You may remember me from a couple of years ago when I was trying to help
out with Python. Unfortunately I trod on a few toes. I now know why.
I have been diagnosed with Asperger Syndrome at 55 years old.
I would like to give it another go.
--
Cheers.
Mark Lawrence.
__
On 2/5/2012 12:44 PM, Blockheads Oi Oi wrote:
You may remember me from a couple of years ago when I was trying to help
out with Python. Unfortunately I trod on a few toes. I now know why. I
have been diagnosed with Asperger Syndrome at 55 years old.
I would like to give it another go.
Hi Mark,
In article ,
georg.brandl wrote:
> +Bugfix Releases
> +===
> +
> +- 3.2.1: released July 10, 2011
> +- 3.2.2: released September 4, 2011
> +
> +- 3.2.3: planned February 10-17, 2012
I would like to propose that we plan for 3.2.3 and 2.7.3 immediately
after PyCon, so approximately M
2012/2/5 Ned Deily :
> In article ,
> georg.brandl wrote:
>> +Bugfix Releases
>> +===
>> +
>> +- 3.2.1: released July 10, 2011
>> +- 3.2.2: released September 4, 2011
>> +
>> +- 3.2.3: planned February 10-17, 2012
>
> I would like to propose that we plan for 3.2.3 and 2.7.3 immediatel
On Feb 5, 2012, at 20:25 , Benjamin Peterson wrote:
> 2012/2/5 Ned Deily :
>> In article ,
>> georg.brandl wrote:
>>> +Bugfix Releases
>>> +===
>>> +
>>> +- 3.2.1: released July 10, 2011
>>> +- 3.2.2: released September 4, 2011
>>> +
>>> +- 3.2.3: planned February 10-17, 2012
>>
>>
I understand that but, to me, it makes no sense to send out truly
broken releases. Besides, the hash collision attack is not exactly
new either. Another few weeks can't make that much of a difference.
Why would the release be truly broken? It surely can't be worse than
the current release
In article
<[email protected]>,
[email protected] wrote:
> > I understand that but, to me, it makes no sense to send out truly
> > broken releases. Besides, the hash collision attack is not exactly
> > new either. Another few weeks can't make that
On Mon, Feb 6, 2012 at 5:45 AM, wrote:
>
>> I understand that but, to me, it makes no sense to send out truly broken
>> releases. Besides, the hash collision attack is not exactly new either.
>> Another few weeks can't make that much of a difference.
>
>
> Why would the release be truly broken?
In article
,
Nick Coghlan wrote:
> Because Apple wasn't publishing versions of gcc-llvm that miscompile
> Python when those releases were made.
More importantly, Apple removed gcc-4.2 with the current versions of
Xcode 4 and the Pythons installed by our current installers require
gcc-4.2 to b
Blockheads Oi Oi writes:
> I would like to give it another go.
Welcome back.
Your signature shows the name “Mark Lawrence”. It would help with
initial impressions if your ‘From’ field, instead of the pseudonym
currently shown, shows your name. Could you please change it to that?
--
\
On Feb 05, 2012, at 02:25 PM, Benjamin Peterson wrote:
>The reason 3.2.3 is so soon is the need to patch the hash collision attack.
Also remember that we are coordinating releases between several versions of
Python for this issue, some of which are in security-only mode. The RMs of
the active st
Paul Moore wrote:
On 4 February 2012 11:25, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
It strikes me that it would be helpful sometimes to programmatically
recognise "preview" modules in the std lib. Could we have a recommendation
in PEP 8 that such modules should have a global variable called PREVIEW, and
non-pre
I'm going to assume pylint or pyflakes would throw too many warnings on the
stdlib, but would it be worth someone's time to write a simple unused
import checker to run over the stdlib on occasion? I bet even one that did
nothing more than a regex search for matched import statements would be
good e
Am 06.02.2012 01:39, schrieb Brett Cannon:
> I'm going to assume pylint or pyflakes would throw too many warnings on
> the stdlib, but would it be worth someone's time to write a simple
> unused import checker to run over the stdlib on occasion? I bet even one
> that did nothing more than a regex s
On Feb 5, 2012 5:36 PM, "Steven D'Aprano" wrote:
>
> Paul Moore wrote:
>>
>> On 4 February 2012 11:25, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
>>>
>>> It strikes me that it would be helpful sometimes to programmatically
>>> recognise "preview" modules in the std lib. Could we have a
recommendation
>>> in PEP 8 th
Am 06.02.2012 00:01, schrieb Barry Warsaw:
> On Feb 05, 2012, at 02:25 PM, Benjamin Peterson wrote:
>
>>The reason 3.2.3 is so soon is the need to patch the hash collision attack.
>
> Also remember that we are coordinating releases between several versions of
> Python for this issue, some of whic
16 matches
Mail list logo
