[python-win32] Boolean type changed in Python 3.0?

[Sunny Carter]

Hi Mark,

I'm afraid I'm not sure where to look for new binary releases for python win32.  You mentioned that Roger had checked in a fix for a bug that I need on 27th Jan this year.  Looking at http://sourceforge.net/projects/pywin32/files/ I can't see any new releases since July 09 so I assume this fix is not released yet.

Is that the best place to look for new releases?  What is the best way to know when a release has been made, other than to check that site every now and again? Or should I scroll through the python-win mail archive?

Many Thanks

Sunny Carter


On 27/01/2010 8:21 AM, Sunny Carter wrote:
> Mark - just wondered if you had any update on this?

I believe Roger checked a fix in for this over the last few days.  I'm 
not sure when a new binary build will be available though, but probably 
not within a few weeks...

Cheers,

Mark 

-----Original Message-----
From: Mark Hammond [mailto:skippy.hammond at gmail.com] 
Sent: 05 January 2010 07:58
To: Sunny Carter
Cc: python-win32 at python.org
Subject: Re: [python-win32] Boolean type changed in Python 3.0?

On 5/01/2010 3:51 AM, Sunny Carter wrote:
> Hi all,
> I'm trying my posting again with a different subject so that it is 
> more generic.
> I am having problems calling across the win32 API using a Boolean 
> argument in Python 3.0 (False in my python script) which is not 
> recognised as a Boolean (The error I get back from setattr is 'Boolean 
> value expected').
> Has the way that a Boolean is represented changed in Python 3.0? This 
> worked fine in Python 2.6. I cannot get it to work and have tried 
> values of False,True,0 and 1, all to no avail.
> It sounds like a bug in the win32com API for 3.0 to me.
> Further details below.
> Many thanks to anyone that can help,

I expect something subtle is going on with boolean conversions in 3.x, but the test suite does have coverage of booleans, so I'm really not sure what the problem could be.  I don't have photoshop so I'm unable to reproduce - I intend revisiting the tests to see if I can spot an edge case which isn't tested, but I'm yet to get to that after the holidays...

Cheers,

Mark