Python Source Code for a HTTP Proxy
Hello, i'm looking for a simple http proxy in python. Does anybody know about something like this ? -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
How is the python path build ?
Hello, i must add my own python.exe and a little patched runtime library with my product. How can i setup the python path, so that the directories are not taken from the registry values for Python2.4 but something relative to my own python.exe ? With PYTHONPATH i can only add new items in front of sys.path but i want start with a clean sys.path without any pre added directories. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Can't compile
Here i jump into this thread. With this option the configure script runs well. But then i get a compile error in complexobject. I'm using Solaris in 32-Bit Mode on my AthlonX2. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
How to find out if the interpreter is a debug build?
How can i find out if a selected python interpreter (i only know the path name under which i should start it) is a debug build? I tried sys.api_version, sys.platform, sys.version, sys.version_info and there is no difference between "python.exe" and "python_d.exe". I'm pretty sure the information is stored somewhere but i can't find it. Please help. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: How to find out if the interpreter is a debug build?
On 1 Sep., 10:37, Lawrence D'Oliveiro <[EMAIL PROTECTED] central.gen.new_zealand> wrote: > In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, llothar > wrote: > > > How can i find out if a selected python interpreter (i only know the > > path name under which i should start it) is a debug build? > > What's the difference in their behaviour? Total different and total incompatible behaviour if you write an IDE (Debugger/Profiler etc.) And total different for binary extensions. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: How to find out if the interpreter is a debug build?
On 1 Sep., 13:25, "Martin v. Löwis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > If you want it cross-platform, you can check whether sys.getobjects > is available. That, of course, is also unsafe because there isn't > a single "debug build" on Unix, but instead, several debugging > features can be enabled and disabled separately, so you would have > to specify first what precisely a debug build is. I thought that the answer is as complicated as this. At the moment it would be nice and enough if i only can find out if my binary extension can be loaded into an interpreter or if this requires a new extension build. It is a huge problem and weakness of python if this is impossible with debug builds. And if you answer that this is up to the user, i have to say, no it isn't: At least if you are like me and are working on an IDE with a debugger component. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: status of Programming by Contract (PEP 316)?
On 29 Aug., 13:45, Russ <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I have not yet personally used it, but I am interested in anything > that can help to make my programs more reliable. If you are > programming something that doesn't really need to be correct, than you > probably don't need it. But if you really need (or want) your software I'm one of the few (thousand) hard core Eiffel programmers on this world and i can tell you that this would not add to much to python. To get the benefits of it you need to use it together with a runtime that is designed from ground with DBC and a language that is fast enough to be able to check the contracts, if you don't have the latter all you get is a better specification language (which you can write as comments in python). Learn the Eiffel design way and then add assert statements whereever you need them. Works well when i do C/C++ programming and maybe even for script languages - but i never used it for scripts as i don't see a real value here. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: How to find out if the interpreter is a debug build?
> > Would you like to contribute a patch? Would such a patch require a full blown PEP? If i have to write a PEP i can better add it to the documentation of my application and be sure that the problem is solved. A patch might be rejected by anybody in a bad mood or who don't understand why it is usefull. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Will Python 3.0 remove the global interpreter lock (GIL)
I'm afraid that the GIL is killing the usefullness of python for some types of applications now where 4,8 oder 64 threads on a chip are here or comming soon. What is the status about that for the future of python? I know that at the moment allmost nobody in the scripting world has solved this problem, but it bites and it bites hard. Only groovy as a Java Plugin has support but i never tried it. Writing an interpreter that does MT this seems to be extremely difficult to do it right, with lots of advanced stuff like CAS and lock free programming. Even Smalltalk and Common Lisp didn't get it until know (with the exception of certain experiments). -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Will Python 3.0 remove the global interpreter lock (GIL)
On 3 Sep., 07:38, "Eduardo O. Padoan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > No.http://www.artima.com/weblogs/viewpost.jsp?thread=211430 > > Ops, I meant:http://www.artima.com/forums/threaded.jsp?forum=106&thread=211200 > Thanks. I whish there would be a project for rewritting the C interpreter to make it better and more useable for threading use. But the CPU infrastructure is also not perfect enough so maybe it's good to wait with this a few more years until Intel and AMD know what they are doing. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Questions on FOX GUI and Python
On 5 Sep., 02:15, Kenneth McDonald <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Would anyone care to offer their opinions as to using Python with the > FOX GUI toolkit? Ease of use, stability, power, > speed, etc., all thoughts would be appreciated. Pure theoretical question, as FXPy is not supported anymore, but i bite: Don't use FOX if you want to write a mainstream application. I did it and i whish i could find the time to switch to another toolkit. Too many problems and to many useability bugs. The later ones are getting more serious for me. Also development for the GUI part stalled and even before it was OpenSource but never OpenCommunity. And it is (if not patched) almost as ugly as the old TK. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Distributed RVS, Darcs, tech love
> I love math. I respect Math. I'm nothing but a menial servant to > Mathematics. Programming and use cases are not maths. Many mathematics are the worst programmers i've seen because they want to solve things and much more often you just need heuristics. Once they are into exact world they loose there capability to see the factor of relevance in algorithms. And they almost never match the mental model that the average user has about a problem. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Distributed RVS, Darcs, tech love
> I'm, not sure that I'm getting your point, but are you trying to argue that > _not_ knowing mathemathics makes you a better programmer? No but it doesn't help you very much either. They are just different skills. > Or maybe that learning math is useless to a programmer? No and at least the mathematical idea of building a universe on a basic set of axioms is pretty exciting for a programmer. But it's the idea not the real wisdom (I never had to use any serious maths in my 25 years of programming) that you need as a programmer > This must be the most ignorant post I've seen > this week. The *best* programmers I've seen actually had mathematic education. Depends. I would call Knuth as one of the worst programmers. Look at his total failures on literature programming. Software Engineering is something very different. Having a dead - i mean end of development line software like TeX - and then trying to base a theory about software engineering (which is based on changes) is so absolutely stupid ... -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Distributed RVS, Darcs, tech love
On 21 Okt., 21:39, Arne Vajhøj <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > That level of activity could be considered dead. For me at least 2% of the total line count should be changed to call it non dead. I don't say it it not used anymore for users it might be not dead but this is not the point under discussion here. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Distributed RVS, Darcs, tech love
> > Depends obvious a bot on what you consider serious math. > > Expression evaluation, floating point characteristics, relational > database theory, simulation, optimum location, encryption etc. > are all based on mathematics of different levels. Thats not i call serious maths. You just need a very little understanding here for all this concepts. A "extended high school degress" should be well enough (based on our education system in Germany - don't know how much math you do in a US high schoool). A little bit set theory and of course boolean algebra (on a very low level but unfortunately not teached in school). But where do you need the way to prove mathematical theorems and this is what i call as serious math. You don't need to prove anything you just need to use it. (In 95% of all programming, except some embedded programming with DSP's or numeric.) > > Depends. I would call Knuth as one of the worst programmers. Look at > > his total > > failures on literature programming. Software Engineering is something > > very > > different. > > I think you will find it very difficult to write a piece of code > that are not heavily influenced by Knuth. Well programming in the small like sort algorithms for sure. But not for his great discoveries but for one of the first man who was paid for this by this university employee. But in the field of software enginering as i said before he completely failed. And for me programming is just another word for software engineering these days. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Is there any pure python webserver that can use FCGI
Hello, as the subject says, for an embedded application i need a 100% pure python webserver that can talk to a FCGI process (which runs ruby on rails). Of couse it also must be able to use simple CGI. Please don't ask why i want a python webserver for a ruby application. I just need it. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Python 2.5 - Build Error on Windows because of SQLite3
Why does Python2.5 do not include the amalgamation source code of sqlite3? At the moment it is not possible to build the system out of the box with the Visual Studio project. I don't think this is good. The amalgamation version is exactly for this purpose. Is there a 2.5.3 release on the way? -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Problems building a binary extension
I works well on Linux. But on FreeBSD when i use ../bin/python setup.py build_ext --inplace to select my own build python interpreter it is not using the correct library paths and therefore complains that it can't find the - lpython2.5 library. Using python-config i also don't see that the lib directory based on the --prefix option is not used anywhere for the library. Must i set LIBRARY_PATH by hand? If i have to it seems like a bug to me, because the information is there and the build tools should use it. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
When does a binary extension gets the file extension '.pyd' and when is it '.so'
On windows everything is '.pyd' but there seems to be two ways to get this on unix? Why and what is the rule? -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: When does a binary extension gets the file extension '.pyd' and when is it '.so'
Thanks, my question was not how can i make python to it find. I don't have a problem. My question was: Why does setup.py generated sometimes a pyd and sometimes a so file? There must be a rule behind this. Unforunately setup.py is not well documented. Here i mean i need a specification not a tutorial, because i want to know something not do something. Don't ask why i need to know: I need to know. And maybe somebody here can drop a line before i have to dig around in the source code. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: When does a binary extension gets the file extension '.pyd' and when is it '.so'
On 5 Apr., 15:48, Fredrik Lundh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > llothar wrote: > > My question was: Why does setup.py generated sometimes a pyd and > > sometimes a so file? > > setup.py picks an extension that happens to work on the platform you're > running setup.py on. doing otherwise would be pretty pointless. > > Unfortunately as pointless as the answers i got so far. Okay i try it one more time: I ship an application that compiles an python interpreter and extension on a remote system. It also needs to copy this created items around. So if i use setup.py to create an extension i need to know the file name of the generated file. Damned this is trivial and a fundamental question and it is not documented anywhere. I have a clue at the moment that it might be ".so" when python is compiled without shared library and ".pyd" otherwise (configure option --enable-shared) . But this is just a guess. Does anybody know? And by the way: I think this is a bug and should be fixed. If the platform does allow renaming the extension of a DLL (does HP/UX allow this?) it should always be ".pyd" -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: When does a binary extension gets the file extension '.pyd' and when is it '.so'
> Right, so you think people aren't trying to help you? I think they are not reading the question. > You display your ignorance here. The ".pyd" extension is used on Windows > as an alternative to ".dll", but both are recognized as shared > libraries. Personally I'm not really sure why they even chose to use > ".pyd", which is confusing to most Windows users. Here i agree. But having it's own identifiying extension has also some small benefits. > To depart from the platform standard would be unhelpful and confusing to > the majority of users. It's know use telling us what you think: tell us > instead the compelling reasons why your opinion is correct. Opinions, > after all, are so cheap that everyone can have one. Because i want a uniform solution. Either use "dllso" or use "pyd" but stay with one decision once made. At the moment when i build python on my ubuntu system without "--enable-shared" i get a pyd file created, if i use "--enable-shared" it is a so file. I don't know if this is a special case on Linux or the general on unix systems (i only have Linux, FreeBSD, NetBSD, OpenBSD, Solaris and MacOSX in mind). > There are ways to build distributions of Python extensions (modules or > packages involving binary code from languages like C or C++), but you > will want to understand a bit more about computing in general Believe me nobody needs to teach me anything about general programming anymore. > (and work on your social skills ;-) I don't think so. I asked a pretty simple question and as usual on usenet nobody read the question but answered to complete different topics. Answers on usenet are so cheap, everybody likes to give one - no matter if it is ontopic, right or wrong. And this does not really help. My question is simple and person who knows setup.py and distools would be able to give the answer in a small sentence if there is a strategy behind it and it's not only a bug. Unfortunately there is no python.core mailing list that i know so i ask here. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
UML for Python or some other Graphical Notation Language
This is more an academic question right now but was there ever some work in progress how UML could be made better for Python or script languages in general. It is so extremely deep interwoven with Java/C++ language implementations that there are a lot of modified notiations necessary. Or is there anything else then UML? Eiffel still has BON for example. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
