On Thursday 02 December 2010 19:06:51 georg.brandl wrote:
Author: georg.brandl
Date: Thu Dec 2 19:06:51 2010
New Revision: 86934
Log:
#7475: add (un)transform method to bytes/bytearray and str, add back codecs
that can be used with them from Python 2.
Oh no, someone did it. Was it really
Stephen J. Turnbull:
Will it accept Arabic on input? (Han might be too much to ask for
since Unicode considers Han digits to be impure.)
I couldn't find a direct way to input Arabic digits into OO Calc,
the normal use of Alt+number didn't work in Calc although it did in
WordPad where
Alexander Belopolsky wrote:
On Thu, Dec 2, 2010 at 5:58 PM, M.-A. Lemburg m...@egenix.com wrote:
..
I will change my mind on this issue when you present a
machine-readable file with Arabic-Indic numerals and a program capable
of reading it and show that this program uses the same number
On Fri, Dec 3, 2010 at 8:42 PM, michael.foord
python-check...@python.org wrote:
+# When tests are run from the Python build directory, it is best practice
+# to keep the test files in a subfolder. It eases the cleanup of leftover
+# files using command make distclean.
+if
On 03/12/2010 10:53, Nick Coghlan wrote:
On Fri, Dec 3, 2010 at 8:42 PM, michael.foord
python-check...@python.org wrote:
+# When tests are run from the Python build directory, it is best practice
+# to keep the test files in a subfolder. It eases the cleanup of leftover
+# files using command
Le 03/12/2010 08:31, Martin v. Löwis a écrit :
I wonder what your definition of “unmaintained” is.
In this specific case: doesn't get feature requests acted upon.
Thanks for clarifying. I think that’s a stretch, but I see your meaning
now.
Sure, distutils is not as well-maintained as other
Le vendredi 03 décembre 2010 à 13:58 +0900, Stephen J. Turnbull a
écrit :
Antoine Pitrou writes:
The legacy format argument looks like a red herring to me. When
converting from a format to another it is the programmer's job to
his/her job right.
Uhmm, the argument *for* this
On Fri, 3 Dec 2010 10:29:12 +0100 (CET)
nick.coghlan python-check...@python.org wrote:
Author: nick.coghlan
Date: Fri Dec 3 10:29:11 2010
New Revision: 86962
Log:
Improve Pydoc interactive browsing (#2001). Patch by Ron Adam.
Tests seem to fail under Windows:
On Fri, 03 Dec 2010 10:16:04 +0100, Victor Stinner
victor.stin...@haypocalc.com wrote:
On Thursday 02 December 2010 19:06:51 georg.brandl wrote:
Author: georg.brandl
Date: Thu Dec 2 19:06:51 2010
New Revision: 86934
Log:
#7475: add (un)transform method to bytes/bytearray and str,
On Fri, Dec 3, 2010 at 10:11 AM, R. David Murray rdmur...@bitdance.com wrote:
..
Please also recall that transform/untransform was discussed before
the release of Python 3.0 and was approved at the time, but it just
did not get implemented before the 3.0 release.
Can you provide a link? My
On Fri, 03 Dec 2010 10:11:29 -0500
R. David Murray rdmur...@bitdance.com wrote:
'abc'.transform('hex')
TypeError: 'str' does not support the buffer interface
b'abc'.transform('rot13')
TypeError: expected an object with the buffer interface
I find these 'buffer interface' error
On Sat, Dec 4, 2010 at 12:00 AM, Antoine Pitrou solip...@pitrou.net wrote:
On Fri, 3 Dec 2010 10:29:12 +0100 (CET)
nick.coghlan python-check...@python.org wrote:
Author: nick.coghlan
Date: Fri Dec 3 10:29:11 2010
New Revision: 86962
Log:
Improve Pydoc interactive browsing (#2001). Patch
On Friday 03 December 2010 16:11:29 R. David Murray wrote:
'abc'.transform('hex')
TypeError: 'str' does not support the buffer interface
b'abc'.transform('rot13')
TypeError: expected an object with the buffer interface
I find these 'buffer interface' error messages to be the most
On Sat, Dec 4, 2010 at 2:28 AM, Antoine Pitrou solip...@pitrou.net wrote:
On Fri, 03 Dec 2010 10:11:29 -0500
R. David Murray rdmur...@bitdance.com wrote:
'abc'.transform('hex')
TypeError: 'str' does not support the buffer interface
b'abc'.transform('rot13')
TypeError: expected an
On Sat, 4 Dec 2010 02:45:42 +1000
Nick Coghlan ncogh...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sat, Dec 4, 2010 at 2:28 AM, Antoine Pitrou solip...@pitrou.net wrote:
On Fri, 03 Dec 2010 10:11:29 -0500
R. David Murray rdmur...@bitdance.com wrote:
'abc'.transform('hex')
TypeError: 'str' does not support
On Sat, Dec 4, 2010 at 2:57 AM, Antoine Pitrou solip...@pitrou.net wrote:
On Sat, 4 Dec 2010 02:45:42 +1000
Nick Coghlan ncogh...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sat, Dec 4, 2010 at 2:28 AM, Antoine Pitrou solip...@pitrou.net wrote:
On Fri, 03 Dec 2010 10:11:29 -0500
R. David Murray
ACTIVITY SUMMARY (2010-11-26 - 2010-12-03)
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:
open2537 ( +4)
closed 19861 (+69)
total 22398 (+73)
Open issues
Am 03.12.2010 17:57, schrieb Antoine Pitrou:
On Sat, 4 Dec 2010 02:45:42 +1000
Nick Coghlan ncogh...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sat, Dec 4, 2010 at 2:28 AM, Antoine Pitrou solip...@pitrou.net wrote:
On Fri, 03 Dec 2010 10:11:29 -0500
R. David Murray rdmur...@bitdance.com wrote:
On Fri, 03 Dec 2010 18:09:39 +0100
Georg Brandl g.bra...@gmx.net wrote:
Am 03.12.2010 17:57, schrieb Antoine Pitrou:
On Sat, 4 Dec 2010 02:45:42 +1000
Nick Coghlan ncogh...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sat, Dec 4, 2010 at 2:28 AM, Antoine Pitrou solip...@pitrou.net wrote:
On Fri, 03 Dec 2010
Am 03.12.2010 18:29, schrieb Antoine Pitrou:
On Fri, 03 Dec 2010 18:09:39 +0100
Georg Brandl g.bra...@gmx.net wrote:
Am 03.12.2010 17:57, schrieb Antoine Pitrou:
On Sat, 4 Dec 2010 02:45:42 +1000
Nick Coghlan ncogh...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sat, Dec 4, 2010 at 2:28 AM, Antoine Pitrou
On Fri, 03 Dec 2010 11:14:56 -0500, Alexander Belopolsky
alexander.belopol...@gmail.com wrote:
On Fri, Dec 3, 2010 at 10:11 AM, R. David Murray rdmur...@bitdance.com
wrote:
..
Please also recall that transform/untransform was discussed before
the release of Python 3.0 and was approved at
On Fri, Dec 3, 2010 at 9:58 AM, R. David Murray rdmur...@bitdance.com wrote:
On Fri, 03 Dec 2010 11:14:56 -0500, Alexander Belopolsky
alexander.belopol...@gmail.com wrote:
On Fri, Dec 3, 2010 at 10:11 AM, R. David Murray rdmur...@bitdance.com
wrote:
..
Please also recall that
On 12/3/10, Éric Araujo mer...@netwok.org wrote:
Hi Prashant,
Python 3 support in distutils2 is not entirely finished, it’s an
interesting and challenging task.
Another idea: convert the python.org internal scripts to use Python 3,
for example starting with patches for
On Fri, Dec 3, 2010 at 4:16 AM, Victor Stinner
victor.stin...@haypocalc.com wrote:
..
I don't like transform() and untransform() because I think that we should not
add too much operations to the base types (bytes and str), and they do
implicit module import. I prefer explicit module import (eg.
I just want to say thanks for doing this, Michael. __main__.py is IMO
woefully underused and it's great to see Python dogfooding the feature
along with making it easier to explain how to run our unit tests.
On Thu, Dec 2, 2010 at 17:34, michael.foord python-check...@python.org wrote:
Author:
For example, I keep running into the issue that distutils doesn't
currently support parallel builds. I have been pondering supporting
-j for building extensions, using both unbounded -j and the GNU make
style -jN build server. However, I know that the patch will be rejected,
so I don't even
But I'm not interested at all in having it in distutils2. I want the
Python build itself to use it, and alas, I can't because of the freeze.
You can’t in 3.2, true. Neither can you in 3.1, or any previous
version. If you implement it in distutils2, you have very good chances
to get it for 3.3.
Am 03.12.2010 23:48, schrieb Éric Araujo:
But I'm not interested at all in having it in distutils2. I want the
Python build itself to use it, and alas, I can't because of the freeze.
You can’t in 3.2, true. Neither can you in 3.1, or any previous
version. If you implement it in distutils2,
How hard or reasonable would it be to free memory pages on OS level?
[pcmiiw] Gabage collection within a generation involves moving live
objects to compact the generation storage. This separates the memory
region into 2 parts live and cleared, the pointer to the beginning
of the cleared part is
On 12/3/2010 5:55 PM, Dima Tisnek wrote:
How hard or reasonable would it be to free memory pages on OS level?
[pcmiiw] Gabage collection within a generation involves moving live
objects to compact the generation storage. This separates the memory
region into 2 parts live and cleared, the
Wiadomość napisana przez Éric Araujo w dniu 2010-12-03, o godz. 19:35:
Hello,
Author: lukasz.langa
New Revision: 86976
Log: Issue 10499: Modular interpolation in configparser
Modified: python/branches/py3k/Doc/library/configparser.rst
Is the module still backward compatible with the 3.1
On Dec 3, 2010, at 5:52 PM, Martin v. Löwis wrote:
Am 03.12.2010 23:48, schrieb Éric Araujo:
But I'm not interested at all in having it in distutils2. I want the
Python build itself to use it, and alas, I can't because of the freeze.
You can’t in 3.2, true. Neither can you in 3.1, or any
Python organizes objects into 3 generations, ephemeral, short- and long-lived.
When object is created it is place in ephemeral, if it lives long
enough, it is move to short-lived and so on.
q1 are generations placed in separate memory regions, or are all
generations in one memory regions and
On Dec 3, 2010, at 6:04 PM, Terry Reedy wrote:
gc is implementation specific. CPython uses ref counting + cycle gc. A
constraint on all implementations is that objects have a fixed, unique id
during their lifetime. CPython uses the address as the id, so it cannot move
objects. Other
Am 03.12.2010 23:55, schrieb Dima Tisnek:
How hard or reasonable would it be to free memory pages on OS level?
Very easy. Python already does that.
[pcmiiw] Gabage collection within a generation involves moving live
objects to compact the generation storage. This separates the memory
region
Oh my bad, I must've confused python with some research paper.
Unique id is not so hard to make without an address.
While on this topic, what is the real need for unique ids?
Also I reckon not all objects need a unique id like this, e.g.
interned strings, simple data types and hashable and
q1 are generations placed in separate memory regions, or are all
generations in one memory regions and there is a pointer that
signifies the boundary between generations?
You should really start reading the source code. See Modules/gcmodule.c.
To answer your question: neither, nor. All
On 12/3/2010 5:52 PM, Martin v. Löwis wrote:
Am 03.12.2010 23:48, schrieb Éric Araujo:
But I'm not interested at all in having it in distutils2. I want the
Python build itself to use it, and alas, I can't because of the freeze.
You can’t in 3.2, true. Neither can you in 3.1, or any previous
Oh my bad, I must've confused python with some research paper.
Unique id is not so hard to make without an address.
While on this topic, what is the real need for unique ids?
They are absolutely needed for mutable objects. For immutable ones,
it would be ok to claim that they are identical
Am 04.12.2010 00:35, schrieb Terry Reedy:
On 12/3/2010 5:52 PM, Martin v. Löwis wrote:
Am 03.12.2010 23:48, schrieb Éric Araujo:
But I'm not interested at all in having it in distutils2. I want the
Python build itself to use it, and alas, I can't because of the freeze.
You can’t in 3.2, true.
On 12/3/2010 6:46 PM, Martin v. Löwis wrote:
and stable as D1. I do not know what Martin means by 'integrate' (other
than that he be able to use it to build Python)
That the master copy of the source code is in the Python source repository.
Is a separate branch acceptible, as long as you
On 12/3/2010 6:15 PM, James Y Knight wrote:
On Dec 3, 2010, at 6:04 PM, Terry Reedy wrote:
gc is implementation specific. CPython uses ref counting + cycle
gc. A constraint on all implementations is that objects have a
fixed, unique id during their lifetime. CPython uses the address as
the id,
Am 04.12.2010 01:00, schrieb Terry Reedy:
On 12/3/2010 6:46 PM, Martin v. Löwis wrote:
and stable as D1. I do not know what Martin means by 'integrate' (other
than that he be able to use it to build Python)
That the master copy of the source code is in the Python source
repository.
Is a
On Dec 3, 2010, at 7:05 PM, Terry Reedy wrote:
I left out that the id must be an int.
It's somewhat unfortuante that python has this constraint, instead of
the looser: objects have a fixed id during their lifetime, which is
much easier to implement, and practically as useful.
Given that
On 12/3/2010 7:46 PM, James Y Knight wrote:
Sure they are. This is what Java provides you, for example. If you
have fixed, but potentially non-unique ids (in Java you get this
using identityHashCode()), you can still make an identity
I do not see the point of calling a (non-unique) hash value
On 03Dec2010 18:15, James Y Knight f...@fuhm.net wrote:
| On Dec 3, 2010, at 6:04 PM, Terry Reedy wrote:
| gc is implementation specific. CPython uses ref counting + cycle
| gc. A constraint on all implementations is that objects have a fixed,
| unique id during their lifetime. CPython uses the
On Dec 3, 2010, at 10:50 PM, Terry Reedy wrote:
On 12/3/2010 7:46 PM, James Y Knight wrote:
Sure they are. This is what Java provides you, for example. If you
have fixed, but potentially non-unique ids (in Java you get this
using identityHashCode()), you can still make an identity
I do
On 12/3/2010 11:06 PM, Cameron Simpson wrote:
On 03Dec2010 18:15, James Y Knightf...@fuhm.net wrote:
| On Dec 3, 2010, at 6:04 PM, Terry Reedy wrote:
| gc is implementation specific. CPython uses ref counting + cycle
| gc. A constraint on all implementations is that objects have a fixed,
|
On 3 December 2010 16:45, Martin v. Löwis mar...@v.loewis.de wrote:
Oh my bad, I must've confused python with some research paper.
Unique id is not so hard to make without an address.
While on this topic, what is the real need for unique ids?
They are absolutely needed for mutable objects.
On Sat, Dec 4, 2010 at 6:34 AM, James Y Knight f...@fuhm.net wrote:
On Dec 3, 2010, at 10:50 PM, Terry Reedy wrote:
On 12/3/2010 7:46 PM, James Y Knight wrote:
Sure they are. This is what Java provides you, for example. If you
have fixed, but potentially non-unique ids (in Java you get this
James Y Knight wrote:
On Dec 3, 2010, at 10:50 PM, Terry Reedy wrote:
On 12/3/2010 7:46 PM, James Y Knight wrote:
Sure they are. This is what Java provides you, for example. If you
have fixed, but potentially non-unique ids (in Java you get this
using identityHashCode()), you can still make
51 matches
Mail list logo
