Re: [Python-Dev] LZMA support has landed

On Tue, Nov 29, 2011 at 4:59 PM, Nadeem Vawda nadeem.va...@gmail.com wrote: liblzma-dev; on Fedora I believe the correct package is xz-devel. xz-devel is right. I just verified a build of the new module on a fresh F16 system. -- Meador ___

Re: [Python-Dev] [Python-checkins] cpython (3.1): Closes #13807: Now checks for sys.stderr being there before writing to it.

On Fri, Jan 20, 2012 at 5:32 AM, vinay.sajip python-check...@python.org wrote: http://hg.python.org/cpython/rev/73dad4940b88 changeset:   74538:73dad4940b88 branch:      3.1 I thought that the 3.1 branch is in security mode? Is this a security related fix? From my brief scan of the changeset,

[Python-Dev] OS X build break

On Sat, Dec 31, 2011 at 5:56 PM, Guido van Rossum gu...@python.org wrote: PS. I would propose a specific fix but I can't seem to build a working CPython from the trunk on my laptop (OS X 10.6, Xcode 4.1). I get this error late in the build: ./python.exe -SE -m sysconfig --generate-posix-vars

Re: [Python-Dev] OS X build break

On Sat, Feb 4, 2012 at 7:35 AM, Ned Deily n...@acm.org wrote: Chances are you are using llvm-gcc-4.2, the default CC for Xcode 4.2. Yup: motherbrain:python meadori$ sw_vers ProductName:Mac OS X ProductVersion: 10.7.2 BuildVersion: 11C74 motherbrain:python meadori$ gcc --version

Re: [Python-Dev] dir() in inspect.py ?

On Tue, May 15, 2012 at 3:13 PM, Christian Tismer tis...@stackless.com wrote: Is the usage of dir() correct in this context or is the doc right? It would be nice to add a sentence of clarification if the use of dir() is in fact the correct way to implement inspect. There is already a note in

Re: [Python-Dev] VS 11 Express is Metro only.

On Fri, May 25, 2012 at 7:06 AM, mar...@v.loewis.de wrote: I hereby predict that Microsoft will revert this decision, and that VS Express 11 will be able to build CPython. And your prediction was right on :-) :

[Python-Dev] issue2180 and using 'tokenize' with Python 3 'str's

Hi All, I was going through some of the open issues related to 'tokenize' and ran across 'issue2180'. The reproduction case for this issue is along the lines of: tokenize.tokenize(io.StringIO(if 1:\n \\\n #hey\n print 1).readline) but, with 'py3k' I get:

Re: [Python-Dev] issue2180 and using 'tokenize' with Python 3 'str's

On Tue, Sep 28, 2010 at 7:09 AM, Nick Coghlan ncogh...@gmail.com wrote: A feature request on the tracker is the best way to make that happen. Done - http://bugs.python.org/issue9969. Thanks for the feedback everyone. -- Meador ___ Python-Dev

Re: [Python-Dev] API refactoring tracker field for Python4

On Fri, Jan 7, 2011 at 11:20 AM, anatoly techtonik techto...@gmail.com wrote: This happened, because of poor bug management, where community doesn't play any role in determining which issues are desired. This mostly because of limitation of our tracker and desire of people to extend it to get

Re: [Python-Dev] Ctypes and the stdlib (was Re: LZMA compression support in 3.3)

On Sat, Aug 27, 2011 at 11:58 PM, Terry Reedy tjre...@udel.edu wrote: Dan, I once had the more or less the same opinion/question as you with regard to ctypes, but I now see at least 3 problems. 1) It seems hard to write it correctly. There are currently 47 open ctypes issues, with 9 being

[Python-Dev] python -m tokenize in 3.x ?

Hi All, I have been investing some 'tokenize' bugs recently. As a part of that investigation I was trying to use '-m tokenize', which works great in 2.x: [meadori@motherbrain cpython]$ python2.7 -m tokenize test.py 1,0-1,5:NAME'print' 1,6-1,21: STRING 'Hello, World!'

Re: [Python-Dev] 128 bit integer support

On Wed, Dec 4, 2013 at 8:15 AM, Antoine Pitrou solip...@pitrou.net wrote: Aren't you talking about the struct module? In ctypes, it seems it would be sufficient to add a c_int128 type (and/or c_uint128). Even in ctypes these codes are used internally for the field descriptors. For ctypes

Re: [Python-Dev] Changing Clinic's output

On Tue, Jan 14, 2014 at 3:12 PM, Antoine Pitrou solip...@pitrou.net wrote: On Tue, 14 Jan 2014 12:22:12 -0800 Larry Hastings la...@hastings.org wrote: https://bitbucket.org/larry/clinic-buffer-samples/src In it I converted Modules/_pickle.c four different ways. There's a README,

Re: [Python-Dev] .clinic.c vs .c.clinic

On Mon, Jan 20, 2014 at 2:05 AM, Larry Hastings la...@hastings.org wrote: Contestant 1: Add .clinic.h foo.c - foo.c.clinic.h foo.h - foo.h.clinic.h -0 Contestant 2: Add .ac.h foo.c - foo.c.ac.h foo.h - foo.h.ac.h -1 Contestant 3: Add .clinic foo.c - foo.c.clinic foo.h -

Re: [Python-Dev] [Python-checkins] cpython (merge 3.2 - default): Merge #15232: correctly mangle From lines in MIME preamble and epilogue

On Sun, Jul 22, 2012 at 8:55 PM, r.david.murray python-check...@python.org wrote: http://hg.python.org/cpython/rev/80b81658455b changeset: 78246:80b81658455b parent: 78244:c43d73277756 parent: 78245:b97f65f2298d user:R David Murray rdmur...@bitdance.com date:Sun

Re: [Python-Dev] [Python-checkins] cpython (merge 3.2 - default): Merge #15232: correctly mangle From lines in MIME preamble and epilogue

On Mon, Jul 23, 2012 at 12:34 AM, Meador Inge mead...@gmail.com wrote: On Sun, Jul 22, 2012 at 8:55 PM, r.david.murray python-check...@python.org wrote: http://hg.python.org/cpython/rev/80b81658455b changeset: 78246:80b81658455b parent: 78244:c43d73277756 parent: 78245

Re: [Python-Dev] [Python-checkins] cpython (merge 3.2 - default): MERGE: Better test for Issue #15402: Add a __sizeof__ method to struct.Struct

On Mon, Jul 23, 2012 at 11:17 AM, jesus.cea python-check...@python.org wrote: http://hg.python.org/cpython/rev/b9a3ed1b14b9 changeset: 78260:b9a3ed1b14b9 parent: 78257:03063e718f5f parent: 78259:1911e192af0d user:Jesus Cea j...@jcea.es date:Mon Jul 23 18:16:18

Re: [Python-Dev] Doc/ACKS and Misc/ACKS

On Mon, Jul 23, 2012 at 12:17 PM, Antoine Pitrou solip...@pitrou.net wrote: On Mon, 23 Jul 2012 18:38:30 +0200 Jesus Cea j...@jcea.es wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 23/07/12 18:27, Meador Inge wrote: Doc/ACKS.txt is *only* for acknowledging documentation

Re: [Python-Dev] [Python-checkins] cpython (merge 3.2 - default): MERGE: Better test for Issue #15402: Add a __sizeof__ method to struct.Struct

On Mon, Jul 23, 2012 at 11:38 AM, Jesus Cea j...@jcea.es wrote: As for the tests, I intentionally kept them the way that Serhiy contributed them -- using = instead of . I kept them this way because we also discussed in issue14596 the prospect of optimizing the way repeat counts are handled.

Re: [Python-Dev] 2.7 releases

On Thu, Jul 26, 2012 at 1:50 PM, Thomas Heller thel...@ctypes.org wrote: So, I have uploaded a patch and asked for review (since I'm not 1000% sure that it is absolutely correct): http://bugs.python.org/issue15459 I'll take a look at this in the next few days. -- Meador

Re: [Python-Dev] AST optimizer implemented in Python

On Sat, Aug 11, 2012 at 1:30 PM, Victor Stinner victor.stin...@gmail.com wrote: Hi, I started to implement an AST optimizer in Python. It's easy to create a new AST tree, so I'm surprised that I didn't find any existing project.

Re: [Python-Dev] PandaBoard, Raspberry Pi coming to Buildbot fleet

On Thu, Dec 20, 2012 at 2:23 PM, Barry Warsaw ba...@python.org wrote: On Dec 20, 2012, at 02:54 PM, Trent Nelson wrote: On Thu, Dec 20, 2012 at 10:52:56AM -0800, Trent Nelson wrote: I'll work on setting the ARM boards up next week. Does anyone have a preference regarding the operating

Re: [Python-Dev] PEP 3146: Merge Unladen Swallow into CPython

We really do need precise descriptions of the problems so we can avoid them. Initialization of objects with static storage duration typically get a bad wrap for two main reasons: (1) each toolchain implements them differently (but typically by storing initialization thunks in a table that is

Re: [Python-Dev] Executing zipfiles and directories (was Re: PyCon Keynote)

On Tue, Jan 26, 2010 at 9:35 PM, David Lyon david.l...@pythontest.orgwrote: One problem is that in many places, users are trained specifically under windows to *never* run anything in a zip file. As it might contain a virus and bring down the whole company network. I have even hit cases where

[Python-Dev] PEP 3188: Implementation Questions

Hi All, Recently some discussion began in the issue 3132 thread ( http://bugs.python.org/issue3132) regarding implementation of the new struct string syntax for PEP 3118. Mark Dickinson suggested that I bring the discussion on over to Python Dev. Below is a summary of the questions\comments

Re: [Python-Dev] PEP 3188: Implementation Questions

On Fri, Feb 26, 2010 at 4:08 PM, Greg Ewing greg.ew...@canterbury.ac.nzwrote: Meador Inge wrote: 3. Using Decimal keeps the desired precision, Well, sort of, but then you end up doing arithmetic in decimal instead of binary, which could give different results. Even with the user

Re: [Python-Dev] PEP 3188: Implementation Questions

On Sat, Feb 27, 2010 at 11:20 AM, Thomas Heller thel...@ctypes.org wrote: See issue 887237: http://bugs.python.org/issue887237 Thanks for the link Thomas. Since there is already interest in adding arithmetic to ctypes, perhaps that is an option. One question that raises in my mind, though,

Re: [Python-Dev] C++

On Fri, Mar 12, 2010 at 4:03 PM, Antoine Pitrou solip...@pitrou.net wrote: Le Fri, 12 Mar 2010 13:29:09 -0600, s...@pobox.com a écrit : Traditionally Python has run on some (minority) platforms where C++ was unavailable. Is this concern still valid? We are in the 2010s now. I'm not

Re: [Python-Dev] Enhanced tracker privileges for dangerjim to do triage.

In other words, I think the goal is not just to add new developers to the community, but to continue to build a strong community of developers. FWIW, from a Python community newbie that has submitted a few patches and commented on the tracker for a few months, I agree with this statement and

Re: [Python-Dev] Reindenting patches

On Wed, May 5, 2010 at 8:10 AM, Antoine Pitrou solip...@pitrou.net wrote: For the record, I've added to the untabify script a patch rewriting option (-p) which reindents all patch hunks for C files containing tabs. It should minimize manual reformatting work with existing patches. I just

Re: [Python-Dev] Generated Bytecode ...

On Fri, Oct 23, 2015 at 3:23 AM, Victor Stinner wrote: > Note: I propose "noopt" because we already have "optimization level 0" > which still uses optimizations, it's the default mode. It's different > than gcc -O0 which really disables all optimizations. I already

Re: [Python-Dev] cpython: Tighten-up code in the set iterator to use an entry pointer rather than

On Thu, Jul 9, 2015 at 7:41 AM, Guido van Rossum gu...@python.org wrote: On Wed, Jul 8, 2015 at 10:19 PM, Serhiy Storchaka storch...@gmail.com wrote: On 08.07.15 01:45, Raymond Hettinger wrote: P.S. I don't think python-dev post was necessary or helpful (and I still haven't had a chance

Re: [Python-Dev] New poll about a macro for safe reference replacing

On Wed, Dec 23, 2015 at 9:08 AM, Nick Coghlan wrote: > Within the Python context, the analogy from setattr and setitem at the > Python level to Py_SETREF at the C level is pretty solid, so it likely > makes sense to run with that as "good enough". > > In regards to

Re: [Python-Dev] New poll about a macro for safe reference replacing

On Tue, Dec 22, 2015 at 3:58 AM, Serhiy Storchaka wrote: On 21.12.15 23:57, Steve Dower wrote: > >> Was Py_MOVEREF (or MOVE_REF) ever suggested? >> > > This would be nice name. The macro moves the ownership. But I think it's > too late. Otherwise we'll never finish the

Re: [Python-Dev] C99

On Sat, Jun 4, 2016 at 1:11 AM, Benjamin Peterson wrote: > So, what say you to updating PEP 7 to allow C99 features for Python 3.6 > (in so much as GCC and MSVC support them)? > +1 # Meador ___ Python-Dev mailing list

Re: [Python-Dev] Stop using timeit, use perf.timeit!

On Fri, Jun 10, 2016 at 6:13 AM, Victor Stinner wrote: The second result is a new perf module which includes all "tricks" > discovered in my research: compute average and standard deviation, > spawn multiple worker child processes, automatically calibrate the > number

Re: [Python-Dev] ctypes compatibility with 2.3

On Wed, May 11, 2016 at 11:07 AM, Thomas Heller wrote: Cool. While you're at it, the compatibility restriction for modulefinder > could also be lifted. +1 The question of modulefinder actually came up recently*: http://bugs.python.org/issue26881 -- Meador * Posting

Re: [Python-Dev] Speeding up CPython 5-10%

On Sun, May 15, 2016 at 2:23 AM, Cesare Di Mauro wrote: > Just one thing that comes to my mind: is the stack depth calculation > routine changed? It was suboptimal, and calculating a better number > decreases stack allocation, and increases the frame usage. > This is