On Dec 12, 2011, at 7:56 PM, Ben Wolfson wrote:
I personally would prefer (1) to (2) or (3), and (3) to (2), had I my
druthers, but it doesn't matter a *whole* lot to me; I'd prefer any of
them to nothing (or to changing the docs to reflect the current batty
behavior).
+1 on changing the
On Tue, Dec 13, 2011 at 6:37 PM, Raymond Hettinger
raymond.hettin...@gmail.com wrote:
On Dec 12, 2011, at 7:56 PM, Ben Wolfson wrote:
I personally would prefer (1) to (2) or (3), and (3) to (2), had I my
druthers, but it doesn't matter a *whole* lot to me; I'd prefer any of
them to nothing
Ben Wolfson wrote:
Hi,
I'm hoping to get some kind of consensus about the divergences between
the implementation and documentation of str.format
(http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2011-June/111860.html and
the linked bug report contain examples of the divergences). These
pertain
2011/12/12 Victor Stinner victor.stin...@haypocalc.com
When sorting a list using the sort() method, attempting to inspect or
mutate the content of the list will result in undefined behaviour.
But is this even true? in listobject.c::listsort(), since 2002,
/* The list is temporarily made
Hi,
On Tue, Dec 13, 2011 at 11:37, Amaury Forgeot d'Arc amaur...@gmail.com wrote:
When sorting a list using the sort() method, attempting to inspect or
mutate the content of the list will result in undefined behaviour.
(...)
So behaviour is not undefined at all...
No, the behavior _is_
2011/12/13 Armin Rigo ar...@tunes.org
No, the behavior _is_ undefined. The comment you cited says that it
cannot crash the Python interpreter; additionally, it makes a
best-effort attempt at catching such accesses and raising ValueError.
But I think I can build a strange-looking example
On Mon, 12 Dec 2011 22:18:40 +0100, Chris McDonough chr...@plope.com
wrote:
On Mon, 2011-12-12 at 09:50 -0500, PJ Eby wrote:
As someone who ported WebOb and other stuff built on top of it
to Python
3 without using from __future__ import unicode_literals, I'm
On 13/12/2011 13:33, Laurence Rowe wrote:
On Mon, 12 Dec 2011 22:18:40 +0100, Chris McDonough chr...@plope.com
wrote:
On Mon, 2011-12-12 at 09:50 -0500, PJ Eby wrote:
As someone who ported WebOb and other stuff built on top of it
to Python
3 without using from
Input = normal 2.x code; Output = code that runs on both 2.x and 3.x.
That is, tinkering with what 2to3 produces, not what it accepts.
--
Nick Coghlan (via Gmail on Android, so likely to be more terse than usual)
On Dec 13, 2011 11:46 PM, Michael Foord fuzzy...@voidspace.org.uk wrote:
On
On 13/12/2011 14:24, Nick Coghlan wrote:
Input = normal 2.x code; Output = code that runs on both 2.x and 3.x.
That is, tinkering with what 2to3 produces, not what it accepts.
How is that different from what 2to3 currently does? Are you agreeing
with Laurence, suggesting an alternative, or
On Tue, 13 Dec 2011 14:42:12 +0100, Michael Foord
fuzzy...@voidspace.org.uk wrote:
On 13/12/2011 13:33, Laurence Rowe wrote:
On Mon, 12 Dec 2011 22:18:40 +0100, Chris McDonough chr...@plope.com
wrote:
On Mon, 2011-12-12 at 09:50 -0500, PJ Eby wrote:
As someone who ported WebOb
On 13/12/2011 14:28, Laurence Rowe wrote:
On Tue, 13 Dec 2011 14:42:12 +0100, Michael Foord
fuzzy...@voidspace.org.uk wrote:
On 13/12/2011 13:33, Laurence Rowe wrote:
On Mon, 12 Dec 2011 22:18:40 +0100, Chris McDonough
chr...@plope.com wrote:
On Mon, 2011-12-12 at 09:50 -0500, PJ Eby
Laurence Rowe l at lrowe.co.uk writes:
The approach that most people seem to have settled on for porting
libraries to Python 3 is to make a single codebase that is compatible with
both Python 2 and Python 3, perhaps making use of the six library. If I
understand correctly, Chris'
On Tue, 13 Dec 2011 15:28:31 +0100
Laurence Rowe l...@lrowe.co.uk wrote:
The approach that most people seem to have settled on for porting
libraries to Python 3 is to make a single codebase that is compatible with
both Python 2 and Python 3, perhaps making use of the six library.
Do you
On Dec 13, 2011, at 05:24 PM, Antoine Pitrou wrote:
On Tue, 13 Dec 2011 15:28:31 +0100
Laurence Rowe l...@lrowe.co.uk wrote:
The approach that most people seem to have settled on for porting
libraries to Python 3 is to make a single codebase that is compatible with
both Python 2 and
On Tue, Dec 13, 2011 at 14:33, Laurence Rowe l...@lrowe.co.uk wrote:
Could this manual work be cut down if there was a version of 2to3 that
targeted the subset of the language that is compatible with both 2 and 3?
Not really, but a 2to6, ie something that tries to keep Python 2
compatibility by
On Tue, Dec 13, 2011 at 11:24 AM, Antoine Pitrou solip...@pitrou.netwrote:
On Tue, 13 Dec 2011 15:28:31 +0100
Laurence Rowe l...@lrowe.co.uk wrote:
The approach that most people seem to have settled on for porting
libraries to Python 3 is to make a single codebase that is compatible
with
On 12/12/2011 10:56 PM, Ben Wolfson wrote:
Hi,
I'm hoping to get some kind of consensus about the divergences between
the implementation and documentation of str.format
(http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2011-June/111860.html and
the linked bug report contain examples of the
On 12/13/2011 2:02 PM, PJ Eby wrote:
On Tue, Dec 13, 2011 at 11:24 AM, Antoine Pitrou solip...@pitrou.net
mailto:solip...@pitrou.net wrote:
On Tue, 13 Dec 2011 15:28:31 +0100
Laurence Rowe l...@lrowe.co.uk mailto:l...@lrowe.co.uk wrote:
The approach that most people seem to
On Tue, Dec 13, 2011 at 2:55 AM, Martin v. Löwis mar...@v.loewis.de wrote:
(1) Why is PyObject_HEAD used instead of PyObject_VAR_HEAD?
The unicode object is not a var object. In a var object, tp_itemsize
gives the element size, which is not possible for unicode objects,
since the itemsize
On 12/13/2011 10:54 AM, Vinay Sajip wrote:
I started writing a tool today, tentatively called '2to23', which aims to do
this. It's basically 2to3, but with a package of custom fixers in a package
'lib2to23.fixers' adapted from the corresponding fixers in lib2to3.
When, some year in the
On 13/12/2011 21:10, Terry Reedy wrote:
On 12/13/2011 2:02 PM, PJ Eby wrote:
On Tue, Dec 13, 2011 at 11:24 AM, Antoine Pitrou solip...@pitrou.net
mailto:solip...@pitrou.net wrote:
On Tue, 13 Dec 2011 15:28:31 +0100
Laurence Rowe l...@lrowe.co.uk mailto:l...@lrowe.co.uk wrote:
The
On Wed, Dec 14, 2011 at 8:17 AM, Michael Foord
fuzzy...@voidspace.org.uk wrote:
More specifically six [1] is the name of Benjamin Peterson's support
package to help write code that works on both 2 and 3. So the idea is that
the conversion isn't just a straight syntax conversion - but that it
On Dec 14, 2011, at 08:38 AM, Nick Coghlan wrote:
String translation is also an open question. For some codebases, you
want both u and to translate to a Unicode (either in Py3k or
via the future import)
I have a fixer for this:
14.12.11 00:38, Nick Coghlan написав(ла):
String translation is also an open question. For some codebases, you
want both u and to translate to a Unicode (either in Py3k or
via the future import), but if a code base deals with WSGI-style
native strings (by means of u for text, for native, b
On 09:37 pm, tjre...@udel.edu wrote:
On 12/13/2011 10:54 AM, Vinay Sajip wrote:
I started writing a tool today, tentatively called '2to23', which aims
to do
this. It's basically 2to3, but with a package of custom fixers in a
package
'lib2to23.fixers' adapted from the corresponding fixers in
Any chance of adding the rationale to the code?
I'm really short of time right now, so you need to find somebody
else to make such a change.
I am willing to believe that requests for a wchar_t (or utf-8 or
System Locale charset) representation are common enough to justify
caching the data
On Tue, 13 Dec 2011 14:02:45 -0500
PJ Eby p...@telecommunity.com wrote:
Among other things, it means that:
* There's only one codebase
* If the conversion isn't perfect, you only have to fix it once
* Line numbers are the same
* There's no conversion step slowing down development
So, I
On Tue, Dec 13, 2011 at 7:30 PM, Antoine Pitrou solip...@pitrou.net wrote:
On Tue, 13 Dec 2011 14:02:45 -0500
PJ Eby p...@telecommunity.com wrote:
Among other things, it means that:
* There's only one codebase
* If the conversion isn't perfect, you only have to fix it once
* Line
On 12/13/2011 6:36 PM, exar...@twistedmatrix.com wrote:
On 09:37 pm, tjre...@udel.edu wrote:
On 12/13/2011 10:54 AM, Vinay Sajip wrote:
I started writing a tool today, tentatively called '2to23', which
aims to do
this. It's basically 2to3, but with a package of custom fixers in a
package
On 12/13/2011 7:01 PM, Martin v. Löwis wrote:
What I'm asking is that
(1) The other values be documented as reserved, rather than as illegal.
How is that different?
(2) The macros produce an error rather than silently corrupting data.
In debug mode, or release mode? -1 on release mode.
On Tue, Dec 13, 2011 at 23:38, Nick Coghlan ncogh...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Dec 14, 2011 at 8:17 AM, Michael Foord
fuzzy...@voidspace.org.uk wrote:
More specifically six [1] is the name of Benjamin Peterson's support
package to help write code that works on both 2 and 3. So the idea is that
32 matches
Mail list logo
