And here:

is the source to look at -- and the repo to do a PR against.


On Wed, Sep 23, 2020 at 3:34 PM Chris Angelico <> wrote:
On Thu, Sep 24, 2020 at 8:29 AM Henk-Jaap Wagenaar
<> wrote:
> I noticed a sentence that was not completed in PEP 637. Though I have made (pretty minor) contributions to CPython and some other things, it isn't entirely clear to me whether it would be appropriate for me to submit an issue or pull request for this, and what the general policy is?
> does not make it any clearer to me, I guess it is kinda the Wild West and depends on the PEP/what the change is? Would it be worth clarifying this?
> Secondly, I wasn't 100% sure this make was a rendering mistake or in the source. Would it be possible/an idea to include a link to the source (like the Python documentation does)?
> [I am sure people will be curious what the mistake was:
> >>> a[3]       # returns the fourth element of a
> has the comment unfinished. I guess it should say list or something similar.]

Actually it's returning the fourth element of "the thing in the
variable named 'a'", so it's not the English article. If you feel
that's unclear, you could propose a change that renames the variable,

Pull requests are absolutely appropriate for simple changes,
copyediting, etc. You'll be asked to sign the licensing agreement, but
for extremely tiny changes (say, just fixing a missed bit of
punctuation), we can override the CLA bot and merge the change anyway.

Python-ideas mailing list --
To unsubscribe send an email to
Message archived at
Code of Conduct:

Christopher Barker, PhD

Python Language Consulting
  - Teaching
  - Scientific Software Development
  - Desktop GUI and Web Development
  - wxPython, numpy, scipy, Cython