Mailman 3 June 2019 - docs

[issue13875] cmd: no user documentation
by anatoly techtonik 17 Nov '20

17 Nov '20

New submission from anatoly techtonik <techtonik(a)gmail.com>: http://docs.python.org/library/cmd.html# Documentation for cmd module is poor to explain the value of this module to users. Intro is too abstract - phrase "simple framework for writing line-oriented command interpreters" doesn't mean much. Perhaps word "interactive" is missing? So, there is no part explaining the what cmd does exactly (intro fails) and no part explaining the main principle - How exactly does this framework allows to do this in a simple way? (I guess reference part under 'Cmd objects -> Cmd.cmdloop([intro]) -> p[4]` does that, but it is not the place you'd usually expect this info. At the very least what could be done is a link to Doug's tutorial http://www.doughellmann.com/PyMOTW/cmd/ ---------- assignee: docs@python components: Documentation messages: 152010 nosy: docs@python, techtonik priority: normal severity: normal status: open title: cmd: no user documentation _______________________________________ Python tracker <report(a)bugs.python.org> <http://bugs.python.org/issue13875> _______________________________________

4 6

[issue17939] Misleading information about slice assignment in docs
by Stefan Chrobot 17 Nov '20

17 Nov '20

New submission from Stefan Chrobot: http://docs.python.org/3/reference/simple_stmts.html#assignment-statements The docs says: "If the target is a slicing: The primary expression in the reference is evaluated. It should yield a mutable sequence object (such as a list). The assigned object should be a sequence object of the same type." This seems wrong, because the assigned object can be any iterable: a = [4, 5, 6] a[0:0] = range(1, 4) # a is now [1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6] ---------- assignee: docs@python components: Documentation messages: 188738 nosy: docs@python, stefanchrobot priority: normal severity: normal status: open title: Misleading information about slice assignment in docs type: enhancement versions: Python 3.3 _______________________________________ Python tracker <report(a)bugs.python.org> <http://bugs.python.org/issue17939> _______________________________________

4 3

[issue9538] Replace confusing pseudoname 'object' in special methods section.
by Terry J. Reedy 17 Nov '20

17 Nov '20

New submission from Terry J. Reedy <tjreedy(a)udel.edu>: In 3.3. Special method names, 'object' is used as a pseudo class name to prefix all the special method entries. This conflicts with the usual two Python meanings. 1. 'object' is the name of a specific class. So the entry for object.__getattribute__(self, name) says to avoid circularity by calling object.__getattribute__(self, name), which looks circular and requires a bit a mental work by the reader to properly understand. Ditto for object.__setattr__(self, name, value) calling object.__setattr__(self, name, value) 2. Non-specifically, 'object' is usually understood to mean any Python object, not just a class. But the signatures as written require that 'object' specifically be a class and 'object' does not convey that. So for both reasons, I propose that the pseudoname 'object' be replaces with 'class' or 'someclass' ---------- assignee: docs@python components: Documentation messages: 113194 nosy: docs@python, georg.brandl, terry.reedy priority: normal severity: normal stage: needs patch status: open title: Replace confusing pseudoname 'object' in special methods section. versions: Python 3.2 _______________________________________ Python tracker <report(a)bugs.python.org> <http://bugs.python.org/issue9538> _______________________________________

5 8

[issue13561] os.listdir documentation should mention surrogateescape
by Michael Foord 16 Nov '20

16 Nov '20

New submission from Michael Foord <michael(a)voidspace.org.uk>: Where os.listdir encounters undecodable bytes from the filesystem it uses the surrogateescape handler. As the resulting strings are invalid they can't be encoded without an errorhandler, and so can't be printed (for example). This should be documented. ---------- assignee: docs@python components: Documentation messages: 149070 nosy: docs@python, michael.foord priority: normal severity: normal stage: needs patch status: open title: os.listdir documentation should mention surrogateescape versions: Python 3.3 _______________________________________ Python tracker <report(a)bugs.python.org> <http://bugs.python.org/issue13561> _______________________________________

5 6

[issue14338] urllib2 HowTo for overriding post/3xx behavior.
by beeNuts 16 Nov '20

16 Nov '20

New submission from beeNuts <jeff.adams(a)linux.com>: Issue #14144, with the title "urllib2 HTTPRedirectHandler not forwarding POST data in redirect" was recently closed with these comments: "This could be cookbook recipe style example, if it's utility value is high. I am closing this issue as I feel that the requirement may not be addressed by a change. If there is patch for HowTo, we can tackle that in another issue. Thank you for contribution." The decision that documents on this issue were preferable to a patch seems like a fair compromise, especially considering that the RFC is decidedly ambiguous.I was wondering if the HowTo would be forthcoming? It seems to me that the value/utility would certainly be high. I'd submit it myself but I'm so new to Python that I don't trust my ability to do it correctly. It's something I would find highly useful, though. ---------- assignee: docs@python components: Documentation messages: 156080 nosy: beerNuts, docs@python priority: normal severity: normal status: open title: urllib2 HowTo for overriding post/3xx behavior. versions: Python 3.3 _______________________________________ Python tracker <report(a)bugs.python.org> <http://bugs.python.org/issue14338> _______________________________________

4 4

[issue17437] Difference between open and codecs.open
by Giampaolo Rodola' 15 Nov '20

15 Nov '20

New submission from Giampaolo Rodola': In Python 2 the distinction between open() and codes.open() was clear because 'encoding' and 'errors' args were provided by codecs.open only. This is no longer the case in Python 3 since both args are provided also by open(). I'm probably missing something but regardless I think codecs.open doc [1] should be more clear as to when and why (say) codecs.open(file, encoding='utf8', errors='ignore') should be preferred over open(file, encoding='utf8', errors='ignore'). [1] http://docs.python.org/3/library/codecs.html#codecs.open ---------- assignee: docs@python components: Documentation messages: 184303 nosy: docs@python, ezio.melotti, giampaolo.rodola priority: normal severity: normal status: open title: Difference between open and codecs.open versions: Python 3.2, Python 3.3, Python 3.4 _______________________________________ Python tracker <report(a)bugs.python.org> <http://bugs.python.org/issue17437> _______________________________________

3 2

[issue27119] `compile` doesn't compile into an AST object as specified
by Franklin? Lee 15 Nov '20

15 Nov '20

New submission from Franklin? Lee: >From `compile`'s doc: "Compile the source into a code or AST object." The docs don't say how to compile into an AST object with `compile`, though. As it says later: "If you want to parse Python code into its AST representation, see ast.parse()." I checked 3.4-3.2, 3.0, 2.7, and 2.6. Versions before 3.4, and version 2.6, are missing the `ast.parse` line, but still have the first line. ---------- assignee: docs@python components: Documentation messages: 266311 nosy: docs@python, leewz priority: normal severity: normal status: open title: `compile` doesn't compile into an AST object as specified type: behavior versions: Python 2.7, Python 3.2, Python 3.3, Python 3.4, Python 3.5, Python 3.6 _______________________________________ Python tracker <report(a)bugs.python.org> <http://bugs.python.org/issue27119> _______________________________________

4 4

[issue10709] Misc/AIX-NOTES needs updating
by Antoine Pitrou 11 Nov '20

11 Nov '20

New submission from Antoine Pitrou <pitrou(a)free.fr>: Sébastien, would you like to provide an updated version of that file? The current contents look hopelessly outdated. ---------- assignee: docs@python components: Documentation messages: 124024 nosy: docs@python, pitrou, sable priority: normal severity: normal stage: needs patch status: open title: Misc/AIX-NOTES needs updating versions: Python 2.7, Python 3.1, Python 3.2 _______________________________________ Python tracker <report(a)bugs.python.org> <http://bugs.python.org/issue10709> _______________________________________

5 14

[issue15034] tutorial should use best practices in user defined execeptions section
by R. David Murray 11 Nov '20

11 Nov '20

New submission from R. David Murray <rdmurray(a)bitdance.com>: And I wish I knew what those were. ---------- assignee: docs@python components: Documentation messages: 162513 nosy: docs@python, r.david.murray priority: normal severity: normal stage: needs patch status: open title: tutorial should use best practices in user defined execeptions section type: behavior versions: Python 2.7, Python 3.2, Python 3.3 _______________________________________ Python tracker <report(a)bugs.python.org> <http://bugs.python.org/issue15034> _______________________________________

11 16

[issue34365] datetime's documentation refers to "comparison [...] falling back to the default scheme of comparing object addresses"
by Kevin Norris 10 Nov '20

10 Nov '20

New submission from Kevin Norris <nykevin.norris(a)gmail.com>: The 3.x datetime documentation contains the following footnote: > In other words, date1 < date2 if and only if date1.toordinal() < date2.toordinal(). In order to stop comparison from falling back to the default scheme of comparing object addresses, date comparison normally raises TypeError if the other comparand isn’t also a date object. However, NotImplemented is returned instead if the other comparand has a timetuple() attribute. This hook gives other kinds of date objects a chance at implementing mixed-type comparison. If not, when a date object is compared to an object of a different type, TypeError is raised unless the comparison is == or !=. The latter cases return False or True, respectively. But in 3.x, comparison no longer falls back to comparing object addresses. Also, some of the comments on issue 8005 seem to suggest that this footnote is not actually true in 3.x (aside from the first sentence, of course). But regardless, the footnote should not refer to a long dead interpreter behavior as if it were still around. ---------- assignee: docs@python components: Documentation messages: 323314 nosy: Kevin.Norris, docs@python priority: normal severity: normal status: open title: datetime's documentation refers to "comparison [...] falling back to the default scheme of comparing object addresses" versions: Python 3.4, Python 3.5, Python 3.6, Python 3.7, Python 3.8 _______________________________________ Python tracker <report(a)bugs.python.org> <https://bugs.python.org/issue34365> _______________________________________

7 12