Mailman 3 November 2012 - docs

[issue16399] argparse: append action with default list adds to list instead of overriding
by R. David Murray Nov. 4, 2012

Nov. 4, 2012

R. David Murray added the comment: This behavior is inherited from optparse. I think it is more-or-less intentional, and in any case it is of long enough standing that I don't think we can change it. We documented it for optparse in another issue, but I don't think we made the corresponding improvement to the argparse docs. ---------- assignee: -> docs@python components: +Documentation nosy: +bethard, docs@python, r.david.murray versions: +Python 3.2, Python 3.3, Python 3.4 _______________________________________ Python tracker <report(a)bugs.python.org> <http://bugs.python.org/issue16399> _______________________________________

1 0

[issue16304] re: Match Objects always have a boolean value of True
by Vladimir Rutsky Nov. 4, 2012

Nov. 4, 2012

New submission from Vladimir Rutsky: re module documentation says: Match Objects always have a boolean value of :const:`True`, so that you can test whether e.g. :func:`match` resulted in a match with a simple if statement. which is confusing - matched objects have boolean value True, doesn't matched - False. ---------- assignee: docs@python components: Documentation messages: 173595 nosy: docs@python, vrutsky priority: normal severity: normal status: open title: re: Match Objects always have a boolean value of True versions: Python 2.7 _______________________________________ Python tracker <report(a)bugs.python.org> <http://bugs.python.org/issue16304> _______________________________________

8 9

[issue16355] inspect.getcomments() does not work in the interactive shell
by R. David Murray Nov. 4, 2012

Nov. 4, 2012

R. David Murray added the comment: It doesn't matter whether it is a bug or not (though it is not in the situation I described). The point is that a working program would stop working. That is the kind of breakage our backward compatibility policy is designed to protect against. ---------- _______________________________________ Python tracker <report(a)bugs.python.org> <http://bugs.python.org/issue16355> _______________________________________

1 0

[issue16048] Tutorial-classes-remarks: replace paragragh
by Terry J. Reedy Nov. 4, 2012

Nov. 4, 2012

New submission from Terry J. Reedy: (from python-list thread "data attributes override method attributes?") "9.4. Random Remarks Data attributes override method attributes with the same name; to avoid accidental name conflicts, which may cause hard-to-find bugs in large programs, it is wise to use some kind of convention that minimizes the chance of conflicts. Possible conventions include capitalizing method names, prefixing data attribute names with a small unique string (perhaps just an underscore), or using verbs for methods and nouns for data attributes." The first semi-sentence is wrong. Within a class or instance attribute space, later assignments replace earlier ones. Between them, instance attributes (usually) override class attributes. The exceptions are (some? all?) special methods. One suggestion on the thread is to replace the clause with 'Instance attributes override class attributes', as that is the apparent intent, but the exception needs to be noted. The suggested Method and _data conventions are wrong in that they contradict PEP8 style. Peter Otten suggested that the convention suggestion be shortened to "To avoid name conflicts consider using verbs for methods and nouns for data attributes". ---------- assignee: docs@python components: Documentation messages: 171316 nosy: docs@python, terry.reedy priority: normal severity: normal status: open title: Tutorial-classes-remarks: replace paragragh versions: Python 2.7, Python 3.2, Python 3.3 _______________________________________ Python tracker <report(a)bugs.python.org> <http://bugs.python.org/issue16048> _______________________________________

6 8

Re: [docs] Document that datetime.__format__ is datetime.strftime (issue 8913)
by ezio.melotti＠gmail.com Nov. 4, 2012

Nov. 4, 2012

http://bugs.python.org/review/8913/diff/6442/Doc/library/datetime.rst File Doc/library/datetime.rst (right): http://bugs.python.org/review/8913/diff/6442/Doc/library/datetime.rst#newco… Doc/library/datetime.rst:616: 'John in 2002' I'm not sure what 'John in 2002' means. I would re-use one of the previous examples to show the symmetry between strftime and format. http://bugs.python.org/review/8913/

1 0

[issue16394] Reducing tee() memory footprint
by Ramchandra Apte Nov. 4, 2012

Nov. 4, 2012

Changes by Ramchandra Apte <maniandram01(a)gmail.com>: ---------- title: Improving tee() memory footprint -> Reducing tee() memory footprint _______________________________________ Python tracker <report(a)bugs.python.org> <http://bugs.python.org/issue16394> _______________________________________

1 0

[issue11842] slice.indices with negative step and default stop
by Mark Lawrence Nov. 4, 2012

Nov. 4, 2012

Mark Lawrence added the comment: I think this should be closed as slice.indices behaves exactly as I expect it to, and the returned values are for any sequence and not just range(). ---------- nosy: +BreamoreBoy _______________________________________ Python tracker <report(a)bugs.python.org> <http://bugs.python.org/issue11842> _______________________________________

1 0

[issue16355] inspect.getcomments() does not work in the interactive shell
by Ezio Melotti Nov. 4, 2012

Nov. 4, 2012

Ezio Melotti added the comment: That's arguably a bug though. If the pragma was critical the program will silently do the wrong thing by ignoring an existing pragma when the source is missing (e.g. in production, even after passing all the tests locally). ---------- _______________________________________ Python tracker <report(a)bugs.python.org> <http://bugs.python.org/issue16355> _______________________________________

1 0

[issue15125] argparse: positional arguments containing - in name not handled well
by Éric Araujo Nov. 4, 2012

Nov. 4, 2012

Éric Araujo added the comment: Will apply the doc patches soon™ and wait for Steven’s feedback about the 3.4 behavior change. ---------- _______________________________________ Python tracker <report(a)bugs.python.org> <http://bugs.python.org/issue15125> _______________________________________

1 0

Add examples for open’s new opener argument (issue 13424)
by storchaka＠gmail.com Nov. 3, 2012

Nov. 3, 2012

http://bugs.python.org/review/13424/diff/6494/Doc/library/functions.rst File Doc/library/functions.rst (right): http://bugs.python.org/review/13424/diff/6494/Doc/library/functions.rst#new… Doc/library/functions.rst:938: The following example is an alternative implementation for opening files I doubt that an alternative implementation is a good usage example. First, this violates the "one obvious way" principle. Second, this does not justify the adding of the new parameter to already complicated open(), because you can do this without it. http://bugs.python.org/review/13424/diff/6494/Doc/library/functions.rst#new… Doc/library/functions.rst:959: ... dir_fd = os.open(dirname, os.O_RDONLY) Here is a file descriptor leak. http://bugs.python.org/review/13424/

1 0