On 11/1/2015 7:50 PM, Paul Rubin wrote:
Terry Reedy writes:
* 'Save-as' is not part of the regular workflow. It is done once per
file. Experienced users who know to avoid stdlib names will not see
the messages unless they accidentally duplicate one -- which is
possible because there are now s
On Mon, Nov 2, 2015 at 12:19 PM, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
> - Python as a whole should move "" from the start of sys.path to the end (or
> at least the middle, after the stdlib) so as to avoid accidental shadowing.
>
> - Even if Python doesn't do this, IDLE could do it, and could do it
> immediately
On Mon, 2 Nov 2015 11:07 am, Terry Reedy wrote:
> On 11/1/2015 11:17 AM, Laura Creighton wrote:
>
>> In a message of Mon, 02 Nov 2015 01:27:23 +1100, "Steven D'Aprano" writes
>> a reply to Michael Overtoon:
>
> He was actually responding to my proposal to warn about duplicating
> stdlib names wh
On Mon, 2 Nov 2015 03:17 am, Laura Creighton wrote:
> I managed to delete the real mail I would like to reply to.
> This is, at least in the same thread
>
> In a message of Mon, 02 Nov 2015 01:27:23 +1100, "Steven D'Aprano" writes
> a reply to Michael Overtoon:
Actually it's a reply to Terr
Terry Reedy writes:
> * 'Save-as' is not part of the regular workflow. It is done once per
> file. Experienced users who know to avoid stdlib names will not see
> the messages unless they accidentally duplicate one -- which is
> possible because there are now so many. I personally would like be
On 11/1/2015 11:17 AM, Laura Creighton wrote:
In a message of Mon, 02 Nov 2015 01:27:23 +1100, "Steven D'Aprano" writes
a reply to Michael Overtoon:
He was actually responding to my proposal to warn about duplicating
stdlib names when saving-as.
Users are inclined to ignore alerts, dialogs
I managed to delete the real mail I would like to reply to.
This is, at least in the same thread
In a message of Mon, 02 Nov 2015 01:27:23 +1100, "Steven D'Aprano" writes
a reply to Michael Overtoon:
> Users are inclined to ignore alerts, dialogs and error messages, and
> applications try ve
On 01/11/2015 14:27, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
I remember from a few weeks back, a
teacher with the same problem posted this on the mailinglist. Eventually
she had a technician coming in to reinstall Windows, just to fix this
problem ;-) What an overkill...
If that is true, that's really sad. Were
On Sun, 1 Nov 2015 01:50 pm, Terry Reedy wrote:
> On 10/31/2015 9:45 PM, Michiel Overtoom wrote:
>> I'd go even a step further. I think IDLE should not only warn, but
>
> The warning will require a choice, with the default (if one just hits
> ) being to reject the duplicate and go back to the Sa
On Sun, 1 Nov 2015 12:45 pm, Michiel Overtoom wrote:
>
>> On 31 Oct 2015, at 06:59, Terry Reedy wrote:
>> This is a different issue than IDLE avoiding clashes. I opened
>> https://bugs.python.org/issue25522
>
> Terry, thanks for recording this into the issue tracker.
>
> I'd go even a step fu
On 10/31/2015 9:45 PM, Michiel Overtoom wrote:
On 31 Oct 2015, at 06:59, Terry Reedy wrote:
This is a different issue than IDLE avoiding clashes. I opened
https://bugs.python.org/issue25522
Terry, thanks for recording this into the issue tracker.
I'd go even a step further. I think IDLE sh
On Sun, Nov 1, 2015 at 12:45 PM, Michiel Overtoom wrote:
> I'd go even a step further. I think IDLE should not only warn, but completely
> prevent saving a file which shadows a stdlib module, which will effectively
> render Python unusable. I remember from a few weeks back, a teacher with the
>
> On 31 Oct 2015, at 06:59, Terry Reedy wrote:
> This is a different issue than IDLE avoiding clashes. I opened
> https://bugs.python.org/issue25522
Terry, thanks for recording this into the issue tracker.
I'd go even a step further. I think IDLE should not only warn, but completely
prevent s
On 10/30/2015 9:15 PM, Terry Reedy wrote:
On 10/30/2015 12:29 PM, Laura Creighton wrote:
In a message of Fri, 30 Oct 2015 16:21:30 +0100, Michiel Overtoom writes:
Hi,
Laura wrote:
I think that it would be useful if IDLE spit out a warning
An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure. May
On 10/30/2015 12:29 PM, Laura Creighton wrote:
In a message of Fri, 30 Oct 2015 16:21:30 +0100, Michiel Overtoom writes:
Hi,
Laura wrote:
I think that it would be useful if IDLE spit out a warning
An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure. Maybe it's an idea that IDLE
gives a warning
In a message of Fri, 30 Oct 2015 16:21:30 +0100, Michiel Overtoom writes:
>Hi,
>
>Laura wrote:
>> I think that it would be useful if IDLE spit out a warning
>
>An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure. Maybe it's an idea that IDLE
>gives a warning when you're trying to save a file with a na
Hi,
Laura wrote:
> I think that it would be useful if IDLE spit out a warning
An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure. Maybe it's an idea that IDLE
gives a warning when you're trying to save a file with a name that would shadow
an existing module?
Greetings,
--
https://mail.pyth
On 10/29/2015 3:53 AM, Laura Creighton wrote:
I think that it would be useful if IDLE spit out a warning:
User code is compiled and executed by builtin compile and exec, so it
would have to be python (exec) that emit a warning.
Warning: local file /u/lac/junk/string.py shadows module named
I think that it would be useful if IDLE spit out a warning:
Warning: local file /u/lac/junk/string.py shadows module named string in the
Standard Library
Laura
--
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
On 10/28/2015 12:21 PM, Peter Otten wrote:
> PS: The shell people have learned their lesson and no longer include the
> working directory in the PATH:
> $ ls # the real thing
> $ ./ls # use at your own risk
Sure but this is a somewhat different genre.
>
> So maybe
>
import string # stdl
Michael Torrie wrote:
> On 10/28/2015 10:10 AM, Peter Otten wrote:
>> Terry Reedy wrote:
>>
>> Thank you for your patience.
>>
>>> Why do you think it a misfeature for IDLE to execute code the way Python
>>> does?
>>
>> Sadly I wasn't aware that the interactive interpreter is also vulnerable.
>
On 10/28/2015 10:10 AM, Peter Otten wrote:
> Terry Reedy wrote:
>
> Thank you for your patience.
>
>> Why do you think it a misfeature for IDLE to execute code the way Python
>> does?
>
> Sadly I wasn't aware that the interactive interpreter is also vulnerable.
> I should have been, but failed t
Terry Reedy wrote:
Thank you for your patience.
> Why do you think it a misfeature for IDLE to execute code the way Python
> does?
Sadly I wasn't aware that the interactive interpreter is also vulnerable.
I should have been, but failed to add one and one.
Until now I have often started python i
On 10/27/2015 4:15 AM, Peter Otten wrote:
Terry Reedy wrote:
When one runs a
program with 'python somepath/file.py', python prepends somepath to
sys.path.
If /foo/bar contains a string.py (for example) module and you run the
following sequence
$ cd /foo/bar
$ python3 /usr/bin/idle3
I am c
Terry Reedy wrote:
> On 10/26/2015 9:55 AM, Peter Otten wrote:
>
>> The "bug" or misfeature is that idle automatically adds the working
>> directory to sys.path.
>
> I am not sure what you mean by 'working directory' here.
After
$ cd /foo/bar
the working directory is
/foo/bar
> When one ru
On 10/26/2015 9:55 AM, Peter Otten wrote:
The "bug" or misfeature is that idle automatically adds the working
directory to sys.path.
I am not sure what you mean by 'working directory' here. When one runs a
program with 'python somepath/file.py', python prepends somepath to
sys.path.
Ideal
Terry Reedy wrote:
> On 10/23/2015 5:42 AM, Peter Otten wrote:
>> Laura Creighton wrote:
>>
>>> In a message of Fri, 23 Oct 2015 00:19:42 -0400, Terry Reedy writes:
On 10/21/2015 11:24 AM, Terry Alexander via Python-list wrote:
> I have tried installing both Python 2.7 and 3.5, and i
On 10/23/2015 5:42 AM, Peter Otten wrote:
Laura Creighton wrote:
In a message of Fri, 23 Oct 2015 00:19:42 -0400, Terry Reedy writes:
On 10/21/2015 11:24 AM, Terry Alexander via Python-list wrote:
I have tried installing both Python 2.7 and 3.5, and in both cases I
cannot get IDLE to work. I
In a message of Fri, 23 Oct 2015 11:42:54 +0200, Peter Otten writes:
>I tried it out:
>
>$ mkdir test
>$ cd test
>$ touch string.py
>$ idle3
>Traceback (most recent call last):
> File "", line 1, in
> File "/usr/lib/python3.4/idlelib/run.py", line 12, in
>from idlelib import CallTips
> Fil
Laura Creighton wrote:
> In a message of Fri, 23 Oct 2015 00:19:42 -0400, Terry Reedy writes:
>>On 10/21/2015 11:24 AM, Terry Alexander via Python-list wrote:
>>
>>> I have tried installing both Python 2.7 and 3.5, and in both cases I
>>> cannot get IDLE to work. I received the following message b
In a message of Fri, 23 Oct 2015 00:19:42 -0400, Terry Reedy writes:
>On 10/21/2015 11:24 AM, Terry Alexander via Python-list wrote:
>
>> I have tried installing both Python 2.7 and 3.5, and in both cases I
>> cannot get IDLE to work. I received the following message both times:
>
>What OS? Windows
On 10/21/2015 11:24 AM, Terry Alexander via Python-list wrote:
I have tried installing both Python 2.7 and 3.5, and in both cases I
cannot get IDLE to work. I received the following message both times:
What OS? Windows? which version? How did you start IDLE? Start menu
icon? Command line?
Hello...
I have tried installing both Python 2.7 and 3.5, and in both cases I cannot get
IDLE to work. I received the following message both times:
IDLE’s subprocess didn’t make connection. Either IDLE can’t start a subprocess
or personalfirewall software is blocking the connection.
I am running
33 matches
Mail list logo
