Mailman 3 February 2012 - docs

[issue12828] xml.dom.minicompat is not documented
by Sandro Tosi Nov. 12, 2013

Nov. 12, 2013

New submission from Sandro Tosi <sandro.tosi(a)gmail.com>: There's no documentation for xml.dom.minicompat - it's a public module and it should have (even a brief) doc. ---------- assignee: docs@python components: Documentation messages: 142845 nosy: docs@python, sandro.tosi priority: normal severity: normal status: open title: xml.dom.minicompat is not documented versions: Python 2.7, Python 3.2, Python 3.3 _______________________________________ Python tracker <report(a)bugs.python.org> <http://bugs.python.org/issue12828> _______________________________________

3 3

[issue13515] Consistent documentation practices for security concerns and considerations
by Nick Coghlan Oct. 21, 2013

Oct. 21, 2013

New submission from Nick Coghlan <ncoghlan(a)gmail.com>: This issue proposes that we adopt and apply some standard practices when documenting modules that have potential security implications and other cross-cutting errors that may affect multiple interfaces within the module. Accordingly, the main target is the "Documenting Python" meta-docs, proposing the addition of a new subsection to the Style Guide, with an update to the subprocess module documentation serving as the exemplar of a new recommended style: ====================== 2.6 Security Considerations (and Other Concerns) ------------------------------------------------ Some modules provided with Python are inherently exposed to security issues (e.g. shell injection vulnerabilities) due to the purpose of the module (e.g. subprocess invocation). Littering the documentation of these modules with red warning boxes for problems that are due to the task at hand, rather than specifically to Python's support for that task, doesn't make for a good reading experience. Instead, these security concerns should be gathered into a dedicated "Security Considerations" section within the module's documentation, and cross-referenced from the documentation of affected interfaces with in-line text similar to "Please refer to the :ref:`security-considerations` section for important information on how to avoid common mistakes". Similarly, if there is a common error that affects many interfaces in a module (e.g. OS level pipe buffers filling up and stalling child processes), these can be documented in a "Common Errors" section and cross-referenced rather than repeated for every affected interface. ====================== (based on the thread at http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2011-December/114717.html) ---------- assignee: docs@python components: Documentation messages: 148710 nosy: docs@python, ncoghlan priority: normal severity: normal stage: needs patch status: open title: Consistent documentation practices for security concerns and considerations _______________________________________ Python tracker <report(a)bugs.python.org> <http://bugs.python.org/issue13515> _______________________________________

9 27

[issue11120] threading.Thread.daemon Documentation Incomplete
by cardinalbiggles Oct. 13, 2013

Oct. 13, 2013

New submission from cardinalbiggles <jmandersen(a)gmail.com>: In the threading module, the documentation for Thread.isDaemon()/Thread.setDaemon() indicates they are the old API for Thread.daemon, which does not indicate the version in which it was introduced (2.6 I believe). Additionally, the documentation for Thread.setDaemon() should at least include the daemonic parameter, if not the full usage documentation for those targeting older versions. Targeting Python 2.4, and being unable to (as) efficiently navigate the old documentation site, I have come to rely on the various 'Changed/New in version 2.X' messages in the current documentation. This caused some confusion on my part. ---------- assignee: docs@python components: Documentation messages: 127927 nosy: cardinalbiggles, docs@python priority: normal severity: normal status: open title: threading.Thread.daemon Documentation Incomplete type: feature request versions: Python 2.7 _______________________________________ Python tracker <report(a)bugs.python.org> <http://bugs.python.org/issue11120> _______________________________________

2 1

[issue13744] raw byte strings are described in a confusing way
by Barry A. Warsaw Oct. 13, 2013

Oct. 13, 2013

New submission from Barry A. Warsaw <barry(a)python.org>: The lexical analysis documentation says this: http://docs.python.org/py3k/reference/lexical_analysis.html?highlight=raw%2… "Bytes literals are always prefixed with 'b' or 'B';..." "Both string and bytes literals may optionally be prefixed with a letter 'r' or 'R';..." But that would lead you to believe that to get raw byte strings you should use rb"foo". In fact, that's a SyntaxError in Python 2.6+ and Python 3. What *does* work though is br"foo". Either Python should accept both spellings (harder) or the documentation should make it clear that the 'b' must preceded the 'r'. ---------- assignee: docs@python components: Documentation messages: 150936 nosy: barry, docs@python priority: normal severity: normal status: open title: raw byte strings are described in a confusing way versions: Python 2.7, Python 3.1, Python 3.2, Python 3.3 _______________________________________ Python tracker <report(a)bugs.python.org> <http://bugs.python.org/issue13744> _______________________________________

7 11

[issue13915] Update Tutorial 6.1.3 for PEP 3145
by Terry J. Reedy Oct. 12, 2013

Oct. 12, 2013

New submission from Terry J. Reedy <tjreedy(a)udel.edu>: http://docs.python.org/py3k/tutorial/modules.html#compiled-python-files needs to be updated for 3.2+ to reflect http://python.org/dev/peps/pep-3147/ The first sentence is still technically correct, but finding x.pyc in the same directory as x.py is now an anomaly, so that sentence, revised, should be near the bottom. Otherwise, the text should say that the default is to put x.<version>.pyc in __pycache__, where <version> is, for instance, 'cpython-32'. Note that this allows other implementations and other versions of cpython to use the same .py file. I do not know if there is anywhere else that this info is or should be. Using Python?. ---------- assignee: docs@python components: Documentation messages: 152415 nosy: docs@python, terry.reedy priority: normal severity: normal stage: needs patch status: open title: Update Tutorial 6.1.3 for PEP 3145 type: behavior versions: Python 3.2, Python 3.3 _______________________________________ Python tracker <report(a)bugs.python.org> <http://bugs.python.org/issue13915> _______________________________________

5 5

[issue13833] No documentation for PyStructSequence
by Torsten Landschoff Oct. 12, 2013

Oct. 12, 2013

New submission from Torsten Landschoff <t.landschoff(a)gmx.net>: While writing a C extension I wanted to create a namedtuple like object as os.statvfs and friends do. I was unable to find a simple way to do this from C and was wondering how the posixmodule does it. It turned out that there is a PyStructSequence type for this. It would be nice to have it documented. First draft for the documentation update attached. ---------- assignee: docs@python components: Documentation files: structseq_doc.diff keywords: patch messages: 151657 nosy: docs@python, torsten priority: normal severity: normal status: open title: No documentation for PyStructSequence type: enhancement versions: Python 3.3 Added file: http://bugs.python.org/file24280/structseq_doc.diff _______________________________________ Python tracker <report(a)bugs.python.org> <http://bugs.python.org/issue13833> _______________________________________

3 2

[issue13905] Built-in Types Comparisons should mention rich comparison methods
by Catalin Iacob Oct. 12, 2013

Oct. 12, 2013

New submission from Catalin Iacob <iacobcatalin(a)gmail.com>: In 2.7 the Comparisons section of stdtypes.rst only talks about __cmp__ and never mentions the rich comparison methods: "Instances of a class normally compare as non-equal unless the class defines the __cmp__() method. Refer to Basic customization) for information on the use of this method to effect object comparisons." The first sentence is false, instances can also compare as equal if they define __eq__. And since __cmp__ is gone in Python3, I think the rich comparison methods should at least be mentioned, or even emphasized over __cmp__ to help people write more forward compatible code. ---------- assignee: docs@python components: Documentation messages: 152254 nosy: catalin.iacob, docs@python priority: normal severity: normal status: open title: Built-in Types Comparisons should mention rich comparison methods type: enhancement versions: Python 2.7 _______________________________________ Python tracker <report(a)bugs.python.org> <http://bugs.python.org/issue13905> _______________________________________

2 2

[issue13026] Dis module - documentation of MAKE_FUNCTION
by Arnaud Delobelle Oct. 12, 2013

Oct. 12, 2013

New submission from Arnaud Delobelle <arnodel(a)googlemail.com>: The description of the opcode MAKE_FUNCTION in the dis module document is out of date. It still describes the 2.X version of the opcode: """ MAKE_FUNCTION(argc) Pushes a new function object on the stack. TOS is the code associated with the function. The function object is defined to have argc default parameters, which are found below TOS. """ According to http://hg.python.org/cpython/file/default/Python/ceval.c#l2684: 2684 int posdefaults = oparg & 0xff; 2685 int kwdefaults = (oparg>>8) & 0xff; 2686 int num_annotations = (oparg >> 16) & 0x7fff; So the documentation should read something like """ MAKE_FUNCTION(argc) Pushes a new function object on the stack. TOS is the code associated with the function. The function object is defined to have argc & 0xFF positional default parameters, (argc >> 8) & 0xFF keyword only default parameters, and (argc >> 16) & 0x7FFF parameter annotations which are push below TOS in this order. For each keyword only default, the name of the parameter is pushed just below its default value. On top of all the annotations, a tuple is pushed listing the parameter names for these annotations. """ ---------- assignee: docs@python components: Documentation messages: 144393 nosy: arno, docs@python, terry.reedy priority: normal severity: normal status: open title: Dis module - documentation of MAKE_FUNCTION versions: Python 3.3 _______________________________________ Python tracker <report(a)bugs.python.org> <http://bugs.python.org/issue13026> _______________________________________

4 8

[issue13203] Doc: say id() is only useful for existing objects
by Terry J. Reedy Oct. 12, 2013

Oct. 12, 2013

New submission from Terry J. Reedy <tjreedy(a)udel.edu>: Newbies too often do something like (3.2.2, ) >>> id(getattr(x, 'pop')) == id(x.pop) True and get confused by the (invalid) result, whereas >>> a,b=getattr(x, 'pop'),x.pop >>> id(a)==id(b) False works properly. I think we should add a sentence or two or three to the id() doc, such as Since a newly created argument object is either destroyed or becomes inaccessible before the function returns, *id(obj)* is only useful and valid if *obj* exists prior to the call and therefore after its return. The value of an expression such as *id(666)== id(667)* is arbitrary and meaningless. The id of the first int object might or might not be reused for the second one. ---------- assignee: docs@python components: Documentation messages: 145743 nosy: docs@python, terry.reedy priority: normal severity: normal status: open title: Doc: say id() is only useful for existing objects versions: Python 2.7, Python 3.2, Python 3.3 _______________________________________ Python tracker <report(a)bugs.python.org> <http://bugs.python.org/issue13203> _______________________________________

6 10

[issue11009] urllib.splituser is not documented
by anatoly techtonik Oct. 8, 2013

Oct. 8, 2013

New submission from anatoly techtonik <techtonik(a)gmail.com>: I'm studying old code that uses urllib.splituser() call and can't find description of this function in Python 2.6.6 docs. ---------- assignee: docs@python components: Documentation messages: 127047 nosy: docs@python, techtonik priority: normal severity: normal status: open title: urllib.splituser is not documented versions: Python 2.6 _______________________________________ Python tracker <report(a)bugs.python.org> <http://bugs.python.org/issue11009> _______________________________________

6 8