Mailman 3 June 2018 - docs

[issue33745] 3.7.0b5 changes the line number of empty functions with docstrings
by Ned Deily 10 Jun '18

10 Jun '18

Ned Deily <nad(a)python.org> added the comment: The 3.7 What's New has been updated as Nick suggested. Thanks, Nick, and thanks, Ned, for bringing it up! ---------- priority: deferred blocker -> resolution: -> fixed stage: patch review -> resolved status: open -> closed _______________________________________ Python tracker <report(a)bugs.python.org> <https://bugs.python.org/issue33745> _______________________________________

1 0

[issue33745] 3.7.0b5 changes the line number of empty functions with docstrings
by miss-islington 10 Jun '18

10 Jun '18

miss-islington <mariatta.wijaya+miss-islington(a)gmail.com> added the comment: New changeset 14a190c88273fb22d9439bbed394f19f21e8a0f9 by Miss Islington (bot) in branch '3.7': bpo-33745: Add What's New for empty function docstring change. (GH-7611) https://github.com/python/cpython/commit/14a190c88273fb22d9439bbed394f19f21… ---------- nosy: +miss-islington _______________________________________ Python tracker <report(a)bugs.python.org> <https://bugs.python.org/issue33745> _______________________________________

1 0

[issue33745] 3.7.0b5 changes the line number of empty functions with docstrings
by miss-islington 10 Jun '18

10 Jun '18

Change by miss-islington <mariatta.wijaya+miss-islington(a)gmail.com>: ---------- pull_requests: +7237 _______________________________________ Python tracker <report(a)bugs.python.org> <https://bugs.python.org/issue33745> _______________________________________

1 0

[issue33745] 3.7.0b5 changes the line number of empty functions with docstrings
by Ned Deily 10 Jun '18

10 Jun '18

Ned Deily <nad(a)python.org> added the comment: New changeset 12c6cdf4d16078aa09de32a39193c8161177b39d by Ned Deily in branch 'master': bpo-33745: Add What's New for empty function docstring change. (GH-7611) https://github.com/python/cpython/commit/12c6cdf4d16078aa09de32a39193c81611… ---------- _______________________________________ Python tracker <report(a)bugs.python.org> <https://bugs.python.org/issue33745> _______________________________________

1 0

[issue33745] 3.7.0b5 changes the line number of empty functions with docstrings
by Ned Deily 10 Jun '18

10 Jun '18

Change by Ned Deily <nad(a)python.org>: ---------- keywords: +patch pull_requests: +7236 stage: -> patch review _______________________________________ Python tracker <report(a)bugs.python.org> <https://bugs.python.org/issue33745> _______________________________________

1 0

[issue33573] statistics.median does not work with ordinal scale, add doc
by Tal Einat 10 Jun '18

10 Jun '18

Tal Einat <taleinat(a)gmail.com> added the comment: PR ready for review. ---------- nosy: +taleinat _______________________________________ Python tracker <report(a)bugs.python.org> <https://bugs.python.org/issue33573> _______________________________________

1 0

[issue33573] statistics.median does not work with ordinal scale, add doc
by Tal Einat 10 Jun '18

10 Jun '18

Change by Tal Einat <taleinat(a)gmail.com>: ---------- keywords: +patch pull_requests: +7209 stage: needs patch -> patch review _______________________________________ Python tracker <report(a)bugs.python.org> <https://bugs.python.org/issue33573> _______________________________________

1 0

[issue32400] inspect.isdatadescriptor fasle negative
by Lior Cohen 10 Jun '18

10 Jun '18

New submission from Lior Cohen <chnlior(a)gmail.com>: According to the c code in Include/descrobject.h #define PyDescr_IsData(d) (Py_TYPE(d)->tp_descr_set != NULL) and according to the "data model" chapter, a data descriptor is an object who has __set__ and /or __delete__. the "inspect.isdatadescriptor" checks for existence of __get__ and __set__ which IMHO is wrong. an object with __set__/__delete__ only will return falsely False (should be True). This is related to @Serhiy Storchaka comment in issue 26103 opened by @Aaron Hall. ---------- assignee: docs@python components: Documentation, Library (Lib) messages: 308895 nosy: chnlior, docs@python priority: normal severity: normal status: open title: inspect.isdatadescriptor fasle negative type: behavior versions: Python 3.6 _______________________________________ Python tracker <report(a)bugs.python.org> <https://bugs.python.org/issue32400> _______________________________________

4 5

[issue33814] exec() maybe has a memory leak
by Dan Snider 09 Jun '18

09 Jun '18

New submission from Dan Snider <mr.assume.away(a)gmail.com>: Sort of because I'm really not sure if it's working as intended or not. When I found this out today, I noticed that the documentation of `exec` has been updated since the last time I saw it, which is good, but it still leaves much to be desired. Specifically, I don't feel it does enough to explain the supposed justification for `exec`'s ability to very easily trigger a catastrophic memory leak someone unfamiliar with the code they're working on may never have the patience (if not time) to track down.. An illustration: import itertools import sys import weakref def noleak(): def outer(): from itertools import repeat as reeeee def f(): return reeeee(1, 1) return f f = outer() c = sys.getrefcount(f) return c, weakref.ref(f), sys.getrefcount(itertools.repeat) def leaks(): ns = {} co = ('from itertools import repeat as reeeee\n' 'def f(): return reeeee(1, 1)') pre = sys.getrefcount(ns) exec(co, ns) pos = sys.getrefcount(ns) return (pre, pos), weakref.ref(ns['f']), sys.getrefcount(itertools.repeat) for i in range(10): leaks() for i in range(10): noleak() Perhaps I'm wrong in thinking that this is behaving as intended and it actually is a bug. Starting from builtin_exec_impl I got as far as _PyFrame_New_NoTrack before I threw up my hands and decided this is something for someone else. If `exec` with only a `globals` argument is indeed working as intended, I still think it's ridiculous that every item added to that dict has an "extra", non-obvious reference count that is impossible to vanquish of from within Python. I intuited leaving `locals` blank will do what usually happens when functions take optional arguments, and *usually* that is *not* the triggering of a "hidden" memory leak. Perhaps the only solution here is to deprecate `exec` accepting `globals` and `locals` as optional arguments. ---------- assignee: docs@python components: Documentation, Interpreter Core messages: 319157 nosy: bup, docs@python priority: normal severity: normal status: open title: exec() maybe has a memory leak versions: Python 3.6, Python 3.7 _______________________________________ Python tracker <report(a)bugs.python.org> <https://bugs.python.org/issue33814> _______________________________________

4 4

[issue33766] Grammar Incongruence
by Terry J. Reedy 09 Jun '18

09 Jun '18

Change by Terry J. Reedy <tjreedy(a)udel.edu>: ---------- resolution: -> fixed stage: patch review -> resolved status: open -> closed _______________________________________ Python tracker <report(a)bugs.python.org> <https://bugs.python.org/issue33766> _______________________________________

1 0