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
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
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
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
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 =
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:
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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.
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
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
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
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,
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
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
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,
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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.
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
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
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.
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
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
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
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. :-)
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
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
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
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)
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
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
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 ?
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
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
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,
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
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.
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
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
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
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
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,
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.
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
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
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
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
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!
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
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
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?
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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,
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
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
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,
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?
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
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.
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.
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
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
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
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
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 =
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
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/
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
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
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.
On 4/8/06, Brett Cannon [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Anyway, here is a list of the packages that I think have outside
maintenance (or at least have been at some point). Anyone who has
info on them that I need, please let me know the details. Also, if I
missed any, obviously speak up:
I think
I've just managed to get Python built using the free MS compiler and
tools (yay! full instructions to follow somewhere - probably the wiki
and maybe as a patch to PCBuild\readme.txt)
There's one thing that puzzled me - test_sundry is marked as an
unexpected skip. As it imports tty, which imports
On 4/13/06, Tim Peters [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
[Paul Moore]
You didn't say from where, or when, you got the Python source code.
Someone recently added a bare import tty to test_sundry on the
trunk, without realizing that would cause test_sundry to get skipped
on Windows. I repaired
I've just added some instructions on how to build Python on Windows
with the free MS Toolkit C++ compiler. They are at
http://wiki.python.org/moin/Building_Python_with_the_free_MS_C_Toolkit.
Most of the credit for this goes to David Murmann, whose posting on
the subject to python-list pointed out
On 4/15/06, Martin v. Löwis [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Paul Moore wrote:
I've just added some instructions on how to build Python on Windows
with the free MS Toolkit C++ compiler. They are at
http://wiki.python.org/moin/Building_Python_with_the_free_MS_C_Toolkit.
Cool! If you think
On 4/16/06, John J Lee [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
OK, I suppose I should have asked will 2.5's module traceback work with
Python 2.4?. I guess the answer is something resembling no, but of
course (?) the question I'm really interested in is how, without too much
effort or ugliness, can people
On 4/17/06, tomer filiba [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
after several people (several 10) contacted me and said IMHO 'construct'
is a good candidate for stdlib,
i thought i should give it a try. of course i'm not saying it should be
included right now, but in 6 months time, or such a
timeframe
On 4/18/06, Thomas Heller [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
It is not yet too late (but the timeslot left is very small) to propose
enhancements to ctypes. classmethods like 'from_string', 'from_buffer' or
whatever would probably make sense.
A from_buffer classmethod would probably be good. I didn't
1 - 100 of 1788 matches
Mail list logo
