The first (and hopefully last) release candidate for Python 2.6.3 is
now available via
http://www.python.org/download/releases/2.6.3/
Source releases and Windows binaries are currently available, and Mac
OS X binaries should be forthcoming.
Nearly 100 bugs have been fixed since 2.6.2. Barring any unforeseen
problems, we will make the final 2.6.3 release this Friday, October
2nd. Please give this release candidate a spin and let us know if you
encounter any show stopping problems.
Enjoy,
-Barry
I had previously wanted to release Python 2.6.3 over the summer, but
for various personal reasons, the summer was just too insane. I'd
like to reschedule a 2.6.3 release, shooting for final release on 25-
September.
We should probably do a release candidate, so I'd like to make that on
23-September.
Does anybody have objections to that schedule? If not, I'll try to
spend some time over the next few days looking at outstanding bugs,
and marking release blockers, etc.
-Barry
I'm planning to "officially" drop support for Python 1.5.2 in the logging
package.
When the logging package was introduced in Python 2.3, many Linux distros were
shipping 1.5.2 as the system's Python, even though 2.2 had been out for a
while. So it seemed important to support 1.5.2 for those sysadmins who wanted
to use logging with their system Python.
The Linux landscape has changed a bit since then. Most Linux distros ship with
much more recent versions of Python, and so I no longer see 1.5.2 support as
important.
Dropping support for 1.5.2 means that future changes to logging will not be
concerned with 1.5.2 compatibility. For example, boolean values which were 0/1
in the logging package will at some point be replaced by False/True, and newer
language features will start to be used when changes are made. There are no
plans for a specific "cleanup" exercise at the moment. In fact some changes
made a while ago inadvertently broke 1.5.2 compatibility, but no-one's
complained. So I'm assuming the whole thing is really a non-issue, and this
post is just to keep everyone in the picture.
A 1.5.2-compatible version of the package is still available via
http://www.red-dove.com/python_logging.html if anyone needs it. This version
is not actively maintained, but that shouldn't be an issue.
Regards,
Vinay Sajip
Hi All,
I didn't see any docs on this:
http://docs.python.org/reference/datamodel.html?highlight=__eq__#object.__e…
Where are the specifications on what happens if two objects are compared
and both have implementations of __eq__? Which __eq__ is called? What
happens if the first one called returns False? Is the second one called?
What is one implements __eq__ and the other __ne__?
If I've missed something, please point me in the right direction.
To all those about to tell me to go read the source: that's not good
enough here. I'm hoping there *are* "official" rules for how these
interact and they just need better linking in, otherwise, I worry that
IronPython could do one thing, Jython another and CPython a third...
cheers,
Chris
--
Simplistix - Content Management, Batch Processing & Python Consulting
- http://www.simplistix.co.uk
Hello
Here's a wrapup of the Distutils-SIG discussion
we had on the "static metadata" topic.
I realize that it's a good thing to send in.
python-dev such wrapup on distutils design
decisions, to keep everyone informed and get
more feedback when required.
I will try to do it for every upcoming changes
that are not going in a PEP process (when it's not
a 'big' change). The rate of such mails should
not be very high. (around 1 mail in python-dev
for +150 mails in distutils-SIG)
If you feel that what we are about to change in distutils
is wrong, you can go ahead and help us by participating
in Distutils-ML, so we keep one and only one media
for these discussions.
The four sentences summary for people in a hurry:
Getting metadata of a distribution that is not.
installed means running its setup.py. This means.
downloading the whole archive, and running.
third party code on your system.
To avoid it, we are adding a [setup] section in.
setup.cfg where you can express the package metadata
statically.
Conditional sections, specific to some system.
can be added to add some specific fields in [setup].
At the end, you will be able to get metadata fields
without running any third-party code, and possibly
get only the distribution setup.cfg for this.
Now the long version.
Rational
========
Today, if you want to list all the metadata (PEP 314) of a.
distribution that is not installed, you need to use it's.
setup.py CLI.
So, basically, you download it, and run::
$ python setup.py --name
Foo
$ python setup.py --version
1.2
Where `name` and `version` are metadata fields. That's OK but as.
soon as the developers add more code in setup.py, this feature
might break or (worse) might do unwanted things on the target.
system.
Why should we run third-party code just to get its metadata ?
So we worked on a way to express those metadata statically,
by pushing them in `setup.cfg`. That's not hard, since all.
the metadata fields are static values.
Adding a setup section in setup.cfg
===================================
So the first thing we want to introduce is a [setup] section,
that may contain any field from the metadata::
[setup]
name: Foo
version: 1.2
Distutils will look for them, and will use them. Of course
setup.py is still required, and in case an option that is.
a metadata field is passed to setup(), it will override one.
located in setup.cfg.
PEP 341 is coming up
====================
Remember the last Pycon Summit ? We said that we would
introduce a new metadata field to describe requirements..
That's basically what PEP 341 is about, and we are still.
working on it.
Basically, we will be able to write things like::
requires: Twisted == 8.2.0
What takes us so long is that adding requirements like
this in the metadata requires more things:
- the ability to compare versions (this was described in.
PEP 386 but not finished yet)
- the ability to make these requirements vary depending on.
the target system
And the later makes our "setup.cfg" new [setup] section.
obsolete as soon as this new metadata field is added in.
Python.
So we need more that what I've shown in the previous section
Context-dependant sections
==========================
The second change we are going to introduce is context-dependant
sections in setup.cfg.
A context dependant section is a section with a condition that is.
used only if the execution environment meets its condition.
Here's an example::
[setup]
name: Foo
version: 1.3
[setup:sys_platform == 'win32']
requires: pywin32
requires: bar > 1.0
[setup:os_machine == '64bits']
requires: some_package
[setup:python_version == '2.4' or python_version == '2.5']
requires: some_package
Every [setup:condition] section will be added in [setup]
only if the condition is met.
The micro-language behind this is the simplest possible:
it compares only strings, with usual string operators,
and with the ability to combine expressions. It makes it also
easy to understand to non-pythoneers (os packagers).
The pseudo-grammar is (I don't know how to write those but you'll
get it hopefully)::
comp: '<'|'>'|'=='|'>='|'<='|'<>'|'!='|'in'|'not' 'in'
comparison: expr (comp_op expr)*
expr: STRING
test: or_test
or_test: and_test ('or' and_test)*
and_test: not_test ('and' not_test)*
not_test: 'not' not_test | comparison
where STRING belongs to any of those:
- python_version = '%s.%s' % (sys.version_info[0], sys.version_info[1])
- os_name = os.name
- sys_platform = sys.platform
- os_sysname = os.uname()[0].
- os_nodename = os.uname()[1]
- os_release = os.uname()[2].
- os_version = os.uname()[3]..
- os_machine = os.uname()[4].
- a free string, like '2.4', or 'win32'
Distutils will provide a function that is able to read the metadata
of a distribution, given a setup.cfg file, for the target environment::
>>> from distutils.util import local_metadata
>>> local_metadata('setup.cfg')
<DistributionMetadata instance>
Meaning that a Vanilla Python will be able to read the metadata
of a package without running any code.
That's what distutils will use when setup.py is run.
That's what any package manager will be able to use to work.
with distributions.
Limitations
===========
If a distribution is unable for obscure reasons (or does not
wish) to set all metadata fields in setup.cfg, that's fine :.
the fields will be set to UNKNOWN when `local_metadata` is called.
When setup.py is run, options passed to setup() will complete
those.
When a package manager gets 'UNKOWN' values, it knows it might
need to do further processing by running setup.py.
Why this change is good
=====================
Once the requires metadata is added in PEP 341,
being able to query the metadata for a distribution can be done
without doing anything else than reading a static file and interpreting
its conditions in a restricted and secured manner.
So there's no need to run third-party code anymore.
Possible use cases:
- setup.cfg is published on PyPI. Packages managers like easy_install
or pip will be able to list all the distributions needed and their
versions for installing a distribution without having to download
anything !
- OS packagers will be able to list the dependencies of a distribution
without having to browse Python code.
And, again, this new [setup] section is backward-compatible, and will
be a good complement to the work done in PEP 376.
Thanks for reading so far. This code will be added in 2.7 and 3.2.
Tarek
--
Tarek Ziadé | http://ziade.org | オープンソースはすごい!
It's been awhile since I rebuilt Python and ran the test suite. This
evening I noticed this on my Mac (OS X 10.5):
test_thread
Unhandled exception in thread started by <bound method ThreadRunningTests.task of <test.test_thread.ThreadRunningTests testMethod=test_stack_size>>
Traceback (most recent call last):
File "/Users/skip/src/python/trunk/Lib/test/test_thread.py", line 51, in task
self.done_mutex.release()
thread.error: release unlocked lock
Unhandled exception in thread started by <bound method ThreadRunningTests.task of <test.test_thread.ThreadRunningTests testMethod=test_stack_size>>
Traceback (most recent call last):
File "/Users/skip/src/python/trunk/Lib/test/test_thread.py", line 51, in task
self.done_mutex.release()
thread.error: release unlocked lock
Unhandled exception in thread started by <bound method ThreadRunningTests.task of <test.test_thread.ThreadRunningTests testMethod=test_stack_size>>
Traceback (most recent call last):
File "/Users/skip/src/python/trunk/Lib/test/test_thread.py", line 51, in task
self.done_mutex.release()
thread.error: release unlocked lock
Unhandled exception in thread started by <bound method ThreadRunningTests.task of <test.test_thread.ThreadRunningTests testMethod=test_starting_threads>>
Traceback (most recent call last):
File "/Users/skip/src/python/trunk/Lib/test/test_thread.py", line 51, in task
self.done_mutex.release()
thread.error: release unlocked lock
Oddly enough, this didn't cause the test to fail.
Is this a known problem? Should I open a ticket?
Skip
On Tue, Sep 29, 2009 at 5:54 PM, Benjamin Peterson <benjamin(a)python.org> wrote:
> * Provide a flag to Formatter which controls whether new or old
> formatting is used. Emit a warning when it's not true.
So then the transition strategy is something like:
version N: Add formatting flag which uses {}-style formatting on True
and %-style formatting on False, which defaults to False
version N + 1: Deprecate False value for formatting flag (all code
should start specifying flag=True)
version N + 2: Raise error on False value for formatting flag (all
code must specify flag=True)
version N + 3: Deprecate formatting flag
version N + 4: Remove formatting flag
?
Steve
--
Where did you get that preposterous hypothesis?
Did Steve tell you that?
--- The Hiphopopotamus
Below is a new PEP based on discussions from the stdlib-sig, which
proposes to add the argparse module to the standard library in Python
2.7 and 3.2.
Looking forward to your feedback!
Steve
http://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0389/
----------------------------------------------------------------------
PEP: 389
Title: argparse - new command line parsing module
Version: $Revision: 75097 $
Last-Modified: $Date: 2009-09-27 12:42:40 -0700 (Sun, 27 Sep 2009) $
Author: Steven Bethard <steven.bethard(a)gmail.com>
Status: Draft
Type: Standards Track
Content-Type: text/x-rst
Created: 25-Sep-2009
Python-Version: 2.7 and 3.2
Post-History:
Abstract
========
This PEP proposes inclusion of the argparse [1]_ module in the Python
standard library in Python 2.7 and 3.2.
Motivation
==========
The argparse module is a command line parsing library which provides
more functionality than the existing command line parsing modules in
the standard library, getopt [2]_ and optparse [3]_. It includes
support for positional arguments (not just options), subcommands,
required options, options syntaxes like "/f" and "+rgb", zero-or-more
and one-or-more style arguments, and many other features the other
two lack.
The argparse module is also already a popular third-party replacement
for these modules. It is used in projects like IPython (the Scipy
Python shell) [4]_, is included in Debian testing and unstable [5]_,
and since 2007 has had various requests for its inclusion in the
standard library [6]_ [7]_ [8]_. This popularity suggests it may be
a valuable addition to the Python libraries.
Why aren't getopt and optparse enough?
======================================
One argument against adding argparse is that thare are "already two
different option parsing modules in the standard library" [9]_. The
following is a list of features provided by argparse but not present
in getopt or optparse:
* While it is true there are two *option* parsing libraries, there
are no full command line parsing libraries -- both getopt and
optparse support only options and have no support for positional
arguments. The argparse module handles both, and as a result, is
able to generate better help messages, avoiding redundancies like
the ``usage=`` string usually required by optparse.
* The argparse module values practicality over purity. Thus, argparse
allows required options and customization of which characters are
used to identify options, while optparse explicitly states "the
phrase 'required option' is self-contradictory" and that the option
syntaxes ``-pf``, ``-file``, ``+f``, ``+rgb``, ``/f`` and ``/file``
"are not supported by optparse, and they never will be".
* The argparse module allows options to accept a variable number of
arguments using ``nargs='?'``, ``nargs='*'`` or ``nargs='+'``. The
optparse module provides an untested recipe for some part of this
functionality [10]_ but admits that "things get hairy when you want
an option to take a variable number of arguments."
* The argparse module supports subcommands, where a main command
line parser dispatches to other command line parsers depending on
the command line arguments. This is a common pattern in command
line interfaces, e.g. ``svn co`` and ``svn up``.
Why isn't the functionality just being added to optparse?
=========================================================
Clearly all the above features offer improvements over what is
available through optparse. A reasonable question then is why these
features are not simply provided as patches to optparse, instead of
introducing an entirely new module. In fact, the original development
of argparse intended to do just that, but because of various fairly
constraining design decisions of optparse, this wasn't really
possible. Some of the problems included:
* The optparse module exposes the internals of its parsing algorithm.
In particular, ``parser.largs`` and ``parser.rargs`` are guaranteed
to be available to callbacks [11]_. This makes it extremely
difficult to improve the parsing algorithm as was necessary in
argparse for proper handling of positional arguments and variable
length arguments. For example, ``nargs='+'`` in argparse is matched
using regular expressions and thus has no notion of things like
``parser.largs``.
* The optparse extension APIs are extremely complex. For example,
just to use a simple custom string-to-object conversion function,
you have to subclass ``Option``, hack class attributes, and then
specify your custom option type to the parser, like this::
class MyOption(Option):
TYPES = Option.TYPES + ("mytype",)
TYPE_CHECKER = copy(Option.TYPE_CHECKER)
TYPE_CHECKER["mytype"] = check_mytype
parser = optparse.OptionParser(option_class=MyOption)
parser.add_option("-m", type="mytype")
For comparison, argparse simply allows conversion functions to be
used as ``type=`` arguments directly, e.g.::
parser = argparse.ArgumentParser()
parser.add_option("-m", type=check_mytype)
But given the baroque customization APIs of optparse, it is unclear
how such a feature should interact with those APIs, and it is
quite possible that introducing the simple argparse API would break
existing custom Option code.
* Both optparse and argparse parse command line arguments and assign
them as attributes to an object returned by ``parse_args``.
However, the optparse module guarantees that the ``take_action``
method of custom actions will always be passed a ``values`` object
which provides an ``ensure_value`` method [12]_, while the argparse
module allows attributes to be assigned to any object, e.g.::
foo_object = ...
parser.parse_args(namespace=foo_object)
foo_object.some_attribute_parsed_from_command_line
Modifying optparse to allow any object to be passed in would be
difficult because simply passing the ``foo_object`` around instead
of a ``Values`` instance will break existing custom actions that
depend on the ``ensure_value`` method.
Because of issues like these, which made it unreasonably difficult
for argparse to stay compatible with the optparse APIs, argparse was
developed as an independent module. Given these issues, merging all
the argparse features into optparse with no backwards
incompatibilities seems unlikely.
Deprecation of getopt and optparse
==================================
There is still some debate over the best way (if at all) to encourage
users to move from getopt and optparse to their replacement,
argparse. The current recommendation of this PEP is the following
conservative deprecation strategy:
* Python 3.2, Python 2.7 and any later Python 2.X releases --
PendingDeprecation warnings, which by default are not displayed,
and documentation notes directing users of getopt and optparse to
argparse.
* Python 3.3 -- Same as above
* Python 3.4 -- Deprecation warnings for getopt and optparse, which
by default *are* displayed.
Though this is slower than the usual deprecation process, it seems
prudent to avoid producing any casually visible Deprecation warnings
until Python 3.X has had some additional time to attract developers.
Open Issues
===========
The argparse module supports Python from 2.3 up through 3.2 and as a
result relies on traditional ``%(foo)s`` style string formatting. It
has been suggested that it might be better to use the new style
``{foo}`` string formatting [13]_. This seems like a good idea, but
would break backwards compatibility for existing argparse-based
scripts unless we can come up with a way to reasonably support both
syntaxes.
References
==========
.. [1] argparse
(http://code.google.com/p/argparse/)
.. [2] getopt
(http://docs.python.org/library/getopt.html)
.. [3] optparse
(http://docs.python.org/library/optparse.html)
.. [4] argparse in IPython
(http://mail.scipy.org/pipermail/ipython-dev/2009-April/005102.html)
.. [5] argparse in Debian
(http://packages.debian.org/search?keywords=python-argparse)
.. [6] 2007-01-03 request for argparse in the standard library
(http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-list/2007-January/592646.html)
.. [7] 2009-06-09 request for argparse in the standard library
(http://bugs.python.org/issue6247)
.. [8] 2009-09-10 request for argparse in the standard library
(http://mail.python.org/pipermail/stdlib-sig/2009-September/000342.html)
.. [9] Fredrik Lundh response to [6]_
(http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-list/2007-January/592675.html)
.. [10] optparse variable args
(http://docs.python.org/library/optparse.html#callback-example-6-variable-ar…)
.. [11] parser.largs and parser.rargs
(http://docs.python.org/library/optparse.html#how-callbacks-are-called)
.. [12] take_action values argument
(http://docs.python.org/library/optparse.html#adding-new-actions)
.. [13] use {}-formatting instead of %-formatting
(http://bugs.python.org/msg89279)
Copyright
=========
This document has been placed in the public domain.
..
Local Variables:
mode: indented-text
indent-tabs-mode: nil
sentence-end-double-space: t
fill-column: 70
coding: utf-8
End:
I'm working with http://svn.python.org/projects/python/trunk on Mac OS
X 10.6.1
using Apples xcode gcc 4.2.1.
When I run the following commands:
./configure --enable-framework --with-universal-archs=32-bit | tee
build.config.log
make clean all | tee build.make.log
I end up with a x86_64 Python image.
No matter what I use for archs its always the same.
I would expect to see -arch arg to GCC but it is not there.
export CFLAG="-arch i386"
did not work either.
Am I doing something wrong or is this broken on trunk?
Barry
