Mailman 3 August 2011 - Python-Dev

Re: [Python-Dev] [Python-checkins] cpython (3.2): Use real word in English text (i.e. not code)
by Éric Araujo Aug. 13, 2011

Aug. 13, 2011

Hi, >> summary: >> Use real word in English text (i.e. not code) > I agree that 'arg' for 'argument is email/twitter-speak, not proper > document prose. >> - :synopsis: Command-line option and argument-parsing library. >> + :synopsis: Command-line option and argument parsing library. > However, 'argument-parsing' could/should be left hyphenated as a > compound adjective for the same reason 'command-line' is. With all due respect to the fact that … [View More]

4 3

[PEPs] Rebooting PEP 394 (aka Support the /usr/bin/python2 symlink upstream)
by Kerrick Staley Aug. 12, 2011

Aug. 12, 2011

Hi, These are two emails I sent a short while ago about finalizing PEP 394. There was no response, so in case the messages didn't go through, I'm resending them. Thanks, Kerrick Staley ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Kerrick Staley <mail(a)kerrickstaley.com> Date: Sat, Jul 9, 2011 at 7:45 PM Subject: Re: [Python-Dev] [PEPs] Support the /usr/bin/python2 symlink upstream To: python-dev(a)python.org Sorry that I dropped the ball on this. I'd still like to see this get … [View More]implemented, but I got distracted with school and forgot about it. Updates I have made to the PEP will be sent as a patch immediately after this email. Here's a summary of what was happenening when we left off: * The draft SVN version from March 4 was pretty much complete. * Some were concerned about addressing Windows, but it was generally agreed to leave the Windows issue to another PEP. PEP 397 was started on March 15 to address the Windows side of the issue. PEP 397 recommends that the Windows Python launcher read the shebang and use it to determine which Python version to use; this allows one syntax for both operating systems that is compatible with the current PEP 394 recommendation. * There were concerns from Ned Deily about the naming of other binaries such as idle, pydoc, and python-config; these need to be created as idle2, pydoc2, and python2-config, with links created at the locations of the original binaries. * There were concerns from Glenn Linderman that the shebang line doesn't encode enough information to flexibly handle Windows launching (or even launching in general). ==== Here are my thoughts: * For Ned's comments, I agree. Although the issue isn't as large with these programs, there's no reason we can't handle them in the same way. I updated the PEP. * For Glenn's comments, I think the method you propose adds too much complexity. Regardless, if the #@ syntax is implemented, it can be described in PEP 397; it won't have an impact on the contents of this PEP. I think, though, that having multiple syntaxes may cause many scripts to be incompatible with multiple platforms when they don't have to be, since Unix coders will rarely add a #@ line, and Windows coders will likely forget the #! line. Also, #@ really ignores the purpose of a shebang: shebangs simply indicate an interpreter that works with the script; the shebang allows users to run arbitrary scripts without worrying about which interpreter they should specify. There's no reason that a script should use one interpreter on Unix, but be incompatible with that interpreter on Windows yet compatible with another. The name of the Unix binary is enough to determine the implementation and version of the interpreter to be used on Unix, and a Windows launcher should always invoke the same implementation/version on Windows (and this won't require hard-coding anything into the launcher if done right). If you want the script to run with a specific interpreter and version, possibly contingent on which operating system you're running the script under, then you can just invoke the interpreter by name with the script as an argument (e.g. python3 myprogram.py). TL;DR: shebangs encode a default implementation/version, and if you need something special, you can just manually run python3 myprogram.py or use a .bat file. ==== Also, I updated the PEP with the clarification that commands like python3 should be hard links (because they'll be invoked from code and are more efficient; also, hard links are just as flexible as symlinks here), while commands like python should be soft links (because this makes it clear to sysadmins that they can be "switched", and it's needed for flexibility if python3 changes). This really doesn't matter, but can we keep it this way unless there are serious objections? Regards, Kerrick Staley ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Kerrick Staley <mail(a)kerrickstaley.com> Date: Sat, Jul 9, 2011 at 7:46 PM Subject: Re: [Python-Dev] [PEPs] Support the /usr/bin/python2 symlink upstream To: python-dev(a)python.org $ svn diff Index: pep-0394.txt =================================================================== --- pep-0394.txt (revision 88860) +++ pep-0394.txt (working copy) @@ -1,5 +1,5 @@ PEP: 394 -Title: The "python" command on Unix-Like Systems +Title: The "python" Command on Unix-Like Systems Version: $Revision$ Last-Modified: $Date$ Author: Kerrick Staley <mail(a)kerrickstaley.com>, @@ -53,10 +53,14 @@ * When reinvoking the interpreter from a Python script, querying ``sys.executable`` to avoid hardcoded assumptions regarding the interpreter location remains the preferred approach. +* The ``idle``, ``pydoc``, and ``python-config`` binaries from Python 2.0 +should likewise be available as ``idle2``, ``pydoc2``, and ``python2-config``, +with the original commands invoking these binaries by default, but possibly +invoking the Python 3.0 versions instead. These recommendations are the outcome of the relevant python-dev discussion in -March 2011 [1] (NOTE: More accurately, they will be such once that "Draft" -status disappears from the PEP header, it has been moved into the "Other +March to July 2011 [1] (NOTE: More accurately, they will be such once that +"Draft" status disappears from the PEP header, it has been moved into the "Other Informational PEP" section in PEP 0 and this note has been deleted) @@ -144,11 +148,16 @@ While technically a new feature, the ``make install`` command and the Mac OS X installer in the 2.7 version of CPython will be adjusted to create the -new ``python2`` command in addition to the existing ``python`` and -``python2.7`` commands. This feature will first appear in CPython 2.7.2. +``python2.7``, ``idle2.7``, ``pydoc2.7``, and ``python2.7-config`` binaries, +with ``python2``, ``idle2``, ``pydoc2``, and ``python2-config`` as hard links +to the respective binaries, and ``python``, ``idle``, ``pydoc``, and +``python-config`` as symbolic links to the respective hard links. This feature +will first appear in CPython 2.7.2. -The ``make install`` command in the CPython 3.x series will continue to -install only the ``python3`` symlink for the foreseeable future. +The ``make install`` command in the CPython 3.x series will similarly install +the ``python3.x``, ``idle3.x``, ``pydoc3.x``, and ``python3.x-config`` binaries +(with appropriate ``x``), and ``python3``, ``idle3``, ``pydoc3``, and +``python3-config`` as hard links. Impact on PYTHON* Environment Variables @@ -166,27 +175,12 @@ Exclusions of MS Windows ======================== -This PEP deliberately excludes any proposals relating to Microsoft Windows. -The use of parallel installs on Windows suffers from numerous issues, -including the "last installed wins" behaviour for handling of file -associations, a lack of universal robust symlink support for easy aliasing of -commands, the fact that the Python executable is not available on ``PATH`` by -default, the fact that the ``python.exe`` and ``pythonw.exe`` names are -used for both Python 2 and Python 3 binaries and the lack of distinction -between the different Python versions when the Start menu shortcuts are -divorced from their containing folders (e.g. when they appear in the -"Recently Used" list. +This PEP deliberately excludes any proposals relating to Microsoft Windows: +devising an equivalent solution for Windows was deemed too complex to handle +here. PEP 397 and the related discussion on the python-dev mailing list address +this issue. -While these questions are well worth addressing, they do not have easy -answers. The authors of this particular PEP aren't inclined to even begin -trying to answer them, but anyone that wants to tackle them should feel free -to start working on their own PEP. -Note that, while the topic has been excluded from this PEP, there is plenty of -material in the linked python-dev discussion that may be useful in the design -and implementation of a Windows-specific solution. - - References ========== [View Less]

14 33

Review request issue 12178
by Catalin Iacob Aug. 12, 2011

Aug. 12, 2011

Could a core developer please review the patch I proposed for issue 12178 "csv writer doesn't escape escapechar"? Thanks!

1 0

Summary of Python tracker Issues
by Python tracker Aug. 12, 2011

Aug. 12, 2011

ACTIVITY SUMMARY (2011-08-05 - 2011-08-12) Python tracker at http://bugs.python.org/ To view or respond to any of the issues listed below, click on the issue. Do NOT respond to this message. Issues counts and deltas: open 2923 (+24) closed 21602 (+23) total 24525 (+47) Open issues with patches: 1264 Issues opened (35) ================== #12032: Tools/Scripts/crlf.py needs updating for python 3+ http://bugs.python.org/issue12032 reopened by eric.araujo #12701: Apple's clang 2.… [View More]

1 0

Re: [Python-Dev] [Python-checkins] cpython (2.7): Fix closes Issue12722 - link heapq source in the text format in the
by Sandro Tosi Aug. 11, 2011

Aug. 11, 2011

On Wed, Aug 10, 2011 at 21:55, Terry Reedy <tjreedy(a)udel.edu> wrote: > >> >> Latest version of the `heapq Python source code >> >> -<http://svn.python.org/view/python/branches/release27-maint/Lib/heapq.py?vie…>`_ >> >> +<http://svn.python.org/view/*checkout*/python/branches/release27-maint/Lib/h…>`_ > > Should links be to the hg repository instead of svn? > Is svn updated from hg? > I thought is was (mostly) … [View More]

7 7

Re: [Python-Dev] cpython: News item for #12724
by Georg Brandl Aug. 11, 2011

Aug. 11, 2011

Am 11.08.2011 03:34, schrieb brian.curtin: > http://hg.python.org/cpython/rev/3a6782f2a4a8 > changeset: 71811:3a6782f2a4a8 > user: Brian Curtin <brian(a)python.org> > date: Wed Aug 10 20:32:10 2011 -0500 > summary: > News item for #12724 > > files: > Misc/NEWS | 2 ++ > 1 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-) If it gets a NEWS entry, why isn't it documented? Georg

2 1

Moving forward with the concurrent package
by Brian Curtin Aug. 11, 2011

Aug. 11, 2011

Now that we have concurrent.futures, is there any plan for multiprocessing to follow suit? PEP 3148 mentions a hope to add or move things in the future [0], which would be now. [0] http://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-3148/#naming

7 11

urllib bug in Python 3.2.1?
by MRAB Aug. 9, 2011

Aug. 9, 2011

Someone over at StackOverflow has a problem with urlopen in Python 3.2.1: http://stackoverflow.com/questions/6892573/problem-with-urlopen/6892843#689… This is the code: from urllib.request import urlopen f = urlopen('http://online.wsj.com/mdc/public/page/2_3020-tips.html?mod=topnav_2_3000') page = f.read() f.close() With Python 3.1 and Python 3.2.1 it works OK, but with Python 3.2.1 the read returns an empty string (I checked it myself).

7 8

GIL removal question
by Марк Коренберг Aug. 9, 2011

Aug. 9, 2011

Probably I want to re-invent a bicycle. I want developers to say me why we can not remove GIL in that way: 1. Remove GIL completely with all current logick. 2. Add it's own RW-locking to all mutable objects (like list or dict) 3. Add RW-locks to every context instance 4. use RW-locks when accessing members of object instances Only one reason, I see, not do that -- is performance of singlethreaded applications. Why not to fix locking functions for this 4 cases to stubs when only one thread … [View More]

2 1

"Meet the Team" on Python Insider
by Doug Hellmann Aug. 9, 2011

Aug. 9, 2011

[Renewing this request for participation since there are a few new members since the original request went out.] We are running a series of interviews with the Python developers on the python-dev blog (http://blog.python.org). There is a short list of questions below this message. If you would like to be included in the series, please reply directly to me with your answers. We will be doing one or two posts per week, depending on the number of responses and availability of other information … [View More]

1 1