Am 27.02.2013 17:51, schrieb Michael Foord:
> Hello all,
>
> PyCon, and the Python Language Summit, is nearly upon us. We have a good
> number of people confirmed to attend. If you are intending to come to the
> language summit but haven't let me know please do so.
>
> The agenda of topics for
On Feb 27, 2013, at 04:51 PM, Michael Foord wrote:
>If you have other items you'd like to discuss please let me know and I can
>add them to the agenda.
I'd like to have some discussions around promotion of Python 3, how we can
accelerate its adoption, availability of supporting packages, what cri
On Feb 27, 2013, at 11:33 AM, fwierzbi...@gmail.com wrote:
>I am suggesting that we push forward on the "shared library" approach to the
>files in the Lib/* directory, so that would certainly include IronPython and
>PyPy as well I hope.
+1
>The easy part for Jython is pushing some of our "if is_
On Wed, Feb 27, 2013 at 12:33 PM, fwierzbi...@gmail.com
wrote:
> There are a couple of spots that might be more controversial. For
> example, Jython has a file Lib/zlib.py that implements zlib in terms
> of the existing Java support for zlib. I do wonder if such a file is
> acceptable in CPython's
Armin Rigo:
> So the general answer to your question is: we google MessageBox and
> copy that line from the microsoft site, and manually remove the
> unnecessary WINAPI and _In_opt declarations:
Wouldn't it be better to understand the SAL annotations like _In_opt so that
spurious NULLs (for e
Hi Paul,
On Wed, Feb 27, 2013 at 9:31 PM, Paul Moore wrote:
> from ctypes import windll
> MessageBox = windll.User32.MessageBoxW
> MessageBox(0, "Hello, world!", "Title", 0)
You are right that it's a bit cumbersome in cffi up to and including
0.5, but in the cffi trunk all standard Windows types
On 2/27/2013 3:31 PM, Paul Moore wrote:
from ctypes import windll
MessageBox = windll.User32.MessageBoxW
MessageBox(0, "Hello, world!", "Title", 0)
> Note - I wrote this from memory,
Gee, that is pretty easy. Worked perfectly
--
Terry Jan Reedy
___
Antoine Pitrou wrote:
We have to find sufficiently silly species of snakes, though.
Glancing through http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_snakes,
we have:
Wart snakes
Java wart snakes
Pipe snakes
Stiletto snakes
Rubber boas
Dog-faced water snakes
Shovel-nosed snakes
Hook-nosed snakes
Leaf-nose
On 27 February 2013 19:26, Paul Moore wrote:
> On 27 February 2013 19:08, Armin Rigo wrote:
>> That's not correct: you can't indeed give the calling convention, but
>> it is not needed for the common case. What is not supported is only
>> Python-defined callbacks using the Windows-specific conve
On Wed, Feb 27, 2013 at 7:51 PM, Michael Foord wrote:
> Hello all,
>
> PyCon, and the Python Language Summit, is nearly upon us. We have a good
> number of people confirmed to attend. If you are intending to come to the
> language summit but haven't let me know please do so.
>
> The agenda of topi
On Wed, Feb 27, 2013 at 4:18 AM, Ronald Oussoren wrote:
>
> On 27 Feb, 2013, at 10:06, Maciej Fijalkowski wrote:
>
>> On Wed, Feb 27, 2013 at 9:29 AM, Ronald Oussoren
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> On 26 Feb, 2013, at 16:13, Maciej Fijalkowski wrote:
>>>
Hello.
I would like to discuss on the
On Wed, Feb 27, 2013 at 11:21 AM, Brett Cannon wrote:
> Do you mean more generally getting more pure Python implementations of
> modules in the stdlib? If so then as a reference there is
> http://bugs.python.org/issue16651 which lists the modules in the stdlib w/
> only extension module implementa
On 27 February 2013 19:08, Armin Rigo wrote:
> That's not correct: you can't indeed give the calling convention, but
> it is not needed for the common case. What is not supported is only
> Python-defined callbacks using the Windows-specific convention --- as
> documented, there is a workaround fo
On Wed, Feb 27, 2013 at 2:01 PM, fwierzbi...@gmail.com <
fwierzbi...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 27, 2013 at 8:51 AM, Michael Foord
> wrote:
> > If you have other items you'd like to discuss please let me know and I
> can add them to the agenda.
>
> I'd like to discuss merging Jython's standa
Hi Paul,
On Wed, Feb 27, 2013 at 7:24 PM, Paul Moore wrote:
> On 27 February 2013 11:53, Maciej Fijalkowski wrote:
>> I think it means you can't use the ABI version and specify the calling
>> convention. It's a reasonable bug report (the calling convention on
>> API version works though)
>
> Tha
On Wed, Feb 27, 2013 at 8:51 AM, Michael Foord wrote:
> If you have other items you'd like to discuss please let me know and I can
> add them to the agenda.
I'd like to discuss merging Jython's standard Lib (the *.py files). We
have in the past had agreement that this would be a good idea - I ju
On 27 February 2013 18:50, Brett Cannon wrote:
>> One other use case for the ABI level over the API level - the ABI
>> level (no C extension) can be used across Python versions, where the
>> API level needs a separate compiled extension per Python version. This
>> can be a big deal on Windows at l
On Wed, 27 Feb 2013 16:51:16 +
Michael Foord wrote:
> Hello all,
>
> PyCon, and the Python Language Summit, is nearly upon us. We have a good
> number of people confirmed to attend. If you are intending to come to the
> language summit but haven't let me know please do so.
>
> The agenda
On Wed, Feb 27, 2013 at 1:28 PM, Paul Moore wrote:
> 27 February 2013 18:24, Paul Moore wrote:
> > On 27 February 2013 11:53, Maciej Fijalkowski wrote:
> >> I think it means you can't use the ABI version and specify the calling
> >> convention. It's a reasonable bug report (the calling convent
27 February 2013 18:24, Paul Moore wrote:
> On 27 February 2013 11:53, Maciej Fijalkowski wrote:
>> I think it means you can't use the ABI version and specify the calling
>> convention. It's a reasonable bug report (the calling convention on
>> API version works though)
>
> That would be a deal-
On 27 February 2013 11:53, Maciej Fijalkowski wrote:
> I think it means you can't use the ABI version and specify the calling
> convention. It's a reasonable bug report (the calling convention on
> API version works though)
That would be a deal-breaker for my use case of quick scripts working
wit
On Wed, Feb 27, 2013 at 10:51 AM, Michael Foord
wrote:
> Hello all,
>
> PyCon, and the Python Language Summit, is nearly upon us. We have a good
> number of people confirmed to attend. If you are intending to come to the
> language summit but haven't let me know please do so.
>
> The agenda of t
Hello all,
PyCon, and the Python Language Summit, is nearly upon us. We have a good number
of people confirmed to attend. If you are intending to come to the language
summit but haven't let me know please do so.
The agenda of topics for discussion so far includes the following:
* A report on p
Hi, offering my DKK 0.50 on the subject. I've used an in-house enum
type for the better part of a decade - put up at
http://unicollect.dk/download/oss/dc_enum.zip for inspiration.
I'm partial to an int subclass, or at least something very int-like,
because wrapping C libraries is such a major use
On Wed, Feb 27, 2013 at 5:57 PM, Eli Bendersky wrote:
>
>> > I read the cffi docs once again and went through some of the examples. I
>> > want to divide this to two topics.
>> >
>> > One is what you call the "ABI" level. IMHO, it's hands down superior to
>> > ctypes. Your readdir demo demonstrate
> > I read the cffi docs once again and went through some of the examples. I
> > want to divide this to two topics.
> >
> > One is what you call the "ABI" level. IMHO, it's hands down superior to
> > ctypes. Your readdir demo demonstrates this very nicely. I would
> definitely
> > want to see this
On Tue, Feb 26, 2013 at 11:29 PM, Ronald Oussoren wrote:
>
> On 26 Feb, 2013, at 16:13, Maciej Fijalkowski wrote:
>
> > Hello.
> >
> > I would like to discuss on the language summit a potential inclusion
> > of cffi[1] into stdlib.
>
> The API in general looks nice, but I do have some concens w.r
On Wed, Feb 27, 2013 at 8:30 AM, Antoine Pitrou wrote:
> I don't think extra-strong typing of constants is really useful in
> practice; it smells a bit like private methods to me.
I think checking that a value comes from a particular enum *is* a degree of
hand-holding. For libraries or framework
Hi Guido,
On Tue, Feb 26, 2013 at 8:24 PM, Guido van Rossum wrote:
> From a software engineering perspective, 10 years is indistinguishable
> from infinity, so I don't care what happens 10 years from now -- as
> long as you don't blame me. :-)
I can't resist: around today it is the 10th annivers
On 27 February 2013 10:31, Antoine Pitrou wrote:
> Le Wed, 27 Feb 2013 12:15:05 +1300,
> Greg Ewing a écrit :
> > Antoine Pitrou wrote:
> > > Or we'll go straight to 5.
> > > (or switch to date-based numbering :-))
> >
> > We could go the Apple route and start naming them after
> > species of sn
On 2013-02-27, at 14:31 , Antoine Pitrou wrote:
> Le Wed, 27 Feb 2013 12:15:05 +1300,
> Greg Ewing a écrit :
>> Antoine Pitrou wrote:
>>> Or we'll go straight to 5.
>>> (or switch to date-based numbering :-))
>>
>> We could go the Apple route and start naming them after
>> species of snake.
>
>
Le Wed, 27 Feb 2013 12:33:35 +0900,
"Stephen J. Turnbull" a écrit :
>
> As far as I can see, what you (Antoine) want is an identifier with a
> constant value, no more and no less. Grouping into an enum is merely
> a lexical convention, since you are happy to compare enums of
> different enum cla
Le Wed, 27 Feb 2013 12:15:05 +1300,
Greg Ewing a écrit :
> Antoine Pitrou wrote:
> > Or we'll go straight to 5.
> > (or switch to date-based numbering :-))
>
> We could go the Apple route and start naming them after
> species of snake.
We have to find sufficiently silly species of snakes, though
On Wed, Feb 27, 2013 at 7:00 PM, Maciej Fijalkowski wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 27, 2013 at 6:53 AM, Eli Bendersky wrote:
>> 2. Using a function called "verify" to create stuff. This may sound like a
>> naming bikeshed, but it's not. It ties in to the question - why is this
>> needed?
>
> We welcome a b
On Wed, Feb 27, 2013 at 2:39 PM, Nick Coghlan wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 27, 2013 at 7:06 PM, Maciej Fijalkowski wrote:
>>> 3. Cffi basicly contains a (limited) C parser, and those are notoriously
>>> hard to get exactly right. Luckily cffi only needs to interpret
>>> declarations and not the full la
On Wed, Feb 27, 2013 at 7:06 PM, Maciej Fijalkowski wrote:
>> 3. Cffi basicly contains a (limited) C parser, and those are notoriously
>> hard to get exactly right. Luckily cffi only needs to interpret declarations
>> and not the full language, but even so this can be a risk of subtle bugs.
>
>
On Wed, Feb 27, 2013 at 1:45 PM, Richard Oudkerk wrote:
> On 27/02/2013 9:21am, Maciej Fijalkowski wrote:
>>>
>>> >That's somehting that will have to be resolved before cffi can be
>>> > included in the stdlib, fat binaries are supported by CPython and are used
>>> > the binary installers.
>>> >
>
On 27/02/2013 9:21am, Maciej Fijalkowski wrote:
>That's somehting that will have to be resolved before cffi can be included in
the stdlib, fat binaries are supported by CPython and are used the binary
installers.
>
>Ronald
if cpython supports it and you can load it using dlopen, it does work
t
On 27 Feb 2013, at 11:00, David Beazley wrote:
>>
>> From: Eli Bendersky
>>
>> I'll be the first one to admit that pycparser is almost certainly not
>> generally useful enough to be exposed in the stdlib. So just using it as an
>> implementation detail is absolutely fine. PLY is a more intere
>
> From: Eli Bendersky
>
> I'll be the first one to admit that pycparser is almost certainly not
> generally useful enough to be exposed in the stdlib. So just using it as an
> implementation detail is absolutely fine. PLY is a more interesting
> question, however, since PLY is somewhat more ge
On Wed, Feb 27, 2013 at 11:18 AM, Ronald Oussoren
wrote:
>
> On 27 Feb, 2013, at 10:06, Maciej Fijalkowski wrote:
>
>> On Wed, Feb 27, 2013 at 9:29 AM, Ronald Oussoren
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> On 26 Feb, 2013, at 16:13, Maciej Fijalkowski wrote:
>>>
Hello.
I would like to discuss on th
On 27 Feb, 2013, at 10:06, Maciej Fijalkowski wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 27, 2013 at 9:29 AM, Ronald Oussoren
> wrote:
>>
>> On 26 Feb, 2013, at 16:13, Maciej Fijalkowski wrote:
>>
>>> Hello.
>>>
>>> I would like to discuss on the language summit a potential inclusion
>>> of cffi[1] into stdlib.
On Wed, Feb 27, 2013 at 9:29 AM, Ronald Oussoren wrote:
>
> On 26 Feb, 2013, at 16:13, Maciej Fijalkowski wrote:
>
>> Hello.
>>
>> I would like to discuss on the language summit a potential inclusion
>> of cffi[1] into stdlib.
>
> The API in general looks nice, but I do have some concens w.r.t. i
On Wed, Feb 27, 2013 at 6:53 AM, Eli Bendersky wrote:
>
> * Work either at the level of the ABI (Application Binary Interface)
>>
>> or the API (Application Programming Interface). Usually, C libraries
>> have a specified C API but often not an ABI (e.g. they may document a
>> “struct” as having a
On Wed, Feb 27, 2013 at 3:39 AM, Terry Reedy wrote:
> On 2/26/2013 10:13 AM, Maciej Fijalkowski wrote:
>
>> I would like to discuss on the language summit a potential inclusion
>> of cffi[1] into stdlib.
>
>
> How does it compare in terms of speed. One reason ctypes has not replaces
> hand-tuned s
45 matches
Mail list logo
