring the lambda
syntax, you just erased it :)
Statements are always executed
24 matches
Mail list logo
