Mailman 3 December 2010 - docs

[issue10031] Withdraw anti-recommendation of relative imports from documentation
by Darren Dale 06 Oct '14

06 Oct '14

New submission from Darren Dale <dsdale24(a)gmail.com>: Old-style relative imports have been strongly discouraged in some sections of the python documentation. This was discussed on the python-dev mailing list. Executive summary: "The issue is implementing a PEP with nice support for relative imports, and then documenting that it should never be used." To which Guido responded: --- "Isn't this mostly historical? Until the new relative-import syntax was implemented there were various problems with relative imports. The short-term solution was to recommend not using them. The long-term solution was to implement an unambiguous syntax. Now it is time to withdraw the anti-recommendation. Of course, without going overboard -- I still find them an acquired taste; but they have their place." --- It was suggested I open a ticket and suggest specific changes. They are listed below: The faq at http://docs.python.org/py3k/faq/programming.html#what-are-the-best-practice… could go from: "Never use relative package imports. If you’re writing code that’s in the package.sub.m1 module and want to import package.sub.m2, do not just write from . import m2, even though it’s legal. Write from package.sub import m2 instead. See PEP 328 for details." to: "Although the python community generally prefers absolute imports, relative imports may be useful in certain circumstances. See PEP 328 for details." The programming faq for python-2.7 at http://docs.python.org/faq/programming.html#what-are-the-best-practices-for… could go from: "Never use relative package imports. If you’re writing code that’s in the package.sub.m1 module and want to import package.sub.m2, do not just write import m2, even though it’s legal. Write from package.sub import m2 instead. Relative imports can lead to a module being initialized twice, leading to confusing bugs. See PEP 328 for details." to: "Although the python community generally prefers absolute imports, relative imports may be useful in certain circumstances. Support for relative imports has recently been improved, and the use of the old-style relative imports is strongly discouraged. See PEP 328 for details." There is also this warning against relative imports in PEP 8, that could go from: - Relative imports for intra-package imports are highly discouraged. Always use the absolute package path for all imports. Even now that PEP 328 [7] is fully implemented in Python 2.5, its style of explicit relative imports is actively discouraged; absolute imports are more portable and usually more readable. to: - While the python community generally prefers absolute imports, relative imports may be useful in certain circumstances. Now that PEP 328 [7] is fully implemented in Python 2.5 and later, the older style of implicit relative imports is strongly discouraged. ---------- assignee: docs@python components: Documentation messages: 118031 nosy: docs@python, dsdale24 priority: normal severity: normal status: open title: Withdraw anti-recommendation of relative imports from documentation versions: Python 2.6, Python 2.7, Python 3.1, Python 3.2, Python 3.3 _______________________________________ Python tracker <report(a)bugs.python.org> <http://bugs.python.org/issue10031> _______________________________________

5 5

[issue10702] bytes and bytearray methods are not documented
by Alexander Belopolsky 27 Sep '14

27 Sep '14

New submission from Alexander Belopolsky <belopolsky(a)users.sourceforge.net>: Library reference manual has a section dedicated to string methods [1], but similar methods of bytes and bytearray types are not documented. Adding two new sections would probably be too repetitious, so I wonder if it would make sense to add notes about byte/bytearray methods to the matching string methods' entries. See also issue10587. [1] http://docs.python.org/dev/py3k/library/stdtypes.html#string-methods ---------- assignee: docs@python components: Documentation messages: 123960 nosy: belopolsky, docs@python priority: normal severity: normal status: open title: bytes and bytearray methods are not documented versions: Python 3.2 _______________________________________ Python tracker <report(a)bugs.python.org> <http://bugs.python.org/issue10702> _______________________________________

6 7

[issue10503] os.getuid() documentation should be clear on what kind of uid it is referring
by Giampaolo Rodola' 07 Jun '14

07 Jun '14

New submission from Giampaolo Rodola' <g.rodola(a)gmail.com>: http://docs.python.org/library/os.html#os.getuid os.getuid() documentation just states: > Return the current process’s user id. It is not clear, however, whether "user id" refers to real, effective or saved user id. As per: http://linux.about.com/library/cmd/blcmdl2_getuid.htm ...it should refer to _real_ user id. ---------- assignee: docs@python components: Documentation messages: 122117 nosy: docs@python, giampaolo.rodola priority: normal severity: normal status: open title: os.getuid() documentation should be clear on what kind of uid it is referring versions: Python 2.6, Python 2.7, Python 3.1, Python 3.2 _______________________________________ Python tracker <report(a)bugs.python.org> <http://bugs.python.org/issue10503> _______________________________________

5 6

[issue9307] Py_TPFLAGS_LONG_SUBCLASS is not documented
by Alexander Belopolsky 29 Apr '14

29 Apr '14

New submission from Alexander Belopolsky <belopolsky(a)users.sourceforge.net>: Is there a reason for not documenting Py_TPFLAGS_LONG_SUBCLASS (Py_TPFLAGS_INT_SUBCLASS in 2.x)? This flag is used in PyLong_Check, but neither this flag or its inheritance properties are explained anywhere in the docs. See also issue5476. ---------- assignee: docs@python components: Documentation messages: 110787 nosy: belopolsky, docs@python priority: normal severity: normal stage: needs patch status: open title: Py_TPFLAGS_LONG_SUBCLASS is not documented type: feature request _______________________________________ Python tracker <report(a)bugs.python.org> <http://bugs.python.org/issue9307> _______________________________________

6 8

[issue9364] some problems with the documentation of pydoc
by Eli Bendersky 19 Apr '14

19 Apr '14

New submission from Eli Bendersky <eliben(a)gmail.com>: The first paragraph in its documentation says: """ In the Python interpreter, do "from pydoc import help" to provide online help. Calling help(thing) on a Python object documents the object. """ Which is no longer accurate, because the help() function has long ago become a built-in. Below is an excerpt from Terry Reedy in a private email discussion on this subject, that raises more issues. --------------------------------------------- 1. The output from help(help) could be made more clear. The nature of 'help' has been a point of confusion. A recent python-list post asked something like "What is 'help'?" Now (with some parallel examples: >>> help(int) Help on class int in module builtins: class int(object) [snip] >>> help(1) Help on int object: class int(object) [snip] >>> help(help) Help on _Helper in module site object: class _Helper(builtins.object) | Define the built-in 'help'. | This is a wrapper around pydoc.help (with a twist). | | Methods defined here: | | __call__(self, *args, **kwds) | a. 'module site object' is nonsense, it should just be 'module site', except that to be parallel to what is done for other instances, it should be 'Help on _Helper object'. Why should help special-case itself (with a slightly garbled line?) Is that done in site._Helper or pydoc.help? However, it would be more helpful for all instances to give the location of the class when one asks for help on an instance, just as when one asks for help on the class itself. It is annoying to to have to repeat help(<classname>) just to get that info. So I would like to see "Help on instance of class int in module builtins:" "Help on instance of class _Helper in module site:" This would be a code patch to pydoc.help b. "This is a wrapper around pydoc.help" good so far "(with a twist)" thanks a lot. I think the comment should be either removed or explained. A reference manual should explain, not tease. Replace "Define the built-in 'help'." with something clearer and more accurate, such as "The name 'help' is injected in module builtins after being bound to an instance of this class.". Put this after, not before, the 'wrapper' line. A patch for site._Helper doc string. 2. Improve manual chapter for site module. a. It currently starts "Importing this module will append site-specific paths to the module search path." Add "inject 'help' into builtins and " after append. Then add a short explanation paragraph before the search path stuff. Something like "This module contains a class (_Helper) that wraps function pydoc.help. An instance of the class is bound to name 'help' in the builtins module." A recent discussion on pydev or maybe python-list (in the thread mentioned above?) implied that one could usefully make another instance of _Helper or maybe a subclass thereof. I did not pay enough attention, though, to really get it. b. It currently ends with "XXX Update documentation XXX document python -m site –user-base –user-site" ---------- assignee: docs@python components: Documentation messages: 111426 nosy: docs@python, eli.bendersky, tjreedy priority: normal severity: normal status: open title: some problems with the documentation of pydoc type: behavior versions: Python 3.1, Python 3.2 _______________________________________ Python tracker <report(a)bugs.python.org> <http://bugs.python.org/issue9364> _______________________________________

9 21

[issue10481] subprocess PIPEs are byte streams
by Glenn Linderman 14 Apr '14

14 Apr '14

New submission from Glenn Linderman <v+python(a)g.nevcal.com>: While http://bugs.python.org/issue2683 did clarify the fact that the .communicate API takes a byte stream as input, it is easy to miss the implication. Because Python programs start up with stdin as a text stream, it might be good to point out that some action may need to be taken to be sure that the receiving program expects a byte stream, or that the byte stream supplied should be in an encoding that the receiving program is expecting and can decode appropriately. No mention is presently made in the documentation for .communicate that its output is also a byte stream, and if text will correspond to whatever encoding is used by the sending program. ---------- assignee: docs@python components: Documentation messages: 121869 nosy: docs@python, v+python priority: normal severity: normal status: open title: subprocess PIPEs are byte streams versions: Python 3.2 _______________________________________ Python tracker <report(a)bugs.python.org> <http://bugs.python.org/issue10481> _______________________________________

4 5

[issue10434] Document the rules for "public names"
by Alexander Belopolsky 01 Aug '13

01 Aug '13

New submission from Alexander Belopolsky <belopolsky(a)users.sourceforge.net>: As discussed in "Breaking undocumented API" thread [1] on python-dev, a definition of "public names" is buried deep in the language reference manual: """ The public names defined by a module are determined by checking the module’s namespace for a variable named __all__; if defined, it must be a sequence of strings which are names defined or imported by that module. The names given in __all__ are all considered public and are required to exist. If __all__ is not defined, the set of public names includes all names found in the module’s namespace which do not begin with an underscore character ('_'). __all__ should contain the entire public API. It is intended to avoid accidentally exporting items that are not part of the API (such as library modules which were imported and used within the module). """ [2] It has been argued that this is not the authoritative definition and alternatives have been suggested such as "any name that does not begin with an underscore except imported modules." mportant for the users and developers of cpython and other python implementations to know what names they can rely upon to stay defined between releases, the rules for "public names" should be documented. I agree that the library manual is a more appropriate place for such documentation. The definition should include the naming conventions and the set of promises that Python makes about public name availability in the future releases. [1] http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2010-November/105490.html [2] http://docs.python.org/reference/simple_stmts.html ---------- assignee: docs@python components: Documentation messages: 121297 nosy: belopolsky, docs@python priority: normal severity: normal stage: needs patch status: open title: Document the rules for "public names" versions: Python 3.2 _______________________________________ Python tracker <report(a)bugs.python.org> <http://bugs.python.org/issue10434> _______________________________________

6 7

[issue8913] Document that datetime.__format__ is datetime.strftime
by Brett Cannon 04 Apr '13

04 Apr '13

New submission from Brett Cannon <brett(a)python.org>: Documenting that would help get people using datetime objects with string.format more. ---------- assignee: docs@python components: Documentation keywords: easy messages: 107179 nosy: brett.cannon, docs@python priority: low severity: normal status: open title: Document that datetime.__format__ is datetime.strftime versions: Python 3.2 _______________________________________ Python tracker <report(a)bugs.python.org> <http://bugs.python.org/issue8913> _______________________________________

12 28

[issue10358] Doc styles for print should only use dark colors
by Fred L. Drake, Jr. 08 Nov '12

08 Nov '12

New submission from Fred L. Drake, Jr. <fdrake(a)acm.org>: The HTML version of the documentation should include style settings for printing that use fairly dark colors, so that printed copies of pages are more readable. Using a printer that reduces colors to grays causes the light colors in code examples (or inlined references to classes and the like) to nearly drop out, making the result very painful to read. ---------- assignee: docs@python components: Documentation keywords: easy messages: 120741 nosy: docs@python, fdrake priority: normal severity: normal stage: needs patch status: open title: Doc styles for print should only use dark colors type: feature request _______________________________________ Python tracker <report(a)bugs.python.org> <http://bugs.python.org/issue10358> _______________________________________

3 3

[issue8996] Add a default role to allow writing bare `len` instead of :func:`len`
by Éric Araujo 27 Oct '12

27 Oct '12

New submission from Éric Araujo <merwok(a)netwok.org>: Following a discussion on IRC: <birkenfeld> I would even prefer having more of just `object` instead of :func:`object` or :class:`object` I think it would be feasible to write a reST role that would use inspect or pydoc to find the type. It would not violate “In the face of ambiguity, refuse the temptation to guess” if it only resolves `somebuiltin` and `some.fully.qualified.name`. Cons: People unfamiliar with reST might confuse ``code`` with `name`; interpreting the role may prove non-trivial (either requiring importing Python module to introspect them, or keeping a mapping of names→types in some file). Thoughts? ---------- assignee: docs@python components: Documentation messages: 107790 nosy: docs@python, merwok priority: normal severity: normal status: open title: Add a default role to allow writing bare `len` instead of :func:`len` type: feature request _______________________________________ Python tracker <report(a)bugs.python.org> <http://bugs.python.org/issue8996> _______________________________________

5 9