Mailman 3 July 2011 - Python-Dev

time.sleep(-1) behaviour
by Ulrich Eckhardt 01 Jul '11

01 Jul '11

Hi! This is a request for clarification for the thread "how to call a function for evry 10 seconds" from the user mailinglist/newsgroup. The gist is this: 1. On Linux/Python 2.6, time.sleep(-1.0) raises an IOError. 2. On MS Windows/Python 2.5 or 2.7 this sleeps forever. It seems that converting this to a 32-bit integer for Sleep() causes an underflow. Questions: 1. Is the IOError somehow explainable? 2. Is the IOError acceptable or a bug? 3. Is the behaviour under MS Windows acceptable or a bug? 4. Since time.sleep() is documented to possibly sleep a bit longer than specified, someone suggested that the overall sleep time could also be truncated to a minimum of zero, i.e. treating negative values as zero. Greetings! Uli ************************************************************************************** Domino Laser GmbH, Fangdieckstra�e 75a, 22547 Hamburg, Deutschland Gesch�ftsf�hrer: Thorsten F�cking, Amtsgericht Hamburg HR B62 932 ************************************************************************************** Visit our website at http://www.dominolaser.com ************************************************************************************** Diese E-Mail einschlie�lich s�mtlicher Anh�nge ist nur f�r den Adressaten bestimmt und kann vertrauliche Informationen enthalten. Bitte benachrichtigen Sie den Absender umgehend, falls Sie nicht der beabsichtigte Empf�nger sein sollten. Die E-Mail ist in diesem Fall zu l�schen und darf weder gelesen, weitergeleitet, ver�ffentlicht oder anderweitig benutzt werden. E-Mails k�nnen durch Dritte gelesen werden und Viren sowie nichtautorisierte �nderungen enthalten. Domino Laser GmbH ist f�r diese Folgen nicht verantwortlich. **************************************************************************************

5 7

Re: [Python-Dev] cpython: Issue #12451: Add support.create_empty_file()
by Antoine Pitrou 01 Jul '11

01 Jul '11

On Thu, 30 Jun 2011 23:25:59 +0200 victor.stinner <python-checkins(a)python.org> wrote: > http://hg.python.org/cpython/rev/0c49260e85a0 > changeset: 71103:0c49260e85a0 > user: Victor Stinner <victor.stinner(a)haypocalc.com> > date: Thu Jun 30 23:25:47 2011 +0200 > summary: > Issue #12451: Add support.create_empty_file() > > We don't need to create a temporary buffered binary or text file object just to > create an empty file. Is there a reason for this? I find it quite explicit and obvious what the following does: with open("somefile", "wb"): pass so I wonder what replacing it with support.create_empty_file() brings (except from having to lookup yet another helper function). Regards Antoine.

2 1

Re: [Python-Dev] commant
by Bernie Bill 01 Jul '11

01 Jul '11

and thanks!! lederbill

1 0

svn.python.org confusion
by Ned Deily 01 Jul '11

01 Jul '11

Not surprisingly, people are still attempting to browse and/or checkout Python source from svn.python.org. They could be following out-of-date instructions from somewhere or might be expecting the svn repos are mirroring the hg ones. This causes wasted time and frustration for users and for us following up on issues. Could some text be added to the svn browser pages to at least indicate that the repo is no longer being updated with a link to the hg.python.org browser? I'm not sure what to do about the repos themselves if people attempt to do an svn co. Perhaps that should just be disabled totally for python? -- Ned Deily, nad(a)acm.org

9 10