Re: [Python-Dev] MinGW And The other Py2.4 issue

2004-12-13 Thread Paul Moore
On Sun, 12 Dec 2004 23:19:55 +, A.B., Khalid [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: [2] Can someone who has the official Python 2.4 download the sample extension [**] created using the pyMinGW patched MinGW compiled Python 2.4 and SWIG? And see if it works? Sources are in the zip file whose

Re: [Python-Dev] MinGW And The other Py2.4 issue

2004-12-13 Thread Paul Moore
On Mon, 13 Dec 2004 23:17:51 +0100, Martin v. Löwis [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I forgot the details of your analysis, but I think you are right. However, I would feel more comfortable if only a single CRT was used from an extension module. Agreed. But to some extent I'm equally uncomfortable

Re: [Python-Dev] 2.4 news reaches interesting places

2004-12-13 Thread Paul Moore
On Tue, 14 Dec 2004 01:05:09 -0200, Rodrigo Dias Arruda Senra [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: But, but to the joke: I believe Python must strive to run at least as fast as the crowd -- Java, Perl, Ruby, Lua, Boo, etc Maybe we could visit the language shootout sites, translate Python snipets to

Re: [Python-Dev] MinGW And The other Py2.4 issue

2004-12-15 Thread Paul Moore
On Tue, 14 Dec 2004 23:48:41 +0100, Martin v. Löwis [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I understand that one still needs to build libpython24.a in order to use this process. As I have said, I'd happily ship that file with the 2.4.1 MSI, unless the release manager tells me that this would an unacceptable

Re: [Python-Dev] MinGW And The other Py2.4 issue

2004-12-18 Thread Paul Moore
On Wed, 15 Dec 2004 22:57:00 +0100, Martin v. Löwis [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Paul Moore wrote: For a starter, what steps do you actually take to build a release? I assume that the first step is to build Python, by clicking on build in VS.NET. Yes. You can skip this step by just putting

Re: [Python-Dev] an idea for improving struct.unpack api

2005-01-06 Thread Paul Moore
On Thu, 6 Jan 2005 21:28:26 +1100, Anthony Baxter [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: My take on this: struct.pack/struct.unpack is already one of my least-favourite parts of the stdlib. Of the modules I use regularly, I pretty much only ever have to go back and re-read the struct (and re)

Re: [Python-Dev] an idea for improving struct.unpack api

2005-01-08 Thread Paul Moore
On Fri, 7 Jan 2005 19:40:18 -0800 (PST), Ilya Sandler [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Eg. I just looked at xdrlib.py code and it seems that almost every invocation of struct._unpack would shrink from 3 lines to 1 line of code (i = self.__pos self.__pos = j = i+4 data =

Re: [Python-Dev] PEP 246, redux

2005-01-12 Thread Paul Moore
On Wed, 12 Jan 2005 00:33:22 +0100, Alex Martelli [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: But adaptation is not transmission! It's PERFECTLY acceptable for an adapter to facade: to show LESS information in the adapted object than was in the original. It's PERFECTLY acceptable for an adapter to say this

Re: [Python-Dev] PEP 246, redux

2005-01-12 Thread Paul Moore
On Wed, 12 Jan 2005 00:33:22 +0100, Alex Martelli [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: By imposing transitivity, you're essentially asserting that, if a programmer forgets to code and register an A - C direct adapter, this is never a problem, as long as A - B and B - C adapters are registered, because A -

Re: [Python-Dev] PEP 246, redux

2005-01-13 Thread Paul Moore
On Thu, 13 Jan 2005 13:43:53 -0800, Paramjit Oberoi [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Thu, 13 Jan 2005 20:40:56 +0100, Alex Martelli [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: So please explain what's imperfect in wrapping a str into a StringIO? If I understand Philip's argument correctly, the problem is this:

Re: [Python-Dev] PEP 246: lossless and stateless

2005-01-15 Thread Paul Moore
On Fri, 14 Jan 2005 20:06:22 -0500, Phillip J. Eby [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: My feeling here was not that people thought that stateless adapters were in general intrinsically better -- just when the adaptation was going to be done implicitly (e.g. by type declarations). Yes, exactly. :) In

[Python-Dev] PEP 309 (Was: Patch review: [ 1094542 ] add Bunch type to collections module)

2005-01-27 Thread Paul Moore
On Thu, 27 Jan 2005 01:07:06 -0700, Fernando Perez [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I really would like to see such a class in the stdlib, as it's something that pretty much everyone ends up rewriting. I certainly don't claim my implementation to be a good reference (it isn't). But perhaps it can be

[Python-Dev] Re: PEP 309 (Was: Patch review: [ 1094542 ] add Bunch type to collections module)

2005-01-29 Thread Paul Moore
On Thu, 27 Jan 2005 09:49:48 +, Paul Moore [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On the subject of things everyone ends up rewriting, what needs to be done to restart discussion on PEP 309 (Partial Function Application)? The PEP is marked Accepted and various patches exist: 941881 - C implementation

Re: [Python-Dev] discourage patch reviews to the list?

2005-02-10 Thread Paul Moore
On Wed, 09 Feb 2005 17:25:14 -0800, Brett C. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: All valid points, but I also don't want people to suddenly start posting one-liners or bug posts. I guess it comes down to a signal-to-noise ratio and if the level of signal we are currently getting will hold. If we say

Re: [Python-Dev] PEP 309 enhancements

2005-02-26 Thread Paul Moore
On Sat, 26 Feb 2005 16:50:06 +1000, Nick Coghlan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Moving a discussion from the PEP309 SF tracker (Patch #941881) to here, since it's gone beyond the initial PEP 309 concept (and the SF tracker is a lousy place to have a design discussion, anyway). The discussion

Re: [Python-Dev] PEP 309

2005-02-27 Thread Paul Moore
On Sun, 27 Feb 2005 09:31:26 +0100, Martin v. Löwis [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Raymond Hettinger wrote: Are you sure about that? Contriving examples is easy, but download a few modules, scan them for use cases, and you may find, as I did, that partial() rarely applies. The argument order

Re: [Python-Dev] PEP 309

2005-02-27 Thread Paul Moore
On Sun, 27 Feb 2005 19:05:18 +0100, Martin v. Löwis [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Again, this I cannot understand. I do believe that there is no better way to implement the PEP. The PEP very explicitly defines what precisely functional.partial is, and the implementation follows that specification

Re: [Python-Dev] Adding any() and all()

2005-03-11 Thread Paul Moore
On Fri, 11 Mar 2005 11:30:38 +0100, BJörn Lindqvist [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Not sure this is pertinent but anyway: any and all are often used as variable names. all especially often and then almost always as a list of something. It would not be good to add all to the list of words to watch

Re: [Python-Dev] Rationale for sum()'s design?

2005-03-15 Thread Paul Moore
On Mon, 14 Mar 2005 17:57:42 -0800, Guido van Rossum [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Unfortunately this started when I claimed in my blog that sum() was a replacement for 80% of all reduce() uses. That's probably where the error lies, then. When it was introduced, sum() was for summing numbers.

Re: [Python-Dev] thread semantics for file objects

2005-03-18 Thread Paul Moore
On Fri, 18 Mar 2005 07:57:25 +0100, Martin v. Löwis [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The guarantee that we want to make is certainly stronger: if the threads all read from the same file, each will get a series of chunks. The guarantee is that it is possible to combine the chunks in a way to get the

Re: [Python-Dev] Draft PEP to make file objects support non-blocking mode.

2005-03-21 Thread Paul Moore
On Mon, 21 Mar 2005 17:32:36 +1200, Greg Ewing [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 18 March 2005, Donovan Baarda said: The read method's current behaviour needs to be documented, so its actual behaviour can be used to differentiate between an empty non-blocking read, and EOF. This means recording

Re: [Python-Dev] bug in pythondotnet implementation. Maybe related to a bug in cpython implementation...help!!!!

2005-03-23 Thread Paul Moore
On Wed, 23 Mar 2005 12:13:56 +0100, Stan Pinte [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I would welcome any help regarding: -how can I get/give more info on what's happening? -how to solve that stuff? thanks a lot in advance. here is the problem: I have a python (actually pythondotnet) process

Re: [Python-Dev] Shorthand for lambda

2005-03-23 Thread Paul Moore
On Wed, 23 Mar 2005 10:33:53 -0600 (CST), Ka-Ping Yee [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: It dawned on me that you could use this idea to make the whole filter/lambda experience vastly more pleasant. I whipped up a quick implementation: from placeholder import _ numbers = [5, 9, 56, 34, 1,

Re: [Python-Dev] How do you get yesterday from a time object

2005-04-19 Thread Paul Moore
On 4/19/05, Ralph Hilton [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: i'm a beginning python programmer. I want to get the date for yesterday nowTime = time.localtime(time.time()) print nowTime. oneDay = 60*60*24 # number seconds in a day yday = nowTime - oneDay # -- generates an error print

Re: [Python-Dev] anonymous blocks

2005-04-20 Thread Paul Moore
On 4/19/05, Brian Sabbey [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Guido van Rossum wrote: @acquire(myLock): code code code It would certainly solve the problem of which keyword to use! :-) And I think the syntax isn't even ambiguous -- the trailing colon distinguishes this from the

Re: [Python-Dev] Re: anonymous blocks

2005-04-21 Thread Paul Moore
On 4/20/05, Samuele Pedroni [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: def do(): print setup try: yield None finally: print tear down doesn't quite work (if it did, all you would need is syntactic sugar for for dummy in). PEP325 is about

Re: [Python-Dev] Re: anonymous blocks vs scope-collapse

2005-04-26 Thread Paul Moore
On 4/26/05, Jim Jewett [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I'm not sure I understand this. The preferred way would be to just stick the keyword before the call. Using 'collapse', it would look like: def foo(b): c=a def bar(): a=a1 collapse foo(b1) print b,

Re: [Python-Dev] Re: anonymous blocks

2005-04-29 Thread Paul Moore
On 4/29/05, Shane Hathaway [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I think this concept can be explained clearly. I'd like to try explaining PEP 340 to someone new to Python but not new to programming. I'll use the term block iterator to refer to the new type of iterator. This is according to my limited

Re: [Python-Dev] PEP 340: Breaking out.

2005-05-04 Thread Paul Moore
On 5/4/05, Alex Martelli [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On May 4, 2005, at 01:57, Paul Moore wrote: I can't think of a reasonable condition which wouldn't involve reading the file - which either involves an inner loop (and we already can't break out of two loops, so the third one implied

Re: [Python-Dev] PEP 340: Breaking out.

2005-05-05 Thread Paul Moore
On 5/5/05, Nick Coghlan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Well, Michael Hudson and Paul Moore are the current authors of PEP 310, so updating it with any of my ideas would be their call. I'm willing to consider an update - I don't know Michael's view. I currently find myself in the odd situation

Re: [Python-Dev] PEP 340: Breaking out.

2005-05-06 Thread Paul Moore
On 5/5/05, Steven Bethard [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 5/5/05, Paul Moore [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: And does your proposal allow for continue EXPR as supported by PEP 340? I can't see that it could, given that your proposal treats block statements as not being loops. Read PEP 340 again

Re: [Python-Dev] PEP 340: Breaking out.

2005-05-06 Thread Paul Moore
On 5/6/05, Greg Ewing [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Seems to me it should be up to the block iterator whether a break statement gets caught or propagated, since it's up to the block iterator whether the construct behaves like a loop or not. This could be achieved by having a separate exception

Re: [Python-Dev] Breaking off Enhanced Iterators PEP from PEP 340

2005-05-06 Thread Paul Moore
On 5/6/05, Steven Bethard [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Well, busy-work or not, I took the 20 minutes to split them up, so I figured I might as well make them available. It was actually really easy to split them apart, and I think they both read better this way, but I'm not sure my opinion counts

Re: [Python-Dev] PEP 340: Deterministic Finalisation (new PEP draft, either a competitor or update to PEP 340)

2005-05-08 Thread Paul Moore
On 5/8/05, Jp Calderone [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: If such a construct is to be introduced, the ideal spelling would seem to be: for [VAR in] EXPR: BLOCK1 finally: BLOCK2 While I have not been following this discussion at all (I don't have the energy or time to

Re: [Python-Dev] Merging PEP 310 and PEP 340-redux?

2005-05-11 Thread Paul Moore
On 5/11/05, Nick Coghlan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I've posted draft 1.4 of my PEP 310/PEP 340 merger PEP (PEP 650, maybe?): http://members.iinet.net.au/~ncoghlan/public/pep-3XX.html I've been skipping the discussion, but this is starting to look pretty good. I'll give it a proper read soon.

Re: [Python-Dev] Merging PEP 310 and PEP 340-redux?

2005-05-12 Thread Paul Moore
On 5/11/05, Guido van Rossum [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I realize that the pushback was against looping, but whereas in the PEP 340 proposal general exception handling comes out naturally, it feels as an ugly wart in the modified PEP 310 proposal. Plus I think the use cases are much weaker

Re: [Python-Dev] PEP 343 - Abstract Block Redux

2005-05-14 Thread Paul Moore
On 5/14/05, Fredrik Lundh [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Nick Coghlan wrote: PEP 343 (like PEP 310 before it) makes it possible to define the correct resource management *once*, and then invoke it via a 'with' (or 'do') statement. This is probably the main point for me - encapsulate the

Re: [Python-Dev] PEP 343 - Abstract Block Redux

2005-05-15 Thread Paul Moore
On 5/14/05, Brett C. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Nick's was obviously directly against looping, but, with no offense to Nick, how many other people were against it looping? It never felt like it was a screaming mass with pitchforks but more of a I don't love it, but I can deal crowd. Agreed.

Re: [Python-Dev] PEP 343 - Abstract Block Redux

2005-05-16 Thread Paul Moore
On 5/15/05, Steven Bethard [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Having done the python-dev summary on this topic, You have my deepest sympathy :-) So in some sense, PEP 340 was the reason for the lack of enthusiasm; with the semantics laid out, people were forced to deal with a specific implementation

Re: [Python-Dev] PEP 343 - New kind of yield statement?

2005-05-19 Thread Paul Moore
On 5/19/05, Greg Ewing [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Michael Hudson wrote: This is, to me, neat and clear. I don't find the idea that iterators are tied to exactly 1 for loop an improvement (even though they usually will be). To fix this in a fully backward-compatible way, we need some

Re: [Python-Dev] Adventures with Decimal

2005-05-21 Thread Paul Moore
On 5/21/05, Raymond Hettinger [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: A root difference is that I believe we have both a compliant implementation (using Context.create_decimal) and a practical context free extension in the form of the regular Decimal constructor. Please forgive an intrusion by someone who

Re: [Python-Dev] PEP 343 rewrite complete

2005-06-05 Thread Paul Moore
On 6/1/05, Guido van Rossum [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I hope that I've got the rewrite of PEP 343 to include generator extensions right now. I've chosen the 'with' keyword. Please review here; I think this is ready for review by the unwashed masses. :-)

Re: [Python-Dev] Some RFE for review

2005-06-27 Thread Paul Moore
On 6/27/05, Nick Coghlan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: As Douglas Alan's sample implementation (and his second attempt [1]) show, getting this right (and reasonably efficient) is actually a non-trivial exercise. Leveraging the existing xreadlines infrastructure is an idea worth considering. I

Re: [Python-Dev] 'With' context documentation draft (was Re: Terminology for PEP 343

2005-07-06 Thread Paul Moore
On 7/6/05, Nick Coghlan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: OK, here's some draft documentation using Phillip's context terminology. I think it works very well. I agree. +1 on this terminology, and for this explanation to be included in the docs. I also like the fact that it offers a neat 1-word name for

Re: [Python-Dev] 'With' context documentation draft (was Re: Terminology for PEP 343

2005-07-06 Thread Paul Moore
On 7/6/05, Michael Chermside [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Paul Moore writes: I also like the fact that it offers a neat 1-word name for the generator decorator, @context. Well, ok... does anyone *else* agree? I too saw this and thought neat! a simple one-word name!. But then I started

Re: [Python-Dev] Linux Python linking with G++?

2005-07-10 Thread Paul Moore
On 7/10/05, David Abrahams [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Martin v. Löwis [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I well remember that gcc 2.5.8 on Linux a.out required this sort of setup. Sorry, a.out? Isn't that the default name a C compiler gives to the executable it builds on Unix? Is it also (part of)

Re: [Python-Dev] Admin access using svn+ssh

2005-08-23 Thread Paul Moore
On 8/22/05, Martin v. Löwis [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: James Y Knight wrote: It seems a waste to use SVN's webdav support just for anon access. The svnserve method works well for anon access. The only reason to use svn webdav IMO is if you want to use that for authenticated access. But

Re: [Python-Dev] Replacement for print in Python 3.0

2005-09-01 Thread Paul Moore
On 9/1/05, Barry Warsaw [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Thu, 2005-09-01 at 10:58, Guido van Rossum wrote: [Reinhold Birkenfeld] You'd have to enclose print arguments in parentheses. Of course, the trailing comma form would be lost. And good riddance! The print statement harks back

Re: [Python-Dev] Replacement for print in Python 3.0

2005-09-02 Thread Paul Moore
On 9/2/05, Ron Adam [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Jim Jewett wrote: Putting the spaces back in (without a format string) would be even worse. Charles Cazabon's pointed out that it *could* be as simple as writeln(' '.join( ... )) Why not just offer an addition method ?

Re: [Python-Dev] Replacement for print in Python 3.0

2005-09-02 Thread Paul Moore
On 9/2/05, Steven Bethard [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: [...] Since the print function seems to be intended mainly for newbies and simple debugging, I think there have been quite a few comments here from people who *don't* see the print statement [1] as mainly for newbies and simple debugging. But

Re: [Python-Dev] Replacement for print in Python 3.0

2005-09-02 Thread Paul Moore
On 9/2/05, Steven Bethard [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Sorry for the confusion. I wasn't trying to imply anyone was a newbie here, only that the earlier messages in this thread suggested that these were the print statement's main audience. No problem - I was more joking than serious. But I don't

Re: [Python-Dev] Replacement for print in Python 3.0

2005-09-02 Thread Paul Moore
On 9/2/05, Steven Bethard [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Paul Moore wrote: Interestingly enough, the other languages I use most (C, Java, VB(Script) and Javascript (under Windows Scripting Host)) all use functions for output. Except for C, I uniformly dislike the resulting code - the output

Re: [Python-Dev] Replacement for print in Python 3.0

2005-09-03 Thread Paul Moore
On 9/3/05, Guido van Rossum [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Wow. With so many people expressing a gut response and not saying what in the proposal they don't like, it's hard to even start a response. Fair point. Is it... - Going from statement to function? I thought this was a major issue,

Re: [Python-Dev] Replacement for print in Python 3.0

2005-09-03 Thread Paul Moore
On 9/3/05, Nick Coghlan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: [...] Playing well with generator expressions comes for free, too: print .join(str(x*x) for x in range(10)) = output(*(x*x for x in range(10))) Hmm... This prompts a coding question - is it possible to recognise which arguments to a

Re: [Python-Dev] Replacement for print in Python 3.0

2005-09-03 Thread Paul Moore
On 9/3/05, James Y Knight [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Sep 3, 2005, at 11:32 AM, Barry Warsaw wrote: So I think it's best to have two builtins: print(*args, **kws) printf(fmt, *args, **kws) It seems pretty bogus to me to add a second builtin just to apply the % operator for you.

Re: [Python-Dev] Replacement for print in Python 3.0

2005-09-05 Thread Paul Moore
On 9/4/05, Guido van Rossum [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 9/3/05, Bill Janssen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Seems pretty weak to me. Are there other args against? Sure. I made the mistake of thinking that everybody knew them. Looks like I certainly didn't. These are good points, many of which I

Re: [Python-Dev] Simplify the file-like-object interface (Replacement for print in Python 3.0)

2005-09-06 Thread Paul Moore
On 9/6/05, Fredrik Lundh [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Greg Ewing wrote: While we're on the subject, in Py3k I'd like to see readline(), readlines(), etc. removed from file objects and made builtin functions instead. It should only be necessary to implement read() and write() to get a

Re: [Python-Dev] Replacement for print in Python 3.0

2005-09-06 Thread Paul Moore
On 9/6/05, Gareth McCaughan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: So borrow a trick from Common Lisp and use a destination of None to mean return the formatted text as a string. [...] Or is that too cryptic? Yes. To my mind, formatting (returning a string) and output are separate operations. A write

Re: [Python-Dev] Simplify the file-like-object interface (Replacement for print in Python 3.0)

2005-09-07 Thread Paul Moore
On 9/6/05, Steven Bethard [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I'd also prefer something along the lines of Fredrik's suggestion, but I don't write enough C code to understand Paul's last point. Could someone briefly explain why mixins wouldn't work in C code? I had in mind it would be complicated and

Re: [Python-Dev] Python 3 executable name

2005-09-12 Thread Paul Moore
On 9/12/05, Greg Ewing [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Oren Tirosh wrote: I suggest an explicitly and permanently different name for the interpreter executable of this new and incompatible branch of the language. I want Python 3 scripts starting with #! to have an average shelf life longer

Re: [Python-Dev] Simplify the file-like-object interface

2005-09-13 Thread Paul Moore
On 9/13/05, Michael Chermside [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: In unix, the above is true. One of the fundamental decisions in Unix was to treat all files (and lots of other vaguely file-like things) as undiferentiated streams of bytes. But this is NOT true on many other operating systems. It is not,

Re: [Python-Dev] GIL, Python 3, and MP vs. UP

2005-09-23 Thread Paul Moore
On 9/21/05, Josiah Carlson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Antoine Pitrou [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The best way to make people stop complaining about the GIL and start using process-based multiprogramming is to provide solid, standardized support for process-based multiprogramming.

Re: [Python-Dev] Adding a conditional expression in Py3.0

2005-09-23 Thread Paul Moore
On 9/20/05, Nick Coghlan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Basically, I'm +1 on the original PEP 308 form because it reads more naturally (and more like LC's and GE's) to me in expression contexts, and +0 on the if/then/elif/else form (because I would like a real conditional operator). I agree that

Re: [Python-Dev] Adding a conditional expression in Py3.0

2005-09-24 Thread Paul Moore
On 9/24/05, Terry Reedy [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Now, can you honestly say that you would (naively) read return foo if bar else baz and be certain you knew what it meant? FWIW, yes, I can honestly say that I would be certain. Yes, you may be able to *parse* it as (foo if) bar (esle baz) as

Re: [Python-Dev] PEP 350: Codetags

2005-09-29 Thread Paul Moore
On 9/29/05, Phillip J. Eby [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: My point about the lack of motivation was that there was little reason shown why this should be a PEP instead of either: 1. Documentation for a specific tool, or group of tools 2. A specific project's process documentation That's what I

Re: [Python-Dev] Pythonic concurrency

2005-09-30 Thread Paul Moore
On 9/30/05, Jim Jewett [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Bruce Eckel wrote: 3) Tasks are cheap enough that I can make thousands of them, ... 4) Tasks are self-guarding, so they prevent other tasks from interfering with them. The only way tasks can communicate with each other is through some

Re: [Python-Dev] Conditional Expression Resolution

2005-09-30 Thread Paul Moore
On 9/30/05, Guido van Rossum [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Flames, pleas to reconsider, etc., to /dev/null. No flames from here. Congratulations gracefully accepted. Consider them supplied. For both your patience, and for supplying the decision we all desperately needed. It's still my language!

Re: [Python-Dev] Pythonic concurrency

2005-09-30 Thread Paul Moore
On 9/30/05, Jeremy Maxfield [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Support for multiple interpreters already exists from the C API (mod_python, Java Embedded Python a few other add-ons use them) I'm aware of that (didn't I mention it in my message - sorry). But: - it's not possible to create new

Re: [Python-Dev] Definining properties - a use case for class decorators?

2005-10-19 Thread Paul Moore
On 10/19/05, Michele Simionato [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 10/18/05, Guido van Rossum [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I wonder if at some point in the future Python will have to develop a macro syntax so that you can write Property foo: def get(self): return self._foo

Re: [Python-Dev] Proposed resolutions for open PEP 343 issues

2005-10-23 Thread Paul Moore
On 10/23/05, Phillip J. Eby [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Actually, you've just pointed out a new complication introduced by having __context__. The return value of __context__ is supposed to have an __enter__ and an __exit__. Is it a type error if it doesn't? How do we handle that, exactly?

[Python-Dev] PEP 343 - multiple context managers in one statement

2005-10-25 Thread Paul Moore
I have a deep suspicion that this has been done to death already, but my searching ability isn't up to finding the reference. So I'll simply ask the question, and not offer a long discussion: Has the option of letting the with statement admit multiple context managers been considered (and

Re: [Python-Dev] PEP 343 - multiple context managers in one statement

2005-10-26 Thread Paul Moore
On 10/25/05, Nick Coghlan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Paul Moore wrote: [...] Has the option of letting the with statement admit multiple context managers been considered (and presumably rejected)? [...] Not rejected - deliberately left as a future option (this is the reason why the RHS

Re: [Python-Dev] a different kind of reduce...

2005-10-31 Thread Paul Moore
On 10/31/05, Martin Blais [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I'm always--literally every time-- looking for a more functional form, something that would be like this: # apply dirname() 3 times on its results, initializing with p ... = repapply(dirname, 3, p) [...] Just wondering, does anybody

Re: [Python-Dev] Inconsistent behaviour in import/zipimport hooks

2005-11-09 Thread Paul Moore
On 11/9/05, Bob Ippolito [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Nov 9, 2005, at 1:48 PM, Thomas Heller wrote: Bob Ippolito [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: On Nov 9, 2005, at 1:22 PM, Bill Janssen wrote: It's a shame that 1) there's no equivalent of java -jar, i.e., python -z FILE.ZIP, and

Re: [Python-Dev] Inconsistent behaviour in import/zipimport hooks

2005-11-10 Thread Paul Moore
On 11/10/05, Nick Coghlan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Paul Moore wrote: On 11/9/05, Bob Ippolito [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Nov 9, 2005, at 1:48 PM, Thomas Heller wrote: Bob Ippolito [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: On Nov 9, 2005, at 1:22 PM, Bill Janssen wrote: It's a shame that 1

Re: [Python-Dev] Keep default comparisons - or add a second set?

2005-12-19 Thread Paul Moore
On 12/19/05, Jim Jewett [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Unfortunately, one very common use case of comparisons is to get a canonical order. If the order is sensible, all the better, but that is not strictly required. One of Python's selling points (especially compared to Java) is that getting a

Re: [Python-Dev] The path module PEP

2006-01-26 Thread Paul Moore
On 1/26/06, Thomas Wouters [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Wed, Jan 25, 2006 at 09:37:04PM +0100, BJörn Lindqvist wrote: Inheritance from string (Jason) This issue has been brought up before when people were discussing the path module. I think the consensus is that, while the inheritance

Re: [Python-Dev] The path module PEP

2006-01-26 Thread Paul Moore
On 1/25/06, BJörn Lindqvist [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: My comments on the issues. It was easier this way than trying to reply on every message individually. Inheritance from string (Jason) This issue has been brought up before when people were discussing the path module. I think the consensus

Re: [Python-Dev] The path module PEP

2006-01-27 Thread Paul Moore
On 1/26/06, Stefan Rank [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: on 26.01.2006 14:15 Paul Moore said the following: [snip] Also note that my example Path(C:, Windows, System32) above is an *absolute* path on Windows. But a relative (albeit stupidly-named :-)) path on Unix. How would that be handled

Re: [Python-Dev] Extension to ConfigParser

2006-01-31 Thread Paul Moore
On 1/30/06, Guido van Rossum [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Aha. I am beginning to understand. When people say ConfigParser is hopeless they mean .INI files are hopeless. I happen to disagree. (There's also a meme that says that every aspect of an app should be configurable. I disagree with that

Re: [Python-Dev] Extension to ConfigParser

2006-01-31 Thread Paul Moore
On 1/31/06, Tony Meyer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Why doesn't this work? It does here: $ cat suite.ini [sect] opt1 = 1 opt2 = 2 $ cat app.ini [sect] opt1 = 3 opt4 = 5 $ python Python 2.4.1 (#2, Mar 31 2005, 00:05:10) [GCC 3.3 20030304 (Apple Computer, Inc. build 1666)] on darwin Type

Re: [Python-Dev] Let's just *keep* lambda

2006-02-05 Thread Paul Moore
On 2/5/06, Guido van Rossum [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: After so many attempts to come up with an alternative for lambda, perhaps we should admit defeat. I've not had the time to follow the most recent rounds, but I propose that we keep lambda, so as to stop wasting everybody's talent and time on

Re: [Python-Dev] Let's just *keep* lambda

2006-02-07 Thread Paul Moore
On 2/7/06, Brett Cannon [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 2/5/06, Guido van Rossum [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: After so many attempts to come up with an alternative for lambda, perhaps we should admit defeat. I've not had the time to follow the most recent rounds, but I propose that we keep lambda,

Re: [Python-Dev] Linking with mscvrt

2006-02-09 Thread Paul Moore
On 2/9/06, Neil Hodgson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Greg Ewing: But that won't help when you need to deal with third-party code that knows nothing about Python or its wrapped file objects, and calls the CRT (or one of the myriad extant CRTs, chosen at random:-) directly. Can you

Re: [Python-Dev] PEP 338 - Executing Modules as Scripts

2006-02-11 Thread Paul Moore
On 2/11/06, Nick Coghlan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I finally finished updating PEP 338 to comply with the flexible importing system in PEP 302. The result is a not-yet-thoroughly-tested module that should allow the -m switch to execute any module written in Python that is accessible via an

Re: [Python-Dev] Adventures with ASTs - Inline Lambda

2006-02-16 Thread Paul Moore
On 2/16/06, Fredrik Lundh [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Talin wrote: I definately don't want to start a flame war, although I suspect I already have :/ I think most about everything has already been said wrt lambda already, but I guess we could have a little war on spelling issues ;-) Agreed,

Re: [Python-Dev] PEP 338 issue finalisation (was Re: 2.5 PEP)

2006-02-16 Thread Paul Moore
On 2/16/06, Guido van Rossum [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 2/16/06, Nick Coghlan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The PEP itself requests that a string be returned from get_data(), but doesn't require that the file be opened in text mode. Perhaps the PEP 302 emulation should use binary mode here?

Re: [Python-Dev] Proposal: defaultdict

2006-02-17 Thread Paul Moore
On 2/17/06, Raymond Hettinger [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Over lunch with Alex Martelli, he proposed that a subclass of dict with this behavior (but implemented in C) would be a good addition to the language I would like to add something like this to the collections module, +1 but a PEP is

Re: [Python-Dev] Proposal: defaultdict

2006-02-20 Thread Paul Moore
On 2/19/06, Steve Holden [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: You are missing the rationale of the PEP process. The point is *not* documentation. The point of the PEP process is to channel and collect discussion, so that the BDFL can make a decision. The BDFL is not bound at all to the PEP process.

Re: [Python-Dev] conditional expressions - add parens?

2006-03-07 Thread Paul Moore
On 3/7/06, Jeremy Hylton [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 3/6/06, Alex Martelli [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Mar 6, 2006, at 9:17 AM, Jim Jewett wrote: ... I think that adding parentheses would help, by at least signalling that the logic is longer than just the next (single) expression.

Re: [Python-Dev] how about adding ping's uuid module to the standard lib ?

2006-03-07 Thread Paul Moore
On 3/7/06, Phillip J. Eby [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: At 06:29 AM 3/7/2006 +0100, Fredrik Lundh wrote: see subject and http://python.org/sf/1368955 comments ? would be nice if you could just call UUID() to create a generic UUID in a platform-appropriate way. PEAK's uuid module does this such

Re: [Python-Dev] as mania

2006-03-07 Thread Paul Moore
On 3/7/06, Andrew Koenig [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: As it turns out, Python has similar ways of decomposing data structures: (x, y) = foo or def bar((x, y)): # etc. and I have sometimes wished I could write z as (x, y) = foo or def

Re: [Python-Dev] Making builtins more efficient

2006-03-09 Thread Paul Moore
On 3/9/06, Nick Coghlan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Steven Elliott wrote: I'm interested in how builtins could be more efficient. I've read over some of the PEPs having to do with making global variables more efficient (search for global): http://www.python.org/doc/essays/pepparade.html

Re: [Python-Dev] Another threading idea

2006-03-14 Thread Paul Moore
On 3/14/06, Raymond Hettinger [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: FWIW, I've been working on a way to simplify the use of queues with daemon consumer threads Sometimes, I launch one or more consumer threads that wait for a task to enter a queue and then work on the task. A recurring problem is that I

Re: [Python-Dev] Another threading idea

2006-03-14 Thread Paul Moore
On 3/14/06, Guido van Rossum [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Isn't this a job for threading.BoundedSpemaphore()? Not sure I see how. What I think Raymond's after (and certainly what I want) is to queue N tasks, set a counter to N, then wait until the counter goes to zero. I suppose counter =

Re: [Python-Dev] Python 3000 Process

2006-03-20 Thread Paul Moore
On 3/20/06, Barry Warsaw [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Mon, 2006-03-20 at 13:30 -0500, Terry Reedy wrote: Guido van Rossum [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message Barry, if you could create that mailing list, please? And please mirror it on gmane the same way as this list is. Subscription

Re: [Python-Dev] Firefox searchbar engine for Python bugs

2006-04-02 Thread Paul Moore
On 4/2/06, Anthony Baxter [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Sunday 02 April 2006 14:17, Anthony Baxter wrote: I've created a searchbar plugin for the firefox search bar that allows you to search bugs. I should clarify - it allows you to pull up a bug by bug ID, using the www.python.org/sf/

Re: [Python-Dev] RELEASED Python 2.5 (alpha 1)

2006-04-05 Thread Paul Moore
On 4/5/06, Anthony Baxter [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On behalf of the Python development team and the Python community, I'm happy to announce the first alpha release of Python 2.5. Excellent! Downloading it now for a test run... One (possibly very minor) point - the web page offers Windows

[Python-Dev] Possible issue with 2.5a1 Win32 binary

2006-04-05 Thread Paul Moore
Can someone check http://www.python.org/sf/1465093 for me? It looks like a fairly serious issue with the Windows binaries - pywin32 is a pretty important package on Windows. I've verified it on 2 machines, but can't work out what the issue might be. I've assigned it to Martin, as the owner of the

Re: [Python-Dev] Possible issue with 2.5a1 Win32 binary

2006-04-06 Thread Paul Moore
On 4/6/06, Martin v. Löwis [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: What happens when you run D:\Apps\Python25\python.exe -Wi D:\Apps\Python25\Lib\compileall.py -f -x badsyntax D:\Apps\Python25\Lib and look at the status of the program? I think also excluding bad_coding might already help. Status was 1.

  1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   9   10   >