Cameron Simpson wrote:
On 13Jun2009 12:24, Nick Coghlan ncogh...@gmail.com wrote:
| I would phrase this suggestion as users having a reasonable expectation
| that the following invariant should hold for a buffered stream:
|
| f.peek(n) == f.read(n)
|
| Since the latter method will
I am in the process of implementing a number of often requested features and
proposed patches in the subprocess module for my Google Summer of Code 2009
project. For information on my progress, check out my blog located at *
http://subdev.blogspot.com/* http://subdev.blogspot.com/. Any comments
2009/6/7 Stephen J. Turnbull step...@xemacs.org:
Python's 2.x/py3k division is a tour de force; I still can't believe
my eyes that you've pulled it off.
Well, It's not pulled off until Python 3 has surpassed Python 2 in
usage. That's still a long way away. I'm not familiar with the other
Lennart Regebro writes:
2009/6/7 Stephen J. Turnbull step...@xemacs.org:
Python's 2.x/py3k division is a tour de force; I still can't believe
my eyes that you've pulled it off.
Well, It's not pulled off until Python 3 has surpassed Python 2 in
usage.
I'm referring only to the
Nick Coghlan ncoghlan at gmail.com writes:
Since the latter method will perform as many reads of the underlying
stream as necessary to reach the requested number of bytes (or EOF),
then so should the former.
How do you propose to implement this while staying compatible with
1) unseekable raw
Frederick Reeve cylix at solace.info writes:
peek(n):
If n is less than 0, None, or not set; return buffer contents with out
advancing stream position. If the buffer is empty read a full chunk and
return the buffer. Otherwise return exactly n bytes up to _chunk
size_(not contents) with out
Eric Pruitt eric.pruitt at gmail.com writes:
I am in the process of implementing a
number of often requested features and proposed patches in the subprocess
module for my Google Summer of Code 2009 project. For information on
my progress, check out my blog located at
On Fri, Jun 12, 2009 at 9:06 PM, Christian Heimesli...@cheimes.de wrote:
How about a nice 'n shiny context wrapper for the pipe:
I'll do this!
Thank you for the suggestion!
BTW, as this is a good way of avoiding the FD leakage, should this
context wrapper for pipe() be in the stdlib?
The semantic change actually needed to make nested() more equivalent to
the multi-with statement is for it to accept zero-argument callables
that create context managers as arguments rather than pre-created
context managers.
It seems to me that both passing callables which return managers and
On behalf of the Python development team, I'm happy to announce the second
release candidate of Python 3.1.
Python 3.1 focuses on the stabilization and optimization of the features and
changes that Python 3.0 introduced. For example, the new I/O system has been
rewritten in C for speed. File
The other benefit of the military using open source software is that
is can save the taxpayers money over the short and long term. For some
projects it is a small percentage of the total cost. However, for
others it can be significant portion of the cost, so don't discount
its use or its benefit.
The stat module uses the st_ctime slot to hold two kinds of values
which are semantically different and which are frequently
confused with one another. It chooses which kind of value to put in
there based on platform -- Windows gets the file creation time and all
other platforms get the ctime.
Guido,
The reason why I use a code name is that it would be dangerous to reveal my
true name to the world since there are those who are radical liberals who would
like to think that there is no need for a U.S. military and that people such as
myself should be eliminated. Think of the U.S.
Enough is enough guys. As entertaining as this thread has been, shouldn't
we be focused on the 3.1 release?
Don't feed the trolls. Ok so one wandered in, but nobody needed to respond
and it can only get worse from here.
Please just flag the offending address(es) for moderation and ask them
Antoine Pitrou wrote:
The original docstring for peek() says:
...we
do at most one raw read to satisfy it.
In that light, I'm not sure it's a bug
It may be behaving according to the docs, but is that
behaviour useful?
Seems to me that if you're asking for n bytes, then it's
Greg Ewing greg.ewing at canterbury.ac.nz writes:
I think it would be more useful if the at most one
raw read part were dropped. That would give it the
kind of deterministic behaviour generally expected
when dealing with buffered streams.
As I already told Nick: please propose an
Zooko Wilcox-O'Hearn wrote:
1. Add a st_crtime field which gets populated on filesystems
(Windows, ZFS, Mac) which can do so.
crtime looks rather too similar to ctime for my
liking. People who think that the c in ctime
means creation are still likely to confuse them.
Why not give it a more
Hagen Fürstenau wrote:
I guess this is much too late for 3.1, but could we then at least
un-deprecate contextlib.nested for now? As it is, you get a
DeprecationWarning for something like
with contextlib.nested(*my_managers):
without any good way to get rid of it.
I actually almost asked
Hi all,
I apologize if this question is misplaced, I wasn't sure which list to post
it in.
I'm working on a distributed computing project (PyMW and BOINC) where we are
sending Python scripts to client machines. Currently, we make two very
unlikely assumptions: that Python 2.5 is installed and
On Sat, Jun 13, 2009, Jeremy Cowles wrote:
I apologize if this question is misplaced, I wasn't sure which list to
post it in.
I'm working on a distributed computing project (PyMW and BOINC) where
we are sending Python scripts to client machines. Currently, we make
two very unlikely
Definitely the wrong list -- python-dev is for people working on the core
interpreter and libraries. comp.lang.python would be the standard place,
but you might also find some good advice on the new list concurrency-sig.
Sorry for the list pollution, I will repost it there.
Thanks,
Jeremy
On 14Jun2009 12:33, Greg Ewing greg.ew...@canterbury.ac.nz wrote:
Antoine Pitrou wrote:
The original docstring for peek() says:
...we
do at most one raw read to satisfy it.
In that light, I'm not sure it's a bug
It may be behaving according to the docs, but is that
On 14Jun2009 15:16, I wrote:
| Is it possible to access the buffer? I see nothing in the docs.
I've just found getvalue() in IOBase. Forget I said anything.
It seems to be my day for that kind of post:-(
--
Cameron Simpson c...@zip.com.au DoD#743
http://www.cskk.ezoshosting.com/cs/
These are
23 matches
Mail list logo
