James Y Knight added the comment:
Reverting the incorrect commit which caused the regression would be a good
start.
--
___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
http://bugs.python.org/issue21652
New submission from James Y Knight:
The change done for issue9291 in Python 2.7.7 caused the mimetypes.types_map
dict to change to contain a mixture of str and unicode objects, rather than
just str, as it always had before.
This causes twisted.web to crash when serving static files on Windows
James Y Knight f...@users.sourceforge.net added the comment:
YAGNI. Nobody has needed sys.build_platform yet. (And no, sys.platform isn't
it, since that's been fixed at linux2 approximately forever). Why do you think
people would suddenly start needing to know the build-time kernel version now
James Y Knight f...@users.sourceforge.net added the comment:
configure_linux2.python3.2.patch
It would probably be more future-proof to use linux*), not linux3) in the
case expression.
--
___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
http
James Y Knight f...@users.sourceforge.net added the comment:
Well, except maybe if you plan to write applications working only on Python
= 2.7.3? ... this version is not released yet.
No, of course I don't plan on writing new code that checks sys.platform ==
'linux2'. That's ridiculous.
I
James Y Knight f...@users.sourceforge.net added the comment:
M.A., your comments do not make sense in the context of Linux. It does not
actually require porting -- Linux 2.6.39 to Linux 3.0 is no more disruptive
than Linux 2.6.38 to Linux 2.6.39. *Except* that python ill-advisedly exported
James Y Knight f...@users.sourceforge.net added the comment:
Sure, you can compile and run Python on both versions of Linux, but
what if your application uses features that are only present in Linux
3.0 and later ?
This comment is making me think you've missed just how irrelevant kernel
James Y Knight f...@users.sourceforge.net added the comment:
I will backport the fix to 2.7 and 3.2.
Uh, wait, so does that mean you're *not* going to do the
compatibility-preserving thing and force sys.platform to stay linux2 even when
python is built (BUILT! not run!) on a machine where
James Y Knight f...@users.sourceforge.net added the comment:
Oh wow, so it depends on the *build* time major version? That's really not
useful at all for linux 2.x and 3.x; there is nothing useful anyone can
possibly do with the distinction between platform == linux2 and platform ==
linux3
James Y Knight f...@users.sourceforge.net added the comment:
Show your speed test? Looks 2.5x faster to me. But I'm running this on python
2.6, so I guess it's possible that the re module's speed was decimated in Py3k.
python -m timeit -s $(printf import re\ndef escape(s):\n return
re.sub
James Y Knight f...@users.sourceforge.net added the comment:
Right you are, it seems that python's regexp implementation is terribly slow
when doing replacements with a substitution in them. (fixing the broken test,
as you pointed out changed the timing to 97.6 usec vs the in-error-reported
James Y Knight f...@users.sourceforge.net added the comment:
I just ran into the impl of escape after being surprised that '/' was being
escaped, and then was completely amazed that it wasn't just implemented as a
one-line re.subn. Come on, a loop for string replacement
James Y Knight f...@users.sourceforge.net added the comment:
The reason it's a problem is because a device is everything other than a
socket, pipe, slave-side of tty, or file. That is, /dev/null, /dev/zero,
/dev/tty, psuedo-tty masters from openpty (e.g. for running subprocesses), etc.
I find
On May 17, 2009, at 4:54 PM, Martin v. Löwis wrote:
Currently, each feature release introduces a new name for the
Python DLL on Windows, and may cause incompatibilities for extension
modules on Unix. This PEP proposes to define a stable set of API
functions which are guaranteed to be available
On Apr 22, 2009, at 2:50 AM, Martin v. Löwis wrote:
I'm proposing the following PEP for inclusion into Python 3.1.
Please comment.
+1. Even if some people still want a low-level bytes API, it's
important that the easy case be easy. That is: the majority of Python
applications should
On Apr 15, 2009, at 12:15 PM, M.-A. Lemburg wrote:
The much more common use case is that of wanting to have a base
package
installation which optional add-ons that live in the same logical
package namespace.
The PEP provides a way to solve this use case by giving both
developers
and
16 matches
Mail list logo