Mailman 3 নভেম্বর 2002 - Python-Dev

PEP 1, PEP Purpose and Guidelines
by barry＠zope.com 18 মে, 2021

18 মে, 2021

It has been a while since I posted a copy of PEP 1 to the mailing lists and newsgroups. I've recently done some updating of a few sections, so in the interest of gaining wider community participation in the Python development process, I'm posting the latest revision of PEP 1 here. A version of the PEP is always available on-line at http://www.python.org/peps/pep-0001.html Enjoy, -Barry -------------------- snip snip -------------------- PEP: 1 Title: PEP Purpose and Guidelines Version: $Revision: 1.36 $ Last-Modified: $Date: 2002/07/29 18:34:59 $ Author: Barry A. Warsaw, Jeremy Hylton Status: Active Type: Informational Created: 13-Jun-2000 Post-History: 21-Mar-2001, 29-Jul-2002 What is a PEP? PEP stands for Python Enhancement Proposal. A PEP is a design document providing information to the Python community, or describing a new feature for Python. The PEP should provide a concise technical specification of the feature and a rationale for the feature. We intend PEPs to be the primary mechanisms for proposing new features, for collecting community input on an issue, and for documenting the design decisions that have gone into Python. The PEP author is responsible for building consensus within the community and documenting dissenting opinions. Because the PEPs are maintained as plain text files under CVS control, their revision history is the historical record of the feature proposal[1]. Kinds of PEPs There are two kinds of PEPs. A standards track PEP describes a new feature or implementation for Python. An informational PEP describes a Python design issue, or provides general guidelines or information to the Python community, but does not propose a new feature. Informational PEPs do not necessarily represent a Python community consensus or recommendation, so users and implementors are free to ignore informational PEPs or follow their advice. PEP Work Flow The PEP editor, Barry Warsaw <peps(a)python.org>, assigns numbers for each PEP and changes its status. The PEP process begins with a new idea for Python. It is highly recommended that a single PEP contain a single key proposal or new idea. The more focussed the PEP, the more successfully it tends to be. The PEP editor reserves the right to reject PEP proposals if they appear too unfocussed or too broad. If in doubt, split your PEP into several well-focussed ones. Each PEP must have a champion -- someone who writes the PEP using the style and format described below, shepherds the discussions in the appropriate forums, and attempts to build community consensus around the idea. The PEP champion (a.k.a. Author) should first attempt to ascertain whether the idea is PEP-able. Small enhancements or patches often don't need a PEP and can be injected into the Python development work flow with a patch submission to the SourceForge patch manager[2] or feature request tracker[3]. The PEP champion then emails the PEP editor <peps(a)python.org> with a proposed title and a rough, but fleshed out, draft of the PEP. This draft must be written in PEP style as described below. If the PEP editor approves, he will assign the PEP a number, label it as standards track or informational, give it status 'draft', and create and check-in the initial draft of the PEP. The PEP editor will not unreasonably deny a PEP. Reasons for denying PEP status include duplication of effort, being technically unsound, not providing proper motivation or addressing backwards compatibility, or not in keeping with the Python philosophy. The BDFL (Benevolent Dictator for Life, Guido van Rossum) can be consulted during the approval phase, and is the final arbitrator of the draft's PEP-ability. If a pre-PEP is rejected, the author may elect to take the pre-PEP to the comp.lang.python newsgroup (a.k.a. python-list(a)python.org mailing list) to help flesh it out, gain feedback and consensus from the community at large, and improve the PEP for re-submission. The author of the PEP is then responsible for posting the PEP to the community forums, and marshaling community support for it. As updates are necessary, the PEP author can check in new versions if they have CVS commit permissions, or can email new PEP versions to the PEP editor for committing. Standards track PEPs consists of two parts, a design document and a reference implementation. The PEP should be reviewed and accepted before a reference implementation is begun, unless a reference implementation will aid people in studying the PEP. Standards Track PEPs must include an implementation - in the form of code, patch, or URL to same - before it can be considered Final. PEP authors are responsible for collecting community feedback on a PEP before submitting it for review. A PEP that has not been discussed on python-list(a)python.org and/or python-dev(a)python.org will not be accepted. However, wherever possible, long open-ended discussions on public mailing lists should be avoided. Strategies to keep the discussions efficient include, setting up a separate SIG mailing list for the topic, having the PEP author accept private comments in the early design phases, etc. PEP authors should use their discretion here. Once the authors have completed a PEP, they must inform the PEP editor that it is ready for review. PEPs are reviewed by the BDFL and his chosen consultants, who may accept or reject a PEP or send it back to the author(s) for revision. Once a PEP has been accepted, the reference implementation must be completed. When the reference implementation is complete and accepted by the BDFL, the status will be changed to `Final.' A PEP can also be assigned status `Deferred.' The PEP author or editor can assign the PEP this status when no progress is being made on the PEP. Once a PEP is deferred, the PEP editor can re-assign it to draft status. A PEP can also be `Rejected'. Perhaps after all is said and done it was not a good idea. It is still important to have a record of this fact. PEPs can also be replaced by a different PEP, rendering the original obsolete. This is intended for Informational PEPs, where version 2 of an API can replace version 1. PEP work flow is as follows: Draft -> Accepted -> Final -> Replaced ^ +----> Rejected v Deferred Some informational PEPs may also have a status of `Active' if they are never meant to be completed. E.g. PEP 1. What belongs in a successful PEP? Each PEP should have the following parts: 1. Preamble -- RFC822 style headers containing meta-data about the PEP, including the PEP number, a short descriptive title (limited to a maximum of 44 characters), the names, and optionally the contact info for each author, etc. 2. Abstract -- a short (~200 word) description of the technical issue being addressed. 3. Copyright/public domain -- Each PEP must either be explicitly labelled as placed in the public domain (see this PEP as an example) or licensed under the Open Publication License[4]. 4. Specification -- The technical specification should describe the syntax and semantics of any new language feature. The specification should be detailed enough to allow competing, interoperable implementations for any of the current Python platforms (CPython, JPython, Python .NET). 5. Motivation -- The motivation is critical for PEPs that want to change the Python language. It should clearly explain why the existing language specification is inadequate to address the problem that the PEP solves. PEP submissions without sufficient motivation may be rejected outright. 6. Rationale -- The rationale fleshes out the specification by describing what motivated the design and why particular design decisions were made. It should describe alternate designs that were considered and related work, e.g. how the feature is supported in other languages. The rationale should provide evidence of consensus within the community and discuss important objections or concerns raised during discussion. 7. Backwards Compatibility -- All PEPs that introduce backwards incompatibilities must include a section describing these incompatibilities and their severity. The PEP must explain how the author proposes to deal with these incompatibilities. PEP submissions without a sufficient backwards compatibility treatise may be rejected outright. 8. Reference Implementation -- The reference implementation must be completed before any PEP is given status 'Final,' but it need not be completed before the PEP is accepted. It is better to finish the specification and rationale first and reach consensus on it before writing code. The final implementation must include test code and documentation appropriate for either the Python language reference or the standard library reference. PEP Template PEPs are written in plain ASCII text, and should adhere to a rigid style. There is a Python script that parses this style and converts the plain text PEP to HTML for viewing on the web[5]. PEP 9 contains a boilerplate[7] template you can use to get started writing your PEP. Each PEP must begin with an RFC822 style header preamble. The headers must appear in the following order. Headers marked with `*' are optional and are described below. All other headers are required. PEP: <pep number> Title: <pep title> Version: <cvs version string> Last-Modified: <cvs date string> Author: <list of authors' real names and optionally, email addrs> * Discussions-To: <email address> Status: <Draft | Active | Accepted | Deferred | Final | Replaced> Type: <Informational | Standards Track> * Requires: <pep numbers> Created: <date created on, in dd-mmm-yyyy format> * Python-Version: <version number> Post-History: <dates of postings to python-list and python-dev> * Replaces: <pep number> * Replaced-By: <pep number> The Author: header lists the names and optionally, the email addresses of all the authors/owners of the PEP. The format of the author entry should be address(a)dom.ain (Random J. User) if the email address is included, and just Random J. User if the address is not given. If there are multiple authors, each should be on a separate line following RFC 822 continuation line conventions. Note that personal email addresses in PEPs will be obscured as a defense against spam harvesters. Standards track PEPs must have a Python-Version: header which indicates the version of Python that the feature will be released with. Informational PEPs do not need a Python-Version: header. While a PEP is in private discussions (usually during the initial Draft phase), a Discussions-To: header will indicate the mailing list or URL where the PEP is being discussed. No Discussions-To: header is necessary if the PEP is being discussed privately with the author, or on the python-list or python-dev email mailing lists. Note that email addresses in the Discussions-To: header will not be obscured. Created: records the date that the PEP was assigned a number, while Post-History: is used to record the dates of when new versions of the PEP are posted to python-list and/or python-dev. Both headers should be in dd-mmm-yyyy format, e.g. 14-Aug-2001. PEPs may have a Requires: header, indicating the PEP numbers that this PEP depends on. PEPs may also have a Replaced-By: header indicating that a PEP has been rendered obsolete by a later document; the value is the number of the PEP that replaces the current document. The newer PEP must have a Replaces: header containing the number of the PEP that it rendered obsolete. PEP Formatting Requirements PEP headings must begin in column zero and the initial letter of each word must be capitalized as in book titles. Acronyms should be in all capitals. The body of each section must be indented 4 spaces. Code samples inside body sections should be indented a further 4 spaces, and other indentation can be used as required to make the text readable. You must use two blank lines between the last line of a section's body and the next section heading. You must adhere to the Emacs convention of adding two spaces at the end of every sentence. You should fill your paragraphs to column 70, but under no circumstances should your lines extend past column 79. If your code samples spill over column 79, you should rewrite them. Tab characters must never appear in the document at all. A PEP should include the standard Emacs stanza included by example at the bottom of this PEP. A PEP must contain a Copyright section, and it is strongly recommended to put the PEP in the public domain. When referencing an external web page in the body of a PEP, you should include the title of the page in the text, with a footnote reference to the URL. Do not include the URL in the body text of the PEP. E.g. Refer to the Python Language web site [1] for more details. ... [1] http://www.python.org When referring to another PEP, include the PEP number in the body text, such as "PEP 1". The title may optionally appear. Add a footnote reference that includes the PEP's title and author. It may optionally include the explicit URL on a separate line, but only in the References section. Note that the pep2html.py script will calculate URLs automatically, e.g.: ... Refer to PEP 1 [7] for more information about PEP style ... References [7] PEP 1, PEP Purpose and Guidelines, Warsaw, Hylton http://www.python.org/peps/pep-0001.html If you decide to provide an explicit URL for a PEP, please use this as the URL template: http://www.python.org/peps/pep-xxxx.html PEP numbers in URLs must be padded with zeros from the left, so as to be exactly 4 characters wide, however PEP numbers in text are never padded. Reporting PEP Bugs, or Submitting PEP Updates How you report a bug, or submit a PEP update depends on several factors, such as the maturity of the PEP, the preferences of the PEP author, and the nature of your comments. For the early draft stages of the PEP, it's probably best to send your comments and changes directly to the PEP author. For more mature, or finished PEPs you may want to submit corrections to the SourceForge bug manager[6] or better yet, the SourceForge patch manager[2] so that your changes don't get lost. If the PEP author is a SF developer, assign the bug/patch to him, otherwise assign it to the PEP editor. When in doubt about where to send your changes, please check first with the PEP author and/or PEP editor. PEP authors who are also SF committers, can update the PEPs themselves by using "cvs commit" to commit their changes. Remember to also push the formatted PEP text out to the web by doing the following: % python pep2html.py -i NUM where NUM is the number of the PEP you want to push out. See % python pep2html.py --help for details. Transferring PEP Ownership It occasionally becomes necessary to transfer ownership of PEPs to a new champion. In general, we'd like to retain the original author as a co-author of the transferred PEP, but that's really up to the original author. A good reason to transfer ownership is because the original author no longer has the time or interest in updating it or following through with the PEP process, or has fallen off the face of the 'net (i.e. is unreachable or not responding to email). A bad reason to transfer ownership is because you don't agree with the direction of the PEP. We try to build consensus around a PEP, but if that's not possible, you can always submit a competing PEP. If you are interested assuming ownership of a PEP, send a message asking to take over, addressed to both the original author and the PEP editor <peps(a)python.org>. If the original author doesn't respond to email in a timely manner, the PEP editor will make a unilateral decision (it's not like such decisions can be reversed. :). References and Footnotes [1] This historical record is available by the normal CVS commands for retrieving older revisions. For those without direct access to the CVS tree, you can browse the current and past PEP revisions via the SourceForge web site at http://cvs.sourceforge.net/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/python/nondist/peps/?cvsroot=… [2] http://sourceforge.net/tracker/?group_id=5470&atid=305470 [3] http://sourceforge.net/tracker/?atid=355470&group_id=5470&func=browse [4] http://www.opencontent.org/openpub/ [5] The script referred to here is pep2html.py, which lives in the same directory in the CVS tree as the PEPs themselves. Try "pep2html.py --help" for details. The URL for viewing PEPs on the web is http://www.python.org/peps/ [6] http://sourceforge.net/tracker/?group_id=5470&atid=305470 [7] PEP 9, Sample PEP Template http://www.python.org/peps/pep-0009.html 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 End:

8 14

RE: [Python-Dev] Those import related syntax errors again...
by Samuele Pedroni 23 ফেব্রুয়ারি, 2005

23 ফেব্রুয়ারি, 2005

Hi. [Mark Hammond] > The point isn't about my suffering as such. The point is more that > python-dev owns a tiny amount of the code out there, and I don't believe we > should put Python's users through this. > > Sure - I would be happy to "upgrade" all the win32all code, no problem. I > am also happy to live in the bleeding edge and take some pain that will > cause. > > The issue is simply the user base, and giving Python a reputation of not > being able to painlessly upgrade even dot revisions. I agree with all this. [As I imagined explicit syntax did not catch up and would require lot of discussions.] [GvR] > > Another way is to use special rules > > (similar to those for class defs), e.g. having > > > > <frag> > > y=3 > > def f(): > > exec "y=2" > > def g(): > > return y > > return g() > > > > print f() > > </frag> > > > > # print 3. > > > > Is that confusing for users? maybe they will more naturally expect 2 > > as outcome (given nested scopes). > > This seems the best compromise to me. It will lead to the least > broken code, because this is the behavior that we had before nested > scopes! It is also quite easy to implement given the current > implementation, I believe. > > Maybe we could introduce a warning rather than an error for this > situation though, because even if this behavior is clearly documented, > it will still be confusing to some, so it is better if we outlaw it in > some future version. > Yes this can be easy to implement but more confusing situations can arise: <frag> y=3 def f(): y=9 exec "y=2" def g(): return y return y,g() print f() </frag> What should this print? the situation leads not to a canonical solution as class def scopes. or <frag> def f(): from foo import * def g(): return y return g() print f() </frag> [Mark Hammond] > > This probably won't be a very popular suggestion, but how about pulling > > nested scopes (I assume they are at the root of the problem) > > until this can be solved cleanly? > > Agreed. While I think nested scopes are kinda cool, I have lived without > them, and really without missing them, for years. At the moment the cure > appears worse then the symptoms in at least a few cases. If nothing else, > it compromises the elegant simplicity of Python that drew me here in the > first place! > > Assuming that people really _do_ want this feature, IMO the bar should be > raised so there are _zero_ backward compatibility issues. I don't say anything about pulling nested scopes (I don't think my opinion can change things in this respect) but I should insist that without explicit syntax IMO raising the bar has a too high impl cost (both performance and complexity) or creates confusion. [Andrew Kuchling] > >Assuming that people really _do_ want this feature, IMO the bar should be > >raised so there are _zero_ backward compatibility issues. > > Even at the cost of additional implementation complexity? At the cost > of having to learn "scopes are nested, unless you do these two things > in which case they're not"? > > Let's not waffle. If nested scopes are worth doing, they're worth > breaking code. Either leave exec and from..import illegal, or back > out nested scopes, or think of some better solution, but let's not > introduce complicated backward compatibility hacks. IMO breaking code would be ok if we issue warnings today and implement nested scopes issuing errors tomorrow. But this is simply a statement about principles and raised impression. IMO import * in an inner scope should end up being an error, not sure about 'exec's. We will need a final BDFL statement. regards, Samuele Pedroni.

18 78

PEP: Support for System Upgrades
by M.-A. Lemburg 7 জানুয়ারি, 2003

7 জানুয়ারি, 2003

PEP: 0??? Title: Support for System Upgrades Version: $Revision: 0.0 $ Author: mal(a)lemburg.com (Marc-Andr? Lemburg) Status: Draft Type: Standards Track Python-Version: 2.3 Created: 19-Jul-2001 Post-History: Abstract This PEP proposes strategies to allow the Python standard library to be upgraded in parts without having to reinstall the complete distribution or having to wait for a new patch level release. Problem Python currently does not allow overriding modules or packages in the standard library per default. Even though this is possible by defining a PYTHONPATH environment variable (the paths defined in this variable are prepended to the Python standard library path), there is no standard way of achieving this without changing the configuration. Since Python's standard library is starting to host packages which are also available separately, e.g. the distutils, email and PyXML packages, which can also be installed independently of the Python distribution, it is desireable to have an option to upgrade these packages without having to wait for a new patch level release of the Python interpreter to bring along the changes. Proposed Solutions This PEP proposes two different but not necessarily conflicting solutions: 1. Adding a new standard search path to sys.path: $stdlibpath/system-packages just before the $stdlibpath entry. This complements the already existing entry for site add-ons $stdlibpath/site-packages which is appended to the sys.path at interpreter startup time. To make use of this new standard location, distutils will need to grow support for installing certain packages in $stdlibpath/system-packages rather than the standard location for third-party packages $stdlibpath/site-packages. 2. Tweaking distutils to install directly into $stdlibpath for the system upgrades rather than into $stdlibpath/site-packages. The first solution has a few advantages over the second: * upgrades can be easily identified (just look in $stdlibpath/system-packages) * upgrades can be deinstalled without affecting the rest of the interpreter installation * modules can be virtually removed from packages; this is due to the way Python imports packages: once it finds the top-level package directory it stay in this directory for all subsequent package submodule imports * the approach has an overall much cleaner design than the hackish install on top of an existing installation approach The only advantages of the second approach are that the Python interpreter does not have to changed and that it works with older Python versions. Both solutions require changes to distutils. These changes can also be implemented by package authors, but it would be better to define a standard way of switching on the proposed behaviour. Scope Solution 1: Python 2.3 and up Solution 2: all Python versions supported by distutils Credits None References None Copyright This document has been placed in the public domain. Local Variables: mode: indented-text indent-tabs-mode: nil End: -- Marc-Andre Lemburg CEO eGenix.com Software GmbH _______________________________________________________________________ eGenix.com -- Makers of the Python mx Extensions: mxDateTime,mxODBC,... Python Consulting: http://www.egenix.com/ Python Software: http://www.egenix.com/files/python/

4 13

Proposed changes to linuxaudiodev
by Greg Ward 10 ডিসেম্বর, 2002

10 ডিসেম্বর, 2002

Hi all -- I've been hacking sporadically on the linuxaudiodev module for the last couple of days. Initial results are in patch #645786 (www.python.org/sf/645786). The main goal of this patch is to make linuxaudiodev objects a thinner wrapper around the underlying OSS device driver, while still providing some highish-level convenience methods -- see my comments in the patch for details. There's a slight theoretical risk of backwards incompatibility, though. Since this module has never been documented, and since its current behaviour is such that doing anything really funky is severely curtailed, I very much doubt this will be a problem. Is anyone doing anything with linuxaudiodev more sophisticated than playing silly beep sounds? Should I ask around on python-list to be sure I won't ruin anyone's day with this change? Oh yeah: someone noted in the CVS history that the module is misnamed. This is true; it should probably have been called ossaudiodev -- OSS is the current standard audio API used by Linux and, I think, various BSDs. It's also available for a bunch of commercial Unices. Greg -- Greg Ward <gward(a)python.net> http://www.gerg.ca/ Just because you're paranoid doesn't mean they *aren't* out to get you.

3 6

Mac OSX issues
by Guido van Rossum 5 ডিসেম্বর, 2002

5 ডিসেম্বর, 2002

I have temporary access to a Mac OSX box. I find the following problems: - test_re crashes unless I do ulimit -s 2000 -- haven't tried other values, but the default of 512 (KB) is insufficient. I know the README file explains this, but now that I've experienced this myself, I wonder if we shouldn't hack main() to increase the stack size to 2 MB, inside an #ifdef darwin or something like that. - test_socket fails with errno 3, 'Unknown server error' on a socket.gethostbyaddr() call. Does anybody know what that is about? - test_locale fails with a complaint about "1,024" vs. "1024". Since this is probably a libc bug (though wouldn't this also occur on other BSD systems?) I can live with it. - test_largefile takes a *very* long time. Perhaps it actually creates a truly large file (the Mac OSX filesystem is case insensitive, so I suppose it may be so different that it doesn't support files with holes in them). Maybe the test should disable itself (or part of itself) unless a specific resource is requested? --Guido van Rossum (home page: http://www.python.org/~guido/)

10 18

Can someone look at dummy_thread (#622537)?
by Brett Cannon 5 ডিসেম্বর, 2002

5 ডিসেম্বর, 2002

There is a slight chance some of you remember the discussion that Zack Weinberg brought up here back in September about his experiences in rewriting ``tempfile``. One of the things he brought up was having to write his own fake lock so that the code would work when ``thread`` was not available. Guido suggested writing a module called ``dummy_thread`` that was API compatible with ``thread`` but was available on all platforms; he said he would check it in if it was written. Well, I wrote it. But Guido has told me that he is too busy to check it in and so I am emailing you guys to see if someone can look at it and check it in. I would like to get it in before 2.3a so as to get the extra testing the alpha will get. The patch is #622537 ( http://www.python.org/sf/622537 ). It is complete to the best of my abilities. I have docs and the module and the tests and such. Should be pretty straight-forward to apply assuming I didn't muck up the docs (first attempt at doing any docs from scratch). The only thing beyond quality of code and documentation that might have to be dealt with is how far to integrate ``dummy_thread`` into the stdlib. I have a patch to have ``Queue``, ``threading``, and ``tempfile`` all use ``dummy_thread`` when ``thread`` is not available. Now I tested all of them with and without ``thread`` available and they all pass. But of course I wonder if this will break any code. The problem is that since ``dummy_thread`` basically just executes thread calls serially there is a problem when sommething like blocking I/O is used that blocks waiting for another thread (test_asynchat and test_socket do that, but they require ``thread`` so there is no issue there outright). So there is a chance that some code, when trying to run using ``threading`` will lock up. But I don't think this is an issue. I say in the docs that if you want to guarantee true threading to run ``import thread; del thread`` before importing ``threading``. But the main reason I don't think it will be an issue is that all other code that runs fine (but slowly) using ``dummy_thread`` now can be run where threads are not available. And those programs where deadlock would occur do not lose or gain anything since they couldn't run on a platform without ``thread`` anyway. The only issue is that if they don't check for ``thread`` someone trying to run the program will have a deadlocked program (although they shouldn't have been trying to run it in the first place). This is the only real questionable thing. Obviously the module can be checked in with no problem without touching the other modules (although ``Queue`` and ``tempfile`` should be patched regardless) if this seems to dicey to do. -Brett

5 17

Re: [Python-Dev] Getting python-bz2 into 2.3
by Bob Kline 3 ডিসেম্বর, 2002

3 ডিসেম্বর, 2002

Earlier this month, Tim P. wrote: > Semi-unfortunately, the author of that [bzip2] has > > no idea if it actually works on 95/98/ME/NT/XP > > and in the docs for "3.8 Making a Windows DLL" > > I haven't tried any of this stuff myself, but it all looks > plausible. > > That means it will require some real work to build and test this > stuff on 6 flavors of Windows. Not a showstopper, but does raise > the bar for getting into the PLabs Windows distro. Sorry if I'm way off base here, but does the underlying bzip2 package have to be in a DLL, or can't that be built as a static library, which gets linked into the .pyd, which *is* a DLL? In either case, it doesn't seem like it would be very difficult to create whatever flavor library is needed. The code for bzip2 seems to be very portably written. The python-bz2 code, on the other hand, needed a little bit of tweaking to make it compile with Microsoft's compiler. I'll be happy to help in whatever way would be useful in dealing with the "raised bar," as the prospect of having Python support on all platforms for bz2 compression (and tarfiles) is very appealing. -- Bob Kline mailto:bkline@rksystems.com http://www.rksystems.com

4 9

Re: [Python-checkins] python/dist/src/Python import.c,2.210,2.211
by Jack Jansen 2 ডিসেম্বর, 2002

2 ডিসেম্বর, 2002

On vrijdag, nov 29, 2002, at 21:47 Europe/Amsterdam, jvr(a)users.sourceforge.net wrote: > Update of /cvsroot/python/python/dist/src/Python > In directory sc8-pr-cvs1:/tmp/cvs-serv20813/Python > > Modified Files: > import.c > Log Message: > Slightly improved version of patch #642578: "Expose > PyImport_FrozenModules > in imp". This adds two functions to the imp module: get_frozenmodules() > and set_frozenmodules(). Something that's been bothering me about frozen modules in the classical sense (i.e. those that are stored in C static data structures) is that the memory used by them is gone without any chance at recovery. For big frozen Python programs that are to be run on small machines this is a waste of precious memory. With modules "frozen" with set_frozenmodules you could conceivably free the data again after it has been imported (similar to what MacPython-OS9 does with modules "frozen" in "PYC " resources). Would that be worth the added complexity? -- - Jack Jansen <Jack.Jansen(a)oratrix.com> http://www.cwi.nl/~jack - - If I can't dance I don't want to be part of your revolution -- Emma Goldman -

4 3

off to Zope3 sprintathon
by Guido van Rossum 30 নভেম্বর, 2002

30 নভেম্বর, 2002

I'm off with Jim Fulton to Rotterdam to celebrate Sinterklaas and participate in the Zope3 Sprintathon: http://dev.zope.org/Wikis/DevSite/Projects/ComponentArchitecture/InfraeSpri… I will have internet access but little time to check on my email. I'll be back at work (busy as ever :-) on December 9th. --Guido van Rossum (home page: http://www.python.org/~guido/)

1 0

int/long FutureWarning
by Mark Hammond 30 নভেম্বর, 2002

30 নভেম্বর, 2002

I figured that once I started pasting and checking code like: """ if sys.version_info >= (2, 3): # sick off the new hex() warnings, and no time to digest what the # impact will be! import warnings warnings.filterwarnings("ignore", category=FutureWarning, append=1) """ into the Mozilla source tree, it was time to start digesting! Unfortunately, a simple answer seems to allude me whenever it is brought up here. So, to cut a long story short, I have lots and lots of script generated, then often hand-edited source files with constants defined thus: SOMETHING = 0x80000000 Which generate a warning telling me that this may become a positive long in Python 2.4. All I really care about is how my C extension code, which does: PyArg_ParseTuple("ilhH", ...) // Take your pick is going to react to this change? (There are similar warnings for certain shift operations too, but I believe they will all boil down to the same issue) People using the win32all extensions are unlikely to be happy with the screenfulls of warning generated. I know I'm not <wink>. But I don't know what to do. I know I can suppress the warning either using the code I have above, or simply by appending an L to each of the thousands of constants, or even converting them all to decimal. But if nothing is going to change from the POV of my C extensions, then changing all these constants just to suppress a warning seems overkill. Any suggestions for me? Thanks, Mark.

10 40