Re: [Python-Dev] Status of PEP 397 - Python launcher for Windows
Zitat von Mark Hammond skippy.hamm...@gmail.com: I'm wondering what thoughts are on PEP 397, the Python launcher for Windows. I've been using the implementation for a number of months now and I find it incredibly useful. I wonder what the rationale for the PEP (as opposed to the rationale for the launcher) is - why do you need to have a PEP for it? As written, it specifies some guidelines that some software package of yours might adhere to. You don't need a PEP for that, just write the software and adhere to the guidelines, possibly putting them into the documentation. A PEP needs to have controversial issues, or else there would not have been a point in writing it in the first place. Also, it needs to concern CPython, or the Python language, else it does not need to be a *P*EP. To be a proper PEP, you need to include these things: - what is the action that you want to see taken? - what is the Python version (or versions) that you want to see the action taken for? - what alternative actions have been proposed, and what are (in your opinion, and the opinion of readers) pros and cons of each action? Assuming you are proposing some future action for CPython, I'm opposed to the notion that the implementation of the launcher is the specification. The specification needs to be in the PEP. It may leave room, in which case the remaining details need to be specified in the documentation. A critical question (IMO) is the question how the launcher gets onto systems. Will people have to download and install it themselves, or will it come as part of some Python distribution? If it comes with the Python distribution, how get multiple copies of the launcher coordinated? Also: what's the name of the launcher? How can I actually use it? Regards, Martin ___ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
[Python-Dev] problem after installing python 3.2.2
hi i have downloaded and installed python 3.2.2 but still when i use python in terminal it show's: root@debian:~# python Python 2.6.6 (r266:84292, Dec 27 2010, 00:02:40) [GCC 4.4.5] on linux2 Type help, copyright, credits or license for more information. how can i change the default to python 3.2.2? tHanks. ___ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
Re: [Python-Dev] problem after installing python 3.2.2
Hello Vahid, i'm sorry but this mailing list is not the right place where to ask such question, I suggest get in touch with http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list for support. On Sat, Feb 18, 2012 at 18:15, Vahid Ghaderi vahid_male1...@yahoo.com wrote: i have downloaded and installed python 3.2.2 but still when i use python in terminal it show's: root@debian:~# python you're using the system 'python' here, not the new installed, which probably has landed in /usr/local (or where you installed it). Python 2.6.6 (r266:84292, Dec 27 2010, 00:02:40) [GCC 4.4.5] on linux2 Type help, copyright, credits or license for more information. how can i change the default to python 3.2.2? from a Debian Developer perspective, I'd suggest you not to switch the Debian default interpreter to python3.2 since it will make several system tools/debian packages to fail. If you need 3.2 explicitly, state it in the shebang or call the script with py3.2 explicitly. Regards, -- Sandro Tosi (aka morph, morpheus, matrixhasu) My website: http://matrixhasu.altervista.org/ Me at Debian: http://wiki.debian.org/SandroTosi ___ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
Re: [Python-Dev] PEP 410 (Decimal timestamp): the implementation is ready for a review
Guido van Rossum wrote: if there is an *actual* causal link between file A and B, the difference in timestamps should always be much larger than 100 ns. And if there isn't a causal link, simultaneity is relative anyway. To Fred sitting at his computer, file A might have been created before file B, but to George running from the other end of the building in response to an urgent bug report, it could be the other way around. So to be *really* accurate, the API needs a way for the caller to indicate a frame of reference. -- Greg ___ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
Re: [Python-Dev] PEP 410 (Decimal timestamp): the implementation is ready for a review
Greg Ewing greg.ew...@canterbury.ac.nz writes: Guido van Rossum wrote: if there is an *actual* causal link between file A and B, the difference in timestamps should always be much larger than 100 ns. And if there isn't a causal link, simultaneity is relative anyway. To Fred sitting at his computer, file A might have been created before file B, but to George running from the other end of the building in response to an urgent bug report, it could be the other way around. Does that change if Fred and George are separated in the building by twenty floors? -- \“Kill myself? Killing myself is the last thing I'd ever do.” | `\—Homer, _The Simpsons_ | _o__) | Ben Finney ___ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
Re: [Python-Dev] Status of PEP 397 - Python launcher for Windows
On 18/02/2012 11:08 PM, mar...@v.loewis.de wrote: Zitat von Mark Hammond skippy.hamm...@gmail.com: I'm wondering what thoughts are on PEP 397, the Python launcher for Windows. I've been using the implementation for a number of months now and I find it incredibly useful. I wonder what the rationale for the PEP (as opposed to the rationale for the launcher) is - why do you need to have a PEP for it? As written, it specifies some guidelines that some software package of yours might adhere to. You don't need a PEP for that, just write the software and adhere to the guidelines, possibly putting them into the documentation. A PEP needs to have controversial issues, or else there would not have been a point in writing it in the first place. Also, it needs to concern CPython, or the Python language, else it does not need to be a *P*EP. The launcher was slightly controversial when the pep was initially written 12 months ago. If you believe the creation of the PEP was procedurally incorrect I'm happy to withdraw it - obviously I just want the launcher, with or without a PEP. Alternatively, if you think the format of the PEP needs to change before it can be accepted, then I'm happy to do that too if you can be very specific about what you want changed. If you mean something else entirely then please be very specific - I admit I'm not clear on the point of your message at all. To be a proper PEP, you need to include these things: - what is the action that you want to see taken? - what is the Python version (or versions) that you want to see the action taken for? - what alternative actions have been proposed, and what are (in your opinion, and the opinion of readers) pros and cons of each action? Assuming you are proposing some future action for CPython, I'm opposed to the notion that the implementation of the launcher is the specification. The specification needs to be in the PEP. It may leave room, in which case the remaining details need to be specified in the documentation. I'm really not sure what you are trying to say here. That the PEP should remove all references to an implementation specification, or that the PEP simply should be withdrawn? As above, I don't care - I just want the launcher with the least amount of bureaucracy possible. A critical question (IMO) is the question how the launcher gets onto systems. Will people have to download and install it themselves, or will it come as part of some Python distribution? This is addressed in the PEP: The launcher will be distributed with all future versions of Python ... If it comes with the Python distribution, how get multiple copies of the launcher coordinated? This may not be specified as well as it could, but: Future versions of the launcher should remain backwards compatible with older versions, so later versions of Python can install an updated version of the launcher without impacting how the previously installed version of the launcher is used. Also: what's the name of the launcher? How can I actually use it? This too is there: The console launcher will be named 'py.exe' and the Windows one named 'pyw.exe' and there is discussion of the command-line args. Mark ___ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
Re: [Python-Dev] Status of PEP 397 - Python launcher for Windows
On Sun, Feb 19, 2012 at 1:08 PM, Mark Hammond skippy.hamm...@gmail.com wrote: The launcher was slightly controversial when the pep was initially written 12 months ago. If you believe the creation of the PEP was procedurally incorrect I'm happy to withdraw it - obviously I just want the launcher, with or without a PEP. Alternatively, if you think the format of the PEP needs to change before it can be accepted, then I'm happy to do that too if you can be very specific about what you want changed. If you mean something else entirely then please be very specific - I admit I'm not clear on the point of your message at all. I think the PEP is appropriate, but some of the details that are currently embedded in the prose should be extracted out to a clear specification section: - two launcher binaries (one for .py files, one for .pyw) will be added to the system PATH - the launcher will be shipped as part of the default CPython windows installers (starting with Python 3.3) - the launcher will handle launching both Python 2 and Python 3 scripts - the launcher will be overwritten when upgrading CPython As a practical matter, it *may* be worth having the launcher available as an independent installer that just gets bundled with the CPython one, but that shouldn't be a requirement in the PEP. Cheers, Nick. -- Nick Coghlan | ncogh...@gmail.com | Brisbane, Australia ___ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
Re: [Python-Dev] Status of PEP 397 - Python launcher for Windows
On 2/17/2012 9:24 PM, Mark Hammond wrote: I've been using the implementation for a number of months now and I find it incredibly useful. +1 ___ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
[Python-Dev] compiling cpython in visual studio 2010
Hello everyone, I am trying to work on Python bugs following the tutorial given in the python website. I have installed Tortoise svn and visual studio 2010, I cloned a copy of cpython as it is advised in the website using, however I am having some problem in compiling it using visual studio 2010. I request someone to kindly make me understand the full steps on solving the bugs. With regards, Ejaj Hassan ___ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
Re: [Python-Dev] compiling cpython in visual studio 2010
On 2/18/2012 11:54 PM, Ejaj Hassan wrote: Hello everyone, I am trying to work on Python bugs following the tutorial given in the python website. I have installed Tortoise svn and visual studio 2010, I cloned a copy of cpython as it is advised in the website using, however I am having some problem in compiling it using visual studio 2010. As the devguide says, you need vs2008 or the c++express edition. 3.3 may be released compiled with 2010 (that is being worked on) but I believe 2008 will still be needed for 2.7. -- Terry Jan Reedy ___ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
