Message194222
| Author |
ethan.furman |
| Recipients |
amaury.forgeotdarc, barry, cvrebert, eli.bendersky, eric.snow, ethan.furman, ezio.melotti, giampaolo.rodola, gvanrossum, ncoghlan, pitrou, rhettinger |
| Date |
2013年08月02日.23:55:58 |
| SpamBayes Score |
-1.0 |
| Marked as misclassified |
Yes |
| Message-id |
<1375487758.54.0.628790032916.issue18264@psf.upfronthosting.co.za> |
| In-reply-to |
| Content |
I'll check you patch later against big numbers (which is where I had difficulties). If it works I'll try to make it more complete. If it doesn't, I've been working on just extraction the Enum member's value and using that (works fine on the Python side ;) .
Big Question: if the Enum member was used as a key, do we use .name or .value? The decision I went with was to compare the hashes of the member name vs the member itself -- if they're the same, use the .name, otherwise use the value. |
|
History
|
|---|
| Date |
User |
Action |
Args |
| 2013年08月02日 23:55:58 | ethan.furman | set | recipients:
+ ethan.furman, gvanrossum, barry, rhettinger, amaury.forgeotdarc, ncoghlan, pitrou, giampaolo.rodola, ezio.melotti, eli.bendersky, cvrebert, eric.snow |
| 2013年08月02日 23:55:58 | ethan.furman | set | messageid: <1375487758.54.0.628790032916.issue18264@psf.upfronthosting.co.za> |
| 2013年08月02日 23:55:58 | ethan.furman | link | issue18264 messages |
| 2013年08月02日 23:55:58 | ethan.furman | create |
|