I just checked in a whitespace normalization change that was way too
big. Should this task be automated?
Assuming the answer is yes, these are the questions should be answered:
1) Which branches should this occur on: trunk, 2.5 (last release), 3k
2) Should there be a special user for these che
> I posted patch 1675951 a while ago that fixes a performance problem for
> small reads in the gzip stdlib module. It also removes the necessity for
> seeking while reading gzip files (allows reading from stdin now).
>
> Is there anything I can/have to do to get the patch in?
If you want to pri
On 4/24/07, Kumar McMillan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Here is a very small portion of it, with the fix, which was putting a
> ref to the exc_info vars outside the tries and specifically del'ing
> them in the finally block:
Kumar,
Can you create a completely self-contained code example that tr
I've tested the patch and it works as advertised for me.
On 4/23/07, Florian Festi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hi!
I posted patch 1675951 a while ago that fixes a performance problem for
small reads in the gzip stdlib module. It also removes the necessity for
seeking while reading gzip files (a
Brett Cannon writes:
> All in one is fine. Just be *very* wary of getting burned out. I
> especially would watch out for python-ideas as any random idea can end
> up there and just go on and on with no resolution.
As basically a lurker, I second that -- these summaries (and the
weekly tracke
Hi!
I posted patch 1675951 a while ago that fixes a performance problem for
small reads in the gzip stdlib module. It also removes the necessity for
seeking while reading gzip files (allows reading from stdin now).
Is there anything I can/have to do to get the patch in?
tia
Florian Fe
On 4/20/07, Josiah Carlson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> You may want the python-list mailing list or the equivalent
> comp.lang.python newsgroup, unless this is a bug with Python itself (you
> may try running Python 2.4.4, which is the next bugfix of the Python 2.4
> series).
yes, seems like it's
What you really want is to use C++.
However, that is a brash and immature language that is still awaiting wider
acceptance
and is therefore not supported.
K
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Georg Brandl
Sent: Tuesday, April 24, 2007 21:00
T
On 4/24/07, Calvin Spealman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Now that I should be able to actually keep up with my summary duties,
> I need to figure out how to tackle the changing landscape of the
> development lists. The old summaries were no problem, before my time.
> When the python-3000 list was c
Calvin Spealman schrieb:
> Could we use and add this macro to object.h? It could be a much
> cleaner and safer way of dealing with new references you want to clean
> up in the same scope. The first one will make sure to decref your new
> reference when you are done with it. The second one will make
On 4/24/07, Calvin Spealman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> So, the question I pose is how would everyone like to see this
> resolved? As I see it, there are two things I can do. I can either
> summaries each list separately, and try to sort out the cross overs.
> Or, I can start pulling in all three
Could we use and add this macro to object.h? It could be a much
cleaner and safer way of dealing with new references you want to clean
up in the same scope. The first one will make sure to decref your new
reference when you are done with it. The second one will make sure to
set a borrowed reference
On Tue, Apr 24, 2007 at 04:37:14PM -0400, Calvin Spealman wrote:
> So, the question I pose is how would everyone like to see this
> resolved? As I see it, there are two things I can do. I can either
> summaries each list separately, and try to sort out the cross overs.
> Or, I can start pulling in
Now that I should be able to actually keep up with my summary duties,
I need to figure out how to tackle the changing landscape of the
development lists. The old summaries were no problem, before my time.
When the python-3000 list was created, nearly everything was just
conceptual, floaty talk that
Hi all,
He're a reminder to submit a talk at EuroPython!
Like each year, we have both the regular conference (see call at
http://indico.cern.ch/conferenceCFA.py?confId=13919) and a somewhat
separated Refereed Papers section. Here is the call for the latter.
The deadline for both is the 18th of
On Tue, Apr 24, 2007, Brett Cannon wrote:
> On 4/24/07, Calvin Spealman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>> I have not gotten any replies about this. No comments, suggestions for
>> not skipping any missed threads, or corrections. Is everyone good with
>> this or should I give it another day or two?
>
On 4/24/07, Talin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Calvin Spealman wrote:
> > I have not gotten any replies about this. No comments, suggestions for
> > not skipping any missed threads, or corrections. Is everyone good with
> > this or should I give it another day or two?
>
> Part of the issue, for me
On 4/23/07, Collin Winter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
[SNIP - Adding test.test_support.TestCase]
>
> So: any objections to making this change?
God no! I am dying for you to write your replacement for unittest and
get it into the stdlib! I am tired of camelCase method names in all
of my test code.
On 4/24/07, Calvin Spealman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I have not gotten any replies about this. No comments, suggestions for
> not skipping any missed threads, or corrections. Is everyone good with
> this or should I give it another day or two?
>
Up to you. Usually if anyone is going to reply
This is happening both in the Python buildbot farm, and in the
community buildbot farm.
See:
http://www.python.org/dev/buildbot/trunk/sparc%20solaris10%20gcc%20trunk/builds/1960/step-test/0
http://www.python.org/dev/buildbot/community/trunk/sparc%20Solaris%2010%20trunk/builds/484/step-test/0
Gri
On 4/23/07, Phillip J. Eby <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> At 04:23 PM 4/23/2007 -0700, Brett Cannon wrote:
> >On 4/23/07, Phillip J. Eby <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > At 03:16 PM 4/23/2007 -0700, Brett Cannon wrote:
> > > >The PEP does not explicitly state how to signal that a loader cannot
> > >
On 04:36 pm, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 4/24/07, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 12:39 am, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>Fast and simple: I want all stdlib test cases to stop subclassing
>unittest.TestCase and start subclassing test_support.TestCase.
>So: any objections to making t
On 4/24/07, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 12:39 am, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> >Fast and simple: I want all stdlib test cases to stop subclassing
> >unittest.TestCase and start subclassing test_support.TestCase.
>
> >So: any objections to making this change?
>
> Not an objection
Calvin Spealman wrote:
> I have not gotten any replies about this. No comments, suggestions for
> not skipping any missed threads, or corrections. Is everyone good with
> this or should I give it another day or two?
Part of the issue, for me anyway, is that many of the really
"interesting" conver
On 12:39 am, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Fast and simple: I want all stdlib test cases to stop subclassing
unittest.TestCase and start subclassing test_support.TestCase.
So: any objections to making this change?
Not an objection so much as a question - if these feature additions are
generally
I have not gotten any replies about this. No comments, suggestions for
not skipping any missed threads, or corrections. Is everyone good with
this or should I give it another day or two?
On 4/22/07, Calvin Spealman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> There were a good number of skipped threads, but I've
On 24/04/07, Brett Cannon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Not if you read the PEP. It doesn't explicitly say what should happen.
>
> I want to standardize on raising ImportError. The PEP itself has two
> ways of signaling an error; find_module() returns None instead of
> raising an error to signal i
Collin Winter wrote:
> Fast and simple: I want all stdlib test cases to stop subclassing
> unittest.TestCase and start subclassing test_support.TestCase.
>
> Why: With a single parent class common to the entire stdlib, adding
> new functionality/testing instruments to *every single test at once*
>
28 matches
Mail list logo
