[Stackless] stackess for 2.7

[Jeff Senn]

I guess I can agree (except for perhaps the "fortuitously" :-) )

Any word on whether test_functools and test_pickletools work for you?

Should I commit what I have so far?

On Jun 29, 2010, at 5:46 AM, Kristján Valur Jónsson wrote:

> I would agree, except that we have been doing it like this for aeons and changing this would probably break code.
> There is code out there that silently checks for SystemExit and reraises those exceptions, and fortuitously works for TaskletExit too.
> On the flip side, there is code in pythonrun.c (IIRC) that checks for SystemExit, but which we had to patch to ignore TaskletExits...
> 
> We best leave this alone and worry about it later.
> K
> 
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: stackless-bounces at stackless.com [mailto:stackless-
>> bounces at stackless.com] On Behalf Of Jeff Senn
>> Sent: 25. júní 2010 12:43
>> To: The Stackless Python Mailing List
>> Subject: Re: [Stackless] stackess for 2.7
>> 
>> 
>> On Jun 25, 2010, at 6:54 AM, Kristján Valur Jónsson wrote:
>> 
>>> Excellent.
>>> I'll have a look when I'm able.
>>> 
>>> Wrt TaskletExit, yes it makes perfect sense.  Like SystemExit, it is
>> an exception that you normally don't want to handle.  So exception
>> clauses like:
>>> try:
>>>   do_stuff()
>>> except Exception:
>>>   handle_error()
>>> 
>>> will work as expected, and yet allow tasklets to be killed without
>> fuss.
>> 
>> Agree... though I was talking about BaseException (rather then
>> Exception).
>> i.e. do we want this:
>> 
>> BaseException
>> +-- SystemExit
>> +-- TaskletExit
>> +-- KeyboardInterrupt
>> +-- GeneratorExit
>> +-- Exception
>>      +-- StopIteration
>>      +-- StandardError
>>      |    +-- BufferError
>>       ...
>> 
>> Or
>> 
>> BaseException
>> +-- SystemExit
>>      +-- TaskletExit
>> +-- KeyboardInterrupt
>> +-- GeneratorExit
>> +-- Exception
>>      +-- StopIteration
>>      +-- StandardError
>>      |    +-- BufferError
>>       ...
>> 
>> Unless there is some good reason for the latter, I think we want the
>> former, no?
>> I can't think of a good reason -- and it might be confusing to someone
>> who is doing something
>> where they catch SystemExit (probably in a 'finally'), expecting to see
>> it only once...
>> 
>> 
>>> 
>>> K
>>> 
>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>> From: stackless-bounces at stackless.com [mailto:stackless-
>>>> bounces at stackless.com] On Behalf Of Jeff Senn
>>>> Sent: 24. júní 2010 16:13
>>>> To: The Stackless Python Mailing List
>>>> Subject: Re: [Stackless] stackess for 2.7
>>>> 
>>>> Progress - it's now building, but I do see regular python test fails
>>>> (compared to stock 2.7.rc2) on:
>>>> 
>>>> test_email test_functools test_pep352 test_pickletools test_sax
>>>> test_sys test_tk test_ttk_guionly
>>>> 
>>>> I'm looking into them.  In particular so far:
>>>> 
>>>> test_pep352 fails because a text file in the test is missing a
>>>> reference to TaskletExit.
>>>> Easy to fix, though it also raises an issue about whether
>> TaskletExit
>>>> should really be derived
>>>> from SystemExit or the BaseException class.
>>>> 
>>>> test_functools is related the test_pickletools fail which might have
>>>> something to do with
>>>> the other pickling problem that Kristjan mentioned.  K- Does
>>>> test_pickletools succeed for you?
>>>> The problem seems to have to do with some wrapping of a function by
>>>> stackless...
>>>> 
>>>> test_email and text_sax have to do with line endings (\n vs \r\n) --
>>>> which is odd and troublesome...
>>>> and I'm looking more...
>>>> 
>>>> test_sys has to do with the slot wrapper object size (for
>> int.__add__)
>>>> being 44 bytes instead of 40.
>>>> (This might be correct for stackless -- it appears this test is
>>>> commented out in release26_maint)
>>>> 
>>>> and I haven't check the tk stuff yet at all...
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Stackless mailing list
>>> Stackless at stackless.com
>>> http://www.stackless.com/mailman/listinfo/stackless
>>> 
>> 
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> Stackless mailing list
>> Stackless at stackless.com
>> http://www.stackless.com/mailman/listinfo/stackless
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Stackless mailing list
> Stackless at stackless.com
> http://www.stackless.com/mailman/listinfo/stackless
>