Gabe Appleton added the comment:
Also, isn't this just a permissions error? I wouldn't think that would indicate
a failure of the feature, but instead one of the testing environment.
On December 10, 2019 7:47:10 AM UTC, Xavier de Gaye
wrote:
>
>Xavier de Gaye added the
New submission from Gabe Appleton :
At the moment you can definitely use UDPLITE sockets on Linux systems, but it
would be good if this support were formalized such that you can detect support
at runtime easily.
At the moment, to make and use a UDPLITE socket requires something like the
Change by Gabe Appleton :
--
keywords: +patch
pull_requests: +14088
stage: -> patch review
pull_request: https://github.com/python/cpython/pull/14258
___
Python tracker
<https://bugs.python.org/issu
Gabe Appleton added the comment:
Its true that this doesnt exist at the C level, however I worry that having it
purely through getsockopt() and setsockopt() would make things more confusing,
so I added it as a helper function.
I can remove it in lieu of documentation if that would block
Gabe Appleton added the comment:
I just want to be explicit so I don't mess up on protocol, since I am new to
this project. Does that mean that you want me to remove the helper function and
put documentation in about that sockopt, or that an exception could be made in
this
Gabe Appleton added the comment:
Okay, I removed the helper functions and added some additional documentation.
Does that look okay now?
--
versions: +Python 3.8
___
Python tracker
<https://bugs.python.org/issue37
Gabe Appleton added the comment:
I didn't realize that when I submitted this the first time, but I corrected
that in the documentation when someone else removed it from the tags. If I
re-added it it was by mistake. I notice that my browser had that
auto-highlighted. Should be fixe
New submission from Gabe Appleton :
Currently it has a __repr__() which returns `Fraction(x, y)`, and a __str__()
which returns `x/y`. I have a ready pull request to change this to a scheme
where both return unicode fractions.
--
components: Library (Lib)
messages: 316026
nosy
Change by Gabe Appleton :
--
keywords: +patch
pull_requests: +6372
stage: -> patch review
___
Python tracker
<https://bugs.python.org/issue33402>
___
___
Py
Gabe Appleton added the comment:
Would it be workable if I instead just changed the __str__() method? I'm
willing to go either way, but I feel like it's a bit nicer to have it output a
nice fraction that way.
--
___
Python track
Change by Gabe Appleton :
--
resolution: -> rejected
stage: patch review -> resolved
status: open -> closed
___
Python tracker
<https://bugs.python.or
11 matches
Mail list logo
