[Python-Dev] RELEASED Python 3.0rc3

2008-11-21 Thread Barry Warsaw

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1

On behalf of the Python development team and the Python community, I  
am happy to announce the third and last planned release candidate for  
Python 3.0.


This is a release candidate, so while it is not quite suitable for  
production environments, we strongly encourage you to download and  
test this release on your software.  We expect only critical bugs to  
be fixed between now and the final release, currently planned for 03- 
Dec-2008.


If you find things broken or incorrect, please submit bug reports at

   http://bugs.python.org

Please read the RELNOTES file in the distribution for important  
details about this release.  For more information and downloadable  
distributions, see the Python 3.0 website:


   http://www.python.org/download/releases/3.0/

See PEP 361 for release schedule details:

   http://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0361/

Enjoy,
- -Barry

Barry Warsaw
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Python 2.6/3.0 Release Manager
(on behalf of the entire python-dev team)

-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (Darwin)

iQCVAwUBSSbOhHEjvBPtnXfVAQLzBwP/dS2j4XhZMNdb28TG3ZblkSmlPS4IU20U
Vvq85inUkJ6idwKZBqa6brrD1hbqrl4UjKZh4/ppzhIwsJtFMlMiqnkHVrvIYFBG
Yg+pQdO5HQzrw9K04aTdtNiKTiiJNIkqWdQQUd573XBFODRAIaq0qwk9C24kXeZM
e3xNgNRxfmY=
=TvxY
-END PGP SIGNATURE-
___
Python-Dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe: 
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com


[Python-Dev] Summary of Python tracker Issues

2008-11-21 Thread Python tracker

ACTIVITY SUMMARY (11/14/08 - 11/21/08)
Python tracker at http://bugs.python.org/

To view or respond to any of the issues listed below, click on the issue 
number.  Do NOT respond to this message.


 2194 open (+35) / 14007 closed (+18) / 16201 total (+53)

Open issues with patches:   728

Average duration of open issues: 712 days.
Median duration of open issues: 2043 days.

Open Issues Breakdown
   open  2177 (+35)
pending17 ( +0)

Issues Created Or Reopened (56)
___

Tkinter binding involving Control-spacebar raises unicode error  11/18/08
   http://bugs.python.org/issue1028reopened ocean-city
   patch   

Byte/string inconsistencies between different dbm modules11/21/08
   http://bugs.python.org/issue3799reopened brett.cannon  
   patch, needs review 

type of UserList instance returns class instead of instance  11/14/08
CLOSED http://bugs.python.org/issue4326created  chafporte 
   

Patch: simplify complex constant assignment statements   11/14/08
   http://bugs.python.org/issue4327created  novalis_dt
   patch   

"à" in u"foo" raises a misleading error 11/15/08
   http://bugs.python.org/issue4328created  ezio.melotti  
   

base64 does not properly handle unicode strings  11/15/08
   http://bugs.python.org/issue4329created  mbecker   
   

wsgiref.validate doesn't accept arguments to readline11/16/08
CLOSED http://bugs.python.org/issue4330created  ianb  
   

Can't use _functools.partial() created function as method11/16/08
   http://bugs.python.org/issue4331created  ssadler   
   

asyncore.file_dispatcher does not use dup()'ed fd11/17/08
CLOSED http://bugs.python.org/issue4332created  christianbecke
   patch   

Reworked Dialog.py   11/17/08
   http://bugs.python.org/issue4333created  gpolo 
   patch   

Mac Build Script is broken for 2.6 release   11/17/08
CLOSED http://bugs.python.org/issue4334created  ngift 
   

inspect.getsourcelines ignores last line in module   11/17/08
   http://bugs.python.org/issue4335created  RafeSacks 
   

Fix performance issues in xmlrpclib  11/17/08
   http://bugs.python.org/issue4336created  krisvale  
   patch, patch, easy  

Iteration over a map object with list()  11/17/08
CLOSED http://bugs.python.org/issue4337created  jmfauth   
   

TypeError (bytes/str) in distutils command "upload"  11/17/08
CLOSED http://bugs.python.org/issue4338created  hagen 
   patch   

Fix set-like dictview doc11/17/08
CLOSED http://bugs.python.org/issue4339created  tjreedy   
   

xmlrpc.client - default 'SlowParser' not defined 11/17/08
   http://bugs.python.org/issue4340created  mwatkins  
   

Update __hash__ doc  11/17/08
CLOSED http://bugs.python.org/issue4341created  tjreedy   
   

(Tkinter) Please backport these  11/18/08
   http://bugs.python.org/issue4342created  gpolo 
   

New function in Tkinter.py: setup_master  

Re: [Python-Dev] [Python-3000] 2.6.1 and 3.0

2008-11-21 Thread Barry Warsaw

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1

On Nov 19, 2008, at 3:19 PM, Terry Reedy wrote:


Let's try this for 3.0rc4 then.


The current release is rc2.  Skipping rc3 would confuse people'-)


Yeah, my calendar was wrong, but the PEP (and more importantly...  
code!) was right :).


There is no rc4!
- -Barry

-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (Darwin)

iQCVAwUBSScZWXEjvBPtnXfVAQKpQAQAi9Q8rfgcCVXmQ2tIqaiAVKOQHDPQdfhF
lyDWHg+6i2EGrbs0Jju5GB9YML1yNga3X85zfQSedu6mgpA4dV6NvW988N3Wp4oG
ztDGT7yLxwYe4Wy606FF6lxSlXSvXQRLc/Nf1qgn8dDGskQKO2LZ+fUHW0BIWDBN
RFAuZqzdWQY=
=9Z8w
-END PGP SIGNATURE-
___
Python-Dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe: 
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com


[Python-Dev] Adding zipfile and directory execution to What's New for Python 2.6.1?

2008-11-21 Thread Nick Coghlan
A trick we added to 2.6 that users seem to not notice is that it is now
possible to execute zipfiles and directories from the command line by
including a __main__.py module (that module will then be executed, but
more importantly, the zipfile or directory name will be added to the
beginning of sys.path so related modules can be found easily).

I went looking for this in the 2.6 What's New and couldn't find anything
about it (certainly not in the most obvious section - the one that
describes the other changes to the interpreter command line options and
environment variables).

Did I just miss something? Or should more on this be added to the What's
New for 2.6.1?

Cheers,
Nick.

-- 
Nick Coghlan   |   [EMAIL PROTECTED]   |   Brisbane, Australia
---
___
Python-Dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe: 
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com


Re: [Python-Dev] Adding zipfile and directory execution to What's New for Python 2.6.1?

2008-11-21 Thread Benjamin Peterson
On Fri, Nov 21, 2008 at 5:52 PM, Nick Coghlan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> A trick we added to 2.6 that users seem to not notice is that it is now
> possible to execute zipfiles and directories from the command line by
> including a __main__.py module (that module will then be executed, but
> more importantly, the zipfile or directory name will be added to the
> beginning of sys.path so related modules can be found easily).
>
> I went looking for this in the 2.6 What's New and couldn't find anything
> about it (certainly not in the most obvious section - the one that
> describes the other changes to the interpreter command line options and
> environment variables).
>
> Did I just miss something? Or should more on this be added to the What's
> New for 2.6.1?

Feel free to add it! There were so many new things in 2.6, that we
were bound to miss a few things.

>
> Cheers,
> Nick.



-- 
Cheers,
Benjamin Peterson
"There's nothing quite as beautiful as an oboe... except a chicken
stuck in a vacuum cleaner."
___
Python-Dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe: 
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com


[Python-Dev] format specification mini-language docs...

2008-11-21 Thread Dino Viehland
Ok, now I'm implementing __format__ support for IronPython.  The format spec 
mini-language docs say that a presentation type of None is the same as 'g' for 
floating point / decimal values.  But these two formats seem to differ based 
upon how they handle whole numbers:

>>> 2.0.__format__('')
'2.0'
>>> 2.0.__format__('g')
'2'

The docs also say that 'g' prints it as fixed point unless the number is too 
large.  But the fixed point format differs from what 'f' would print.  I guess 
it didn't say they'd both print it as fixed point w/ a precision of 6 or 
anything but it seems a little unclear.

>>> 2.0.__format__('g')
'2'
>>> 2.0.__format__('f')
'2.00'

Finally providing any sign character seems to cause +1.0#INF and friends to be 
returned instead of inf as is documented:

>>> 10e667.__format__('+')
'+1.0#INF'
>>> 10e667.__format__('')
'inf'


Are these just doc bugs?  The inf issue is the only one that seems particularly 
weird to me.
___
Python-Dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe: 
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com


Re: [Python-Dev] RELEASED Python 3.0rc3

2008-11-21 Thread James Mills
On Sat, Nov 22, 2008 at 1:06 AM, Barry Warsaw <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> On behalf of the Python development team and the Python community, I am
> happy to announce the third and last planned release candidate for Python
> 3.0.

Whoohoo! :) Great works guys!

--JamesMills

-- 
--
-- "Problems are solved by method"
___
Python-Dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe: 
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com


Re: [Python-Dev] format specification mini-language docs...

2008-11-21 Thread Eric Smith

Dino Viehland wrote:
Ok, now I'm implementing __format__ support for IronPython.  The format spec mini-language docs say that a presentation type of None is the same as 'g' for floating point / decimal values.  


Awesome! Thanks for doing this.

>But these two formats seem to differ based upon how they handle whole 
numbers:

2.0.__format__('')

'2.0'

2.0.__format__('g')

'2'


I think the docs are wrong. For floats, the PEP 
(http://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-3101/) says:


'' (None) - similar to 'g', except that it prints at least one digit 
after the decimal point.



The docs also say that 'g' prints it as fixed point unless the number is too 
large.  But the fixed point format differs from what 'f' would print.  I guess 
it didn't say they'd both print it as fixed point w/ a precision of 6 or 
anything but it seems a little unclear.


2.0.__format__('g')

'2'

2.0.__format__('f')

'2.00'


This is to be compatible with %-formatting:
$ ./python
Python 2.7a0 (trunk:67325, Nov 21 2008, 20:35:33)
[GCC 4.1.2 20070626 (Red Hat 4.1.2-13)] on linux2
Type "help", "copyright", "credits" or "license" for more information.
>>> '%f %g' % (2.0, 2.0)
'2.00 2'


Finally providing any sign character seems to cause +1.0#INF and friends to be 
returned instead of inf as is documented:


10e667.__format__('+')

'+1.0#INF'

10e667.__format__('')

'inf'


Yes, that does seem odd. Let me look at it a bit and I'll comment on it, 
hopefully this weekend. I have a pending fix for 2.7/3.1 to make inf 
handling more consistent across platforms, it might take care of this 
case, too.



Are these just doc bugs?  The inf issue is the only one that seems particularly 
weird to me.


Agreed.

Eric.
___
Python-Dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe: 
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com


Re: [Python-Dev] Issue 4195: Can't execute packages with -m in Python 2.6/3.0

2008-11-21 Thread Lisandro Dalcin
Unless this is considered a regression...

On Tue, Nov 18, 2008 at 12:51 PM, Guido van Rossum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I think it crosses the line.
>
> On Tue, Nov 18, 2008 at 2:55 AM, Nick Coghlan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> I need a release manager call on whether or not the proposed resolution
>> of this issue goes beyond what is acceptable for a bug fix in 2.6.1.
>>
>> Short version:
>> - Python 2.5 allowed packages to be executed with -m, but in a broken way
>> - I disabled the broken way for 2.6, but didn't provide a replacement
>> - The patch attached to 4195 once again allows execution of packages
>> with -m, but in a clean way similar to the way directories and zipfiles
>> can now be executed
>> - I would like to commit that patch for 3.0/2.6.1, but I'm concerned
>> that it crosses the "no new features" line
>>
>> Long version:
>>
>> There was a bug in python 2.5 that allowed a package name to be passed
>> to the -m switch or runpy.run_module() and it would mostly work.
>>
>> However, the 'mostly' was due to the fact that doing this put the
>> internal import machinery into a slightly inconsistent state: the
>> interpreter was running code from inside a package, but that package
>> wasn't actually present in sys.modules. This could lead to assorted hard
>> to trace import-related weirdness, similar to what you can get when
>> executing a file from inside a package by name. You would often get away
>> with it, but good luck figuring out what is happening if things go wrong
>> (and you aren't already an expert on Python import mechanics).
>>
>> Since the ability to execute packages wasn't intentional, I added the
>> missing check to block it explicitly in 2.6 (but left it alone for 2.5).
>> It seemed like a really niche feature, so I didn't figure out a clean
>> replacement for it at the time.
>>
>> Benjamin noticed this change earlier in the 2.6 release cycle, I pointed
>> out it was a deliberate change, and that's the way it stayed until after
>> 2.6 was released.
>>
>> After the release, Andi Vajda (from the JCC project [1]) contacted me,
>> and together we worked out a better implementation of package support
>> for the -m switch (and runpy.run_module) [2] by extending the
>> __main__.py approach used to support direct execution of zipfiles and
>> directories [3].
>>
>> That's what I would like to add, since it nicely complements the ability
>> to execute zipfiles and directories, while also restoring the ability to
>> pass a package name to the -m switch (but in a way that keeps the import
>> machinery in a consistent state).
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Nick.
>>
>> [1] http://pypi.python.org/pypi/JCC
>>
>> [2] http://bugs.python.org/issue4195 (package execution with -m)
>> [3] http://bugs.python.org/issue1739468 (zipfile execution)
>>
>> --
>> Nick Coghlan   |   [EMAIL PROTECTED]   |   Brisbane, Australia
>> ---
>> ___
>> Python-Dev mailing list
>> [email protected]
>> http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
>> Unsubscribe: 
>> http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/guido%40python.org
>>
>
>
>
> --
> --Guido van Rossum (home page: http://www.python.org/~guido/)
> ___
> Python-Dev mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
> Unsubscribe: 
> http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/dalcinl%40gmail.com
>



-- 
Lisandro Dalcín
---
Centro Internacional de Métodos Computacionales en Ingeniería (CIMEC)
Instituto de Desarrollo Tecnológico para la Industria Química (INTEC)
Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas (CONICET)
PTLC - Güemes 3450, (3000) Santa Fe, Argentina
Tel/Fax: +54-(0)342-451.1594
___
Python-Dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe: 
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com


Re: [Python-Dev] Issue 4195: Can't execute packages with -m in Python 2.6/3.0

2008-11-21 Thread Guido van Rossum
I don't think that removing an unintentional and subtly broken feature
is a regression.

On Fri, Nov 21, 2008 at 7:04 PM, Lisandro Dalcin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Unless this is considered a regression...
>
> On Tue, Nov 18, 2008 at 12:51 PM, Guido van Rossum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> I think it crosses the line.
>>
>> On Tue, Nov 18, 2008 at 2:55 AM, Nick Coghlan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>> I need a release manager call on whether or not the proposed resolution
>>> of this issue goes beyond what is acceptable for a bug fix in 2.6.1.
>>>
>>> Short version:
>>> - Python 2.5 allowed packages to be executed with -m, but in a broken way
>>> - I disabled the broken way for 2.6, but didn't provide a replacement
>>> - The patch attached to 4195 once again allows execution of packages
>>> with -m, but in a clean way similar to the way directories and zipfiles
>>> can now be executed
>>> - I would like to commit that patch for 3.0/2.6.1, but I'm concerned
>>> that it crosses the "no new features" line
>>>
>>> Long version:
>>>
>>> There was a bug in python 2.5 that allowed a package name to be passed
>>> to the -m switch or runpy.run_module() and it would mostly work.
>>>
>>> However, the 'mostly' was due to the fact that doing this put the
>>> internal import machinery into a slightly inconsistent state: the
>>> interpreter was running code from inside a package, but that package
>>> wasn't actually present in sys.modules. This could lead to assorted hard
>>> to trace import-related weirdness, similar to what you can get when
>>> executing a file from inside a package by name. You would often get away
>>> with it, but good luck figuring out what is happening if things go wrong
>>> (and you aren't already an expert on Python import mechanics).
>>>
>>> Since the ability to execute packages wasn't intentional, I added the
>>> missing check to block it explicitly in 2.6 (but left it alone for 2.5).
>>> It seemed like a really niche feature, so I didn't figure out a clean
>>> replacement for it at the time.
>>>
>>> Benjamin noticed this change earlier in the 2.6 release cycle, I pointed
>>> out it was a deliberate change, and that's the way it stayed until after
>>> 2.6 was released.
>>>
>>> After the release, Andi Vajda (from the JCC project [1]) contacted me,
>>> and together we worked out a better implementation of package support
>>> for the -m switch (and runpy.run_module) [2] by extending the
>>> __main__.py approach used to support direct execution of zipfiles and
>>> directories [3].
>>>
>>> That's what I would like to add, since it nicely complements the ability
>>> to execute zipfiles and directories, while also restoring the ability to
>>> pass a package name to the -m switch (but in a way that keeps the import
>>> machinery in a consistent state).
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>> Nick.
>>>
>>> [1] http://pypi.python.org/pypi/JCC
>>>
>>> [2] http://bugs.python.org/issue4195 (package execution with -m)
>>> [3] http://bugs.python.org/issue1739468 (zipfile execution)
>>>
>>> --
>>> Nick Coghlan   |   [EMAIL PROTECTED]   |   Brisbane, Australia
>>> ---
>>> ___
>>> Python-Dev mailing list
>>> [email protected]
>>> http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
>>> Unsubscribe: 
>>> http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/guido%40python.org
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> --Guido van Rossum (home page: http://www.python.org/~guido/)
>> ___
>> Python-Dev mailing list
>> [email protected]
>> http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
>> Unsubscribe: 
>> http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/dalcinl%40gmail.com
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Lisandro Dalcín
> ---
> Centro Internacional de Métodos Computacionales en Ingeniería (CIMEC)
> Instituto de Desarrollo Tecnológico para la Industria Química (INTEC)
> Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas (CONICET)
> PTLC - Güemes 3450, (3000) Santa Fe, Argentina
> Tel/Fax: +54-(0)342-451.1594
>



-- 
--Guido van Rossum (home page: http://www.python.org/~guido/)
___
Python-Dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe: 
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com


Re: [Python-Dev] Issue 4195: Can't execute packages with -m inPython 2.6/3.0

2008-11-21 Thread Raymond Hettinger

In concur that it is not a regression (esp for Py2.6).
OTOH, it would be nice to have -m run as expected.
It seems reasonable to me to get this working for 3.0.

Raymond


- Original Message - 
From: "Guido van Rossum" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

To: "Lisandro Dalcin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: "Nick Coghlan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; "Python Dev" 
Sent: Friday, November 21, 2008 7:16 PM
Subject: Re: [Python-Dev] Issue 4195: Can't execute packages with -m inPython 
2.6/3.0


I don't think that removing an unintentional and subtly broken feature
is a regression.

On Fri, Nov 21, 2008 at 7:04 PM, Lisandro Dalcin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

Unless this is considered a regression...

On Tue, Nov 18, 2008 at 12:51 PM, Guido van Rossum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

I think it crosses the line.

On Tue, Nov 18, 2008 at 2:55 AM, Nick Coghlan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

I need a release manager call on whether or not the proposed resolution
of this issue goes beyond what is acceptable for a bug fix in 2.6.1.

Short version:
- Python 2.5 allowed packages to be executed with -m, but in a broken way
- I disabled the broken way for 2.6, but didn't provide a replacement
- The patch attached to 4195 once again allows execution of packages
with -m, but in a clean way similar to the way directories and zipfiles
can now be executed
- I would like to commit that patch for 3.0/2.6.1, but I'm concerned
that it crosses the "no new features" line

Long version:

There was a bug in python 2.5 that allowed a package name to be passed
to the -m switch or runpy.run_module() and it would mostly work.

However, the 'mostly' was due to the fact that doing this put the
internal import machinery into a slightly inconsistent state: the
interpreter was running code from inside a package, but that package
wasn't actually present in sys.modules. This could lead to assorted hard
to trace import-related weirdness, similar to what you can get when
executing a file from inside a package by name. You would often get away
with it, but good luck figuring out what is happening if things go wrong
(and you aren't already an expert on Python import mechanics).

Since the ability to execute packages wasn't intentional, I added the
missing check to block it explicitly in 2.6 (but left it alone for 2.5).
It seemed like a really niche feature, so I didn't figure out a clean
replacement for it at the time.

Benjamin noticed this change earlier in the 2.6 release cycle, I pointed
out it was a deliberate change, and that's the way it stayed until after
2.6 was released.

After the release, Andi Vajda (from the JCC project [1]) contacted me,
and together we worked out a better implementation of package support
for the -m switch (and runpy.run_module) [2] by extending the
__main__.py approach used to support direct execution of zipfiles and
directories [3].

That's what I would like to add, since it nicely complements the ability
to execute zipfiles and directories, while also restoring the ability to
pass a package name to the -m switch (but in a way that keeps the import
machinery in a consistent state).

Cheers,
Nick.

[1] http://pypi.python.org/pypi/JCC

[2] http://bugs.python.org/issue4195 (package execution with -m)
[3] http://bugs.python.org/issue1739468 (zipfile execution)

--
Nick Coghlan   |   [EMAIL PROTECTED]   |   Brisbane, Australia
---
___
Python-Dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe: 
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/guido%40python.org





--
--Guido van Rossum (home page: http://www.python.org/~guido/)
___
Python-Dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe: 
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/dalcinl%40gmail.com





--
Lisandro Dalcín
---
Centro Internacional de Métodos Computacionales en Ingeniería (CIMEC)
Instituto de Desarrollo Tecnológico para la Industria Química (INTEC)
Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas (CONICET)
PTLC - Güemes 3450, (3000) Santa Fe, Argentina
Tel/Fax: +54-(0)342-451.1594





--
--Guido van Rossum (home page: http://www.python.org/~guido/)
___
Python-Dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/python%40rcn.com 


___
Python-Dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe: 
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com