Hi, Experts:
Anyone can tell how to rerun the job “Azure Pipelines PR” for my PR? Sometimes
my PR failed but this is caused by externals. The next day this external issue
was fixed then I might want to rerun this specific job on my PR to get the new
result. How can I reach this?
[cid:image001.
Closing and re-opening the PR will trigger the CI run again that might help
in this case but it will run all the jobs.
--
Regards,
Karthikeyan S
___
Python-Dev mailing list
[email protected]
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubs
(I originally posted this to python-ideas, where I was told none of this
PEP's authors subscribe so probably no one will see it there, so I'm
posting it here to raise the issue where it can get seen and hopefully
discussed)
While the PEP does show the version number as part of the path to the
act
On 02Apr2019 0522, Karthikeyan wrote:
Closing and re-opening the PR will trigger the CI run again that might
help in this case but it will run all the jobs.
Yes, I believe this is still the best way to re-run Pipelines jobs.
For people with logins (not yet everyone in the GitHub org, but I hea
On 02Apr2019 0817, Calvin Spealman wrote:
(I originally posted this to python-ideas, where I was told none of this
PEP's authors subscribe so probably no one will see it there, so I'm
posting it here to raise the issue where it can get seen and hopefully
discussed)
Correct, thanks for posting
On 3/30/19 11:36 PM, Jeroen Demeyer wrote:
On 2019-03-30 17:30, Mark Shannon wrote:
2. The claim that PEP 580 allows "certain optimizations because other
code can make assumptions" is flawed. In general, the caller cannot make
assumptions about the callee or vice-versa. Python is a dynamic langu
Hi,
On 01/04/2019 6:31 am, Jeroen Demeyer wrote:
I added benchmarks for PEP 590:
https://gist.github.com/jdemeyer/f0d63be8f30dc34cc989cd11d43df248
Thanks. As expected for calls to C function for both PEPs and master
perform about the same, as they are using almost the same calling
conventio
Hi,
On 02/04/2019 1:49 pm, Petr Viktorin wrote:
On 3/30/19 11:36 PM, Jeroen Demeyer wrote:
On 2019-03-30 17:30, Mark Shannon wrote:
2. The claim that PEP 580 allows "certain optimizations because other
code can make assumptions" is flawed. In general, the caller cannot make
assumptions about t
In one of the ways to call C functions in PEP 580, the function gets
access to:
- the arguments,
- "self", the object
- the class that the method was found in (which is not necessarily
type(self))
I still have to read the details, but when combined with
LOAD_METHOD/CALL_METHOD optimization (avoidi
On 2019-04-02 21:38, Mark Shannon wrote:
Hi,
On 01/04/2019 6:31 am, Jeroen Demeyer wrote:
I added benchmarks for PEP 590:
https://gist.github.com/jdemeyer/f0d63be8f30dc34cc989cd11d43df248
Thanks. As expected for calls to C function for both PEPs and master
perform about the same, as they are
10 matches
Mail list logo
