New submission from Frank Wierzbicki :
Nick suggested this as a comment on a blog post of mine -- I'll come up with
some content, but I wanted to log the bug straight away so I wouldn't forget.
--
components: Devguide
messages: 148200
nosy: brett.cannon, ezio.melotti, f
Frank Wierzbicki added the comment:
I'll take a look at the dev guide this week and see how much it differs from
what I'd want to do and report back here. If it doesn't make sense to include a
Jython page here I can either copy content over or link to the CPython dev
guide
Frank Wierzbicki added the comment:
I have forked the devguide into http://hg.python.org/jython-docs/devguide/ --
this way I can merge changes from the main devguide as they make sense. DVCS
FTW :) -- I guess this issue can be closed
Changes by Frank Wierzbicki :
--
status: open -> closed
___
Python tracker
<http://bugs.python.org/issue13465>
___
___
Python-bugs-list mailing list
Unsubscri
New submission from Frank Wierzbicki <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
This patch adds the message "-J is reserved for Jython" if that arg is
attempted. See
http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2008-April/078564.html
For support from BDFL.
--
components: Interp
Frank Wierzbicki <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> added the comment:
On Sat, Apr 12, 2008 at 9:03 AM, Christian Heimes
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Christian Heimes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> added the comment:
>
> I've reserved -X as well. Applied in r62293
Great, thanks! W
Changes by Frank Wierzbicki :
--
nosy: +fwierzbicki
___
Python tracker
<http://bugs.python.org/issue14895>
___
___
Python-bugs-list mailing list
Unsubscribe:
New submission from Frank Wierzbicki:
test_dictcomp hard codes the dict output of various tests of Dict
Comprehensions. Since Jython has a different dict ordering we are currently
altering this test. When we get to 3.x it will be nicer if we can use this test
as is. Also I've seen
Frank Wierzbicki added the comment:
Making these into real unit tests and switching the patch to 3.3 should be no
problem. Is 2.7 still open for changes to tests? I might back port to 2.7 as
well so that I can delete the customized Jython test in 2.7
Frank Wierzbicki added the comment:
Switched to unittest style away from doctests and created patch against 3.3.
Note that at this time test_dictcomp.py is identical in 3.3 and 3.4 so merging
should be pretty easy :)
--
Added file: http://bugs.python.org/file28676/dictcomp3.3.patch
Frank Wierzbicki added the comment:
This patch of test_dict_comp.py was made against 2.7. It differs from the 3.3
version only one line "from test import test_support as support"
--
Added file: http://bugs.python.org/file28677/dictcom
Frank Wierzbicki added the comment:
I'd love to work through the commit process myself once I get through all of
the comments. My intention is to become much more active here as Jython3 starts
to ramp up over the next year. It would be great if I could eventually get all
of Jython's
Frank Wierzbicki added the comment:
> Well, we generally prefer to go through the review process always, except for
> relatively small commits (which some of yours may be).
Good to know, in that case I'll plan to go through the review process always.
> 2.7 is separate from 3.x.
Frank Wierzbicki added the comment:
I'm getting an error when I try to upload patches via Reitveld:
TypeError at /review/16886/add
int() argument must be a string or a number, not 'AddForm'
so I'm attaching my updated patch here. Is this a known issue? If not, where
Frank Wierzbicki added the comment:
On Fri, Jan 11, 2013 at 6:34 PM, Frank Wierzbicki
wrote:
> Reitveld
*Rietveld
I see just uploading a new patch to bugs.python does the right thing
so I'll just move along :)
--
nosy: +Frank.Wierzbicki
__
Changes by Frank Wierzbicki :
Added file: http://bugs.python.org/file28709/dictcomps_updated2.patch
___
Python tracker
<http://bugs.python.org/issue16886>
___
___
Pytho
Frank Wierzbicki added the comment:
I have addressed all of the comments, but I don't know the exact procedure
here. Does someone need to say "Looks good to me" before I push?
--
___
Python tracker
<http://bugs.pyt
New submission from Frank Wierzbicki :
For statements like:
for a,b in c:
pass
The Tuple node "a,b" ends up with a col_offset of 0 (the position of the
"for"), but the col_offset should probably be 4 (the position of "a").
This is more consistent with other
Frank Wierzbicki added the comment:
Adding tests to test_ast.py for the three cases that exercise the "for
a,b" scenario. Also fixed a small bug in the test code generator in
test_ast.py
--
Added file: http://bugs.python.org/file1472
Changes by Frank Wierzbicki :
--
nosy: +fwierzbicki
___
Python tracker
<http://bugs.python.org/issue6811>
___
___
Python-bugs-list mailing list
Unsubscribe:
Changes by Frank Wierzbicki :
--
nosy: +fwierzbicki
___
Python tracker
<http://bugs.python.org/issue6816>
___
___
Python-bugs-list mailing list
Unsubscribe:
Changes by Frank Wierzbicki :
--
nosy: +fwierzbicki
___
Python tracker
<http://bugs.python.org/issue7175>
___
___
Python-bugs-list mailing list
Unsubscribe:
New submission from Frank Wierzbicki :
test_same_as_repr in test_pprint.py assumes repr of literal dict {5:6,
7:8} will be ordered. This definitely is not the case for Jython, and
the comments above the test appear to indicate that it is not a
guarantee of CPython either.
--
components
Frank Wierzbicki added the comment:
This shouldn't be a problem for Jython.
--
___
Python tracker
<http://bugs.python.org/issue24450>
___
___
Python-bugs-l
24 matches
Mail list logo
