Mailman 3 April 2015 - docs

[issue23730] Document return value for ZipFile.extract()
by Martijn Pieters April 13, 2015

April 13, 2015

New submission from Martijn Pieters: The documentation for zipfile.ZipFile.extract() doesn't mention at all that it returns the local path created, either for the directory that the member represents, or the new file created from the zipped data. *Returns the full local path created (a directory or new file)* or similar. ---------- assignee: docs@python components: Documentation messages: 238778 nosy: docs@python, mjpieters priority: normal severity: normal status: open title: Document return value for ZipFile.extract() type: enhancement versions: Python 2.7, Python 3.4, Python 3.5, Python 3.6 _______________________________________ Python tracker <report(a)bugs.python.org> <http://bugs.python.org/issue23730> _______________________________________

4 3

[issue23938] Deprecation of windows xp support missing from whats new
by Zachary Ware April 13, 2015

April 13, 2015

Zachary Ware added the comment: Thanks for the patch! ---------- nosy: +zach.ware _______________________________________ Python tracker <report(a)bugs.python.org> <http://bugs.python.org/issue23938> _______________________________________

1 0

[issue23938] Deprecation of windows xp support missing from whats new
by Roundup Robot April 13, 2015

April 13, 2015

Roundup Robot added the comment: New changeset 24f2c0279120 by Zachary Ware in branch 'default': Closes #23938: List Windows XP as an unsupported platform. https://hg.python.org/cpython/rev/24f2c0279120 ---------- nosy: +python-dev resolution: -> fixed stage: -> resolved status: open -> closed _______________________________________ Python tracker <report(a)bugs.python.org> <http://bugs.python.org/issue23938> _______________________________________

1 0

[issue13814] Document why generators don't support the context management protocol
by Aidan Lowe April 13, 2015

April 13, 2015

Changes by Aidan Lowe <megadude42(a)gmail.com>: ---------- keywords: +patch versions: +Python 3.4 -Python 3.3 Added file: http://bugs.python.org/file38955/design.patch _______________________________________ Python tracker <report(a)bugs.python.org> <http://bugs.python.org/issue13814> _______________________________________

1 0

[issue23938] Deprecation of windows xp support missing from whats new
by Alex Walters April 13, 2015

April 13, 2015

Changes by Alex Walters <tritium-list(a)sdamon.com>: ---------- assignee: -> docs@python components: +Documentation nosy: +docs@python _______________________________________ Python tracker <report(a)bugs.python.org> <http://bugs.python.org/issue23938> _______________________________________

1 0

Re: [docs] Tutorial section on function annotations is out of date re: PEP 484 (issue 23932)
by berker.peksag＠gmail.com April 13, 2015

April 13, 2015

http://bugs.python.org/review/23932/diff/14513/Doc/tutorial/controlflow.rst File Doc/tutorial/controlflow.rst (right): http://bugs.python.org/review/23932/diff/14513/Doc/tutorial/controlflow.rst… Doc/tutorial/controlflow.rst:679: methods (:pep:`484`). It would be better to move the PEP 484 link into a seealso directive. http://bugs.python.org/review/23932/diff/14513/Doc/tutorial/controlflow.rst… Doc/tutorial/controlflow.rst:690: >>> def f(a: str, b: str = 'bar') -> str: On 2015/04/13 17:41:36, Zach Ware wrote: > Can come up with a better example keeping with something referring to the Flying > Circus? Foo and bar are boring and this is Python :) Agreed. spam, ham and eggs examples were fine in my opinion :) http://bugs.python.org/review/23932/

1 0

[issue23932] Tutorial section on function annotations is out of date re: PEP 484
by Zachary Ware April 13, 2015

April 13, 2015

New submission from Zachary Ware: (Brought up by 'Tronster' on docs@) https://docs.python.org/3/tutorial/controlflow.html#function-annotations In light of the PEP 484 and its clear intentions for function annotations, the tutorial section on function annotations is out of date. It should be updated to be clear that function annotations are intended for type hints, and that other uses are no longer encouraged. The example should also use some built-in types in a manner consistent with PEP 484. ---------- assignee: docs@python components: Documentation messages: 240606 nosy: docs@python, gvanrossum, tim.golden, zach.ware priority: normal severity: normal stage: needs patch status: open title: Tutorial section on function annotations is out of date re: PEP 484 versions: Python 3.4, Python 3.5 _______________________________________ Python tracker <report(a)bugs.python.org> <http://bugs.python.org/issue23932> _______________________________________

3 5

[issue23928] SSL wiki page, host name matching, CN and SAN
by Jeffrey Walton April 13, 2015

April 13, 2015

New submission from Jeffrey Walton: The Python wiki page on SSL states (https://wiki.python.org/moin/SSL): To validate that a certificate matches requested site, you need to check commonName field in the subject of the certificate. I don't think its quite correct. Both the IETF and the CA/B Forums deprecated the use of a hostname or IP address in the commonName (CN). All hostnames and IP addresses must be listed in the subjectAlternateName (SAN), and that's where to look for them. Though deprecated, placing a name in the CN is not forbidden. In fact, RFC 6125 states the CN should be used as a "last resort" in Section 6.4.4: Therefore, if and only if the presented identifiers do not include a DNS-ID, SRV-ID, URI-ID, or any application-specific identifier types supported by the client, then the client MAY as a last resort check for a string whose form matches that of a fully qualified DNS domain name in a Common Name field of the subject field (i.e., a CN-ID). Following the advice on the wiki might lead to a Type II error, where an otherwise good certificate is rejected. Its not as bad as accepting a bad certificate, though (by omitting the hostname matching checks). The IETF deprecated the practice of placing a name in the CN in RFC 6125, Section 6.4.4. The CA/Browser Forum deprecated a DNS name in the CN in Baseline Requirements (BR) Section 9.2.2 Subject Common Name Field. ---------- assignee: docs@python components: Documentation messages: 240590 nosy: Jeffrey.Walton, docs@python priority: normal severity: normal status: open title: SSL wiki page, host name matching, CN and SAN type: enhancement _______________________________________ Python tracker <report(a)bugs.python.org> <http://bugs.python.org/issue23928> _______________________________________

2 3

Tutorial section on function annotations is out of date re: PEP 484 (issue 23932)
by zachary.ware＠gmail.com April 13, 2015

April 13, 2015

Reviewers: , http://bugs.python.org/review/23932/diff/14513/Doc/tutorial/controlflow.rst File Doc/tutorial/controlflow.rst (right): http://bugs.python.org/review/23932/diff/14513/Doc/tutorial/controlflow.rst… Doc/tutorial/controlflow.rst:678: Python will use annotations as type hints for static analyzer and overloading Python itself won't use them, though; we're leaving that up to third-party type-checking tools (for now and the foreseeable future). http://bugs.python.org/review/23932/diff/14513/Doc/tutorial/controlflow.rst… Doc/tutorial/controlflow.rst:690: >>> def f(a: str, b: str = 'bar') -> str: Can come up with a better example keeping with something referring to the Flying Circus? Foo and bar are boring and this is Python :) http://bugs.python.org/review/23932/diff/14513/Doc/tutorial/controlflow.rst… Doc/tutorial/controlflow.rst:700: .. warning:: I think this can just be left out, really. Since this is in the tutorial, we don't need to go into all of the nitty-gritty details, just show the syntax and give a link to more information (the PEP link). Please review this at http://bugs.python.org/review/23932/ Affected files: Doc/tutorial/controlflow.rst diff -r 37905786b34b Doc/tutorial/controlflow.rst --- a/Doc/tutorial/controlflow.rst Sun Apr 12 23:24:17 2015 -0500 +++ b/Doc/tutorial/controlflow.rst Mon Apr 13 11:25:56 2015 -0400 @@ -673,11 +673,10 @@ pair: function; annotations single: -> (return annotation assignment) -:ref:`Function annotations <function>` are completely optional, -arbitrary metadata information about user-defined functions. Neither Python -itself nor the standard library use function annotations in any way; this -section just shows the syntax. Third-party projects are free to use function -annotations for documentation, type checking, and other uses. +:ref:`Function annotations <function>` are completely optional metadata +information about user-defined functions. If the annotations are provided, +Python will use annotations as type hints for static analyzer and overloading +methods (:pep:`484`). Annotations are stored in the :attr:`__annotations__` attribute of the function as a dictionary and have no effect on any other part of the function. Parameter @@ -688,14 +687,23 @@ following example has a positional argument, a keyword argument, and the return value annotated with nonsense:: - >>> def f(ham: 42, eggs: int = 'spam') -> "Nothing to see here": + >>> def f(a: str, b: str = 'bar') -> str: ... print("Annotations:", f.__annotations__) - ... print("Arguments:", ham, eggs) + ... print("Arguments:", a, b) + ... return a + b ... - >>> f('wonderful') - Annotations: {'eggs': <class 'int'>, 'return': 'Nothing to see here', 'ham': 42} - Arguments: wonderful spam + >>> f('sample') + Annotations: {'a': <class 'str'>, 'return': <class 'str'>, 'b': <class 'str'>} + Arguments: sample bar + 'samplebar' +.. warning:: + + In Python 3.0-3.5, :ref:`function annotations <function>` are still completely + optional, arbitrary metadata information about user-defined functions. + Neither Python itself nor the standard library use function annotations in + any way; this section just shows the syntax. Third-party projects are free to + use function annotations for documentation, type checking, and other uses. .. _tut-codingstyle:

1 0

[issue23915] traceback set with BaseException.with_traceback() overwritten on raise
by A. Jesse Jiryu Davis April 13, 2015

April 13, 2015

A. Jesse Jiryu Davis added the comment: I've had a very hard time adding to the doc in a way that elucidates rather than further obfuscating; see if you like this patch. ---------- keywords: +patch nosy: +emptysquare Added file: http://bugs.python.org/file38916/issue23915.patch _______________________________________ Python tracker <report(a)bugs.python.org> <http://bugs.python.org/issue23915> _______________________________________

1 0