On 9/18/2010 2:29 AM, python-dev-requ...@python.org wrote:
Polymorphic best practices [was: (Not) delaying the 3.2 release]
If you're hung up on this, try writing the user-level documentation
first. Your target audience is a working-level Web programmer, not
someone who knows six
R. David Murray a écrit :
I'm trying one approach in email6:
Bytes and String subclasses, where the subclasses have an attribute
named 'literals' derived from a utility module that does this:
literals = dict(
empty = '',
colon = ':',
newline = '\n',
space = '
Le jeudi 16 septembre 2010 à 22:51 -0400, R. David Murray a écrit :
On disk, using utf-8,
one might store the text representation of the message, rather than
the wire-format (ASCII encoded) version. We might want to write such
messages from scratch.
But then the user knows the
On Sep 17, 2010, at 12:10 PM, Antoine Pitrou wrote:
Also, I don't understand why an application would want to assemble an
e-mail by itself if it doesn't know how to do so, and produces wrong
data. Why not simply let the application do:
m = Message()
m.add_header(From, Accented Bàrry
On Sep 16, 2010, at 11:45 PM, Terry Reedy wrote:
Based on the discussion so far, I think you should go ahead and
implement the API agreed on by the mail sig both because is *has* been
agreed on (and thinking about the wsgi discussion, that seems to be a
major achievement) and because it seems
On 16/09/2010 23:05, Antoine Pitrou wrote:
On Thu, 16 Sep 2010 16:51:58 -0400
R. David Murrayrdmur...@bitdance.com wrote:
What do we store in the model? We could say that the model is always
text. But then we lose information about the original bytes message,
and we can't reproduce it. For
On Fri, Sep 17, 2010 at 3:25 PM, Michael Foord fuzzy...@voidspace.org.ukwrote:
On 16/09/2010 23:05, Antoine Pitrou wrote:
On Thu, 16 Sep 2010 16:51:58 -0400
R. David Murrayrdmur...@bitdance.com wrote:
What do we store in the model? We could say that the model is always
text. But then
On Thu, 16 Sep 2010 09:52:48 -0400, Barry Warsaw ba...@python.org wrote:
On Sep 16, 2010, at 11:28 PM, Nick Coghlan wrote:
There are some APIs that should be able to handle bytes *or* strings,
but the current use of string literals in their implementation means
that bytes don't work. This
On Thu, 16 Sep 2010 11:30:12 -0400
R. David Murray rdmur...@bitdance.com wrote:
And then BaseHeader uses self.lit.colon, etc, when manipulating strings.
It also has to use slice notation rather than indexing when looking at
individual characters, which is a PITA but not terrible.
I'm not
On Thu, 16 Sep 2010 17:40:53 +0200, Antoine Pitrou solip...@pitrou.net wrote:
On Thu, 16 Sep 2010 11:30:12 -0400
R. David Murray rdmur...@bitdance.com wrote:
And then BaseHeader uses self.lit.colon, etc, when manipulating strings.
It also has to use slice notation rather than indexing
On Thu, 16 Sep 2010 16:51:58 -0400
R. David Murray rdmur...@bitdance.com wrote:
What do we store in the model? We could say that the model is always
text. But then we lose information about the original bytes message,
and we can't reproduce it. For various reasons (mailman being a big one),
On Sep 16, 2010, at 4:51 PM, R. David Murray wrote:
Given a message, there are many times you want to serialize it as text
(for example, for presentation in a UI). You could provide alternate
serialization methods to get text out on demandbut then what if
someone wants to push that text
On Sep 16, 2010, at 06:11 PM, Glyph Lefkowitz wrote:
That may be a handy way to deal with some grotty internal
implementation details, but having a 'decode()' method is broken. The
thing I care about, as a consumer of this API, is that there is a
clearly defined Message interface, which gives me
On Sep 16, 2010, at 7:34 PM, Barry Warsaw wrote:
On Sep 16, 2010, at 06:11 PM, Glyph Lefkowitz wrote:
That may be a handy way to deal with some grotty internal
implementation details, but having a 'decode()' method is broken. The
thing I care about, as a consumer of this API, is that
On Thu, 16 Sep 2010 18:11:30 -0400, Glyph Lefkowitz gl...@twistedmatrix.com
wrote:
On Sep 16, 2010, at 4:51 PM, R. David Murray wrote:
Given a message, there are many times you want to serialize it as text
(for example, for presentation in a UI). You could provide alternate
On Sep 16, 2010, at 09:34 PM, R. David Murray wrote:
Say we start with this bytes input:
To: Glyph Lefkowitz gl...@twistedmatrix.com
From: R. David Murray rdmur...@bitdance.com
Subject: =?utf-8?q?p=F6stal?=
A simple message.
Part of the responsibility of the email module is to
On Fri, 17 Sep 2010 11:34:26 am R. David Murray wrote:
Perhaps another difference is that in my mind *as an application
developer*, the real email message consists of unicode headers and
message bodies, with attachments that are sometimes binary, and that
the wire-format is this formalized
On Fri, 17 Sep 2010 00:05:12 +0200, Antoine Pitrou solip...@pitrou.net wrote:
On Thu, 16 Sep 2010 16:51:58 -0400
R. David Murray rdmur...@bitdance.com wrote:
What do we store in the model? We could say that the model is always
text. But then we lose information about the original bytes
On Thu, 16 Sep 2010 21:53:17 -0400, Barry Warsaw ba...@python.org wrote:
And of course, what happens if the original subject is in one charset and the
prefix is in an incompatible one? Then you end up with a wire format of two
RFC 2047 encoded words separated by whitespace. You have to keep
On Thu, 16 Sep 2010 23:45:12 -0400, Terry Reedy tjre...@udel.edu wrote:
Based on the discussion so far, I think you should go ahead and
implement the API agreed on by the mail sig both because is *has* been
agreed on (and thinking about the wsgi discussion, that seems to be a
major
20 matches
Mail list logo
