I have now completed
http://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0384/
was structseq.h considered?
No, it wasn't - unfortunately, it still doesn't get included when
including Python.h. I'll add it.
IMO it could be made PEP384-compliant with two additions that would
replace two
Am 29.11.2010 09:09, schrieb Martin v. Löwis:
I have now completed
http://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0384/
was structseq.h considered?
No, it wasn't - unfortunately, it still doesn't get included when
including Python.h. I'll add it.
Would 3.2 be a good time to finally
On 29.11.2010 00:40, Martin v. Löwis wrote:
I have now completed
http://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0384/
Benjamin has volunteered to rule on this PEP.
Please comment with any changes you want to see, or speak in
favor or against this PEP.
I looked at a diff with r84330 from the py3k
Hello,
Please comment with any changes you want to see, or speak in
favor or against this PEP.
How to get a diff between py3k and this branch?
Regards
___
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python.org
On 29.11.2010 14:14, Éric Araujo wrote:
Hello,
Please comment with any changes you want to see, or speak in
favor or against this PEP.
How to get a diff between py3k and this branch?
I used
svn diff svn://svn.python.org/python/branches/p...@84330
On Mon, Nov 29, 2010 at 11:37 PM, Matthias Klose d...@ubuntu.com wrote:
On 29.11.2010 14:14, Éric Araujo wrote:
Hello,
Please comment with any changes you want to see, or speak in
favor or against this PEP.
How to get a diff between py3k and this branch?
I used
svn diff
On Mon, Nov 29, 2010 at 9:40 AM, Martin v. Löwis mar...@v.loewis.de wrote:
I have now completed
http://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0384/
Benjamin has volunteered to rule on this PEP.
Please comment with any changes you want to see, or speak in
favor or against this PEP.
This is probably
On Nov 29, 2010, at 8:58 AM, Nick Coghlan wrote:
The http read only URLs
didn't work (no diff returned, just svn: OPTIONS of
'http://svn.python.org/python/branches/pep-0384': 200 OK
(http://svn.python.org)),
That was the wrong url: you should've used
On Mon, Nov 29, 2010 at 11:24 AM, Matthias Klose d...@ubuntu.com wrote:
On 29.11.2010 00:40, Martin v. Löwis wrote:
I have now completed
http://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0384/
Benjamin has volunteered to rule on this PEP.
Please comment with any changes you want to see, or speak in
- Should the distutils support for LIMITED_API be part of the pep, or
be implemented later?
In any case, it has to be implemented in Distutils2, not in Distutils.
Distutils is frozen and just in maintenance mode.
I think it's too late for that. PEP 3149 is accepted, and it does
specify a
2010/11/29 Martin v. Löwis mar...@v.loewis.de:
- Should the distutils support for LIMITED_API be part of the pep, or
be implemented later?
In any case, it has to be implemented in Distutils2, not in Distutils.
Distutils is frozen and just in maintenance mode.
I think it's too late for
Extensions built with Py_LIMITED_API have the python version encoded in
it's name. Which abi name should be used for these extensions?
PEP 3149, IIUC, says it should be abi3. I don't understand what that
means, though (with respect to, say, distutils)
- The m and u modifiers in the abi name
This is probably an issue independent of the PEP but there appear to
be a *lot* of exposed typedefs for various type slots and other
function signatures that don't start with the Py prefix (i.e. getter,
setter, unaryfunc and friends).
It's indeed independent: the names don't actually affect
Am 29.11.2010 14:14, schrieb Éric Araujo:
Hello,
Please comment with any changes you want to see, or speak in
favor or against this PEP.
How to get a diff between py3k and this branch?
As others have already explained:
svn diff http://svn.python.org/projects/python/branches/p...@84329
Am 29.11.2010 09:36, schrieb Georg Brandl:
Am 29.11.2010 09:09, schrieb Martin v. Löwis:
I have now completed
http://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0384/
was structseq.h considered?
No, it wasn't - unfortunately, it still doesn't get included when
including Python.h. I'll add it.
On Tue, Nov 30, 2010 at 12:15 AM, James Y Knight f...@fuhm.net wrote:
On Nov 29, 2010, at 8:58 AM, Nick Coghlan wrote:
The http read only URLs
didn't work (no diff returned, just svn: OPTIONS of
'http://svn.python.org/python/branches/pep-0384': 200 OK
(http://svn.python.org)),
That was
I have now completed
http://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0384/
Benjamin has volunteered to rule on this PEP.
Please comment with any changes you want to see, or speak in
favor or against this PEP.
Regards,
Martin
___
Python-Dev mailing list
On 11/28/2010 6:40 PM, Martin v. Löwis wrote:
I have now completed
http://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0384/
The current text contains several error messages like:
System Message: WARNING/2 (pep-0384.txt, line 194)
Bullet list ends without a blank line; unexpected unindent.
Terry Jan Reedy
2010/11/29 Martin v. Löwis mar...@v.loewis.de
I have now completed
http://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0384/
was structseq.h considered?
IMO it could be made PEP384-compliant with two additions that would replace
two non-compliant functions:
- A new function to create types, since
19 matches
Mail list logo
