[issue30449] Improve __slots__ datamodel documentation

Change by Cheryl Sabella : -- resolution: -> fixed stage: patch review -> resolved status: open -> closed ___ Python tracker ___

[issue30449] Improve __slots__ datamodel documentation

Mariatta Wijaya added the comment: New changeset 6eab93cfe5ee08a6168e5bb69474e461cc7ac535 by Mariatta (Miss Islington (bot)) in branch '3.6': bpo-30449: Improve __slots__ documentation (GH-1819)

[issue30449] Improve __slots__ datamodel documentation

Mariatta Wijaya added the comment: Yes I think we can backport this to 3.6 and 2.7. -- ___ Python tracker ___

[issue30449] Improve __slots__ datamodel documentation

Change by miss-islington : -- keywords: +patch pull_requests: +5590 stage: backport needed -> patch review ___ Python tracker

[issue30449] Improve __slots__ datamodel documentation

Change by Mariatta Wijaya : -- stage: patch review -> backport needed ___ Python tracker ___

[issue30449] Improve __slots__ datamodel documentation

Mariatta Wijaya added the comment: We can't auto backport to 2.7 because of conflict. Aaron can you prepare the backport PR? -- ___ Python tracker

[issue30449] Improve __slots__ datamodel documentation

Cheryl Sabella added the comment: Mariatta, Do you think this one needs to be backported? You had originally added the labels on the pull request, then removed them. I wasn't sure if that was needed before being able to close this. Thanks! -- nosy: +Mariatta

[issue30449] Improve __slots__ datamodel documentation

Change by Raymond Hettinger : -- assignee: rhettinger -> ___ Python tracker ___

[issue30449] Improve __slots__ datamodel documentation

Cheryl Sabella added the comment: It looks like this documentation patch was applied to master. Does it need to be backported to 3.6 and 2.7 for the issue to be closed? Thanks! -- nosy: +csabella ___ Python tracker

[issue30449] Improve __slots__ datamodel documentation

mpb added the comment: @rhettinger I disagree (but you're the boss). If a function can take type X as a parameter, I believe docs should also say what the expected behavior is when you call the function and pass it type X, especially when type X is fundamentally

[issue30449] Improve __slots__ datamodel documentation

Raymond Hettinger added the comment: mpb, I think the docs with respect to strings are fine as-is. Sometimes if too much detail is put in, it makes the docs harder to read and understand (i.e. it gets in the way of our primary purpose). --

[issue30449] Improve __slots__ datamodel documentation

mpb added the comment: Can __slots__ be assigned a string? If so, what are the consequences? I find the current docs lack clarity. For example from the docs for 3.7.0a3: https://docs.python.org/3.7/reference/datamodel.html#slots > 3.3.2.4. __slots__ > > [snip] > >

[issue30449] Improve __slots__ datamodel documentation

Raymond Hettinger added the comment: New changeset 2b44e302ec3079363c4d5c875677945953705c58 by Raymond Hettinger (Aaron Hall, MBA) in branch 'master': bpo-30449 Terse slots (#1819) https://github.com/python/cpython/commit/2b44e302ec3079363c4d5c875677945953705c58 --

[issue30449] Improve __slots__ datamodel documentation

Raymond Hettinger added the comment: Overall this looks good. Please do fix the one review comment. -- ___ Python tracker ___

[issue30449] Improve __slots__ datamodel documentation

Changes by Raymond Hettinger : -- assignee: docs@python -> rhettinger ___ Python tracker ___

[issue30449] Improve __slots__ datamodel documentation

Aaron Hall added the comment: I created a new PR based on rhettinger's feedback (which on consideration was quite correct) with a fresh branch from master. Terseness is retained, and I think this revision makes the documentation more correct and complete. The rewording makes the behavior

[issue30449] Improve __slots__ datamodel documentation

Changes by Aaron Hall : -- pull_requests: +1905 ___ Python tracker ___ ___

[issue30449] Improve __slots__ datamodel documentation

Raymond Hettinger added the comment: As much as possible, please stick with the existing terse style of the data model docs. They tend to be concise, direct, and very light on examples. They don't serve as a tutorial, faq, or cover programming patterns or advice. Looking at the PR, I don't

[issue30449] Improve __slots__ datamodel documentation

Changes by Mariatta Wijaya : -- versions: +Python 3.5 ___ Python tracker ___ ___

[issue30449] Improve __slots__ datamodel documentation

Changes by Mariatta Wijaya : -- stage: -> patch review ___ Python tracker ___ ___

[issue30449] Improve __slots__ datamodel documentation

Changes by Roundup Robot : -- pull_requests: +1889 ___ Python tracker ___

[issue30449] Improve __slots__ datamodel documentation

Aaron Hall added the comment: I've been working on this section quite a lot, trying to improve the flow of content (which in the prior revision is a bit of a mish-mash of information in the "Notes on using __slots__ section") - I intend to move some of that information into the

[issue30449] Improve __slots__ datamodel documentation

New submission from Aaron Hall: The __slots__ documentation in the datamodel needs improvement. For example: > When inheriting from a class without __slots__, the __dict__ attribute of > that class will always be accessible, so a __slots__ definition in the > subclass is meaningless. The