[issue14112] tutorial intro talks of "shallow copy" concept without explanation

Raymond Hettinger added the comment: Thanks Terry. -- resolution: -> fixed stage: patch review -> resolved status: open -> closed ___ Python tracker ___ _

[issue14112] tutorial intro talks of "shallow copy" concept without explanation

Raymond Hettinger added the comment: New changeset a8424940b4873791fc178a9f19a7bf1779a6cf42 by Raymond Hettinger (Miss Islington (bot)) in branch '3.8': bpo-14112: Allow beginners to explore shallowness in greater depth ;-) (GH-15465) (GH-15469) https://github.com/python/cpython/commit/a8424

[issue14112] tutorial intro talks of "shallow copy" concept without explanation

Change by miss-islington : -- pull_requests: +15160 pull_request: https://github.com/python/cpython/pull/15469 ___ Python tracker ___ __

[issue14112] tutorial intro talks of "shallow copy" concept without explanation

Raymond Hettinger added the comment: New changeset 69ee87e99cfe0b79389cffa92d126af868baf353 by Raymond Hettinger in branch 'master': bpo-14112: Allow beginners to explore shallowness in greater depth ;-) (GH-15465) https://github.com/python/cpython/commit/69ee87e99cfe0b79389cffa92d126af868ba

[issue14112] tutorial intro talks of "shallow copy" concept without explanation

Change by Raymond Hettinger : -- pull_requests: +15157 pull_request: https://github.com/python/cpython/pull/15465 ___ Python tracker ___ ___

[issue14112] tutorial intro talks of "shallow copy" concept without explanation

Terry J. Reedy added the comment: With /like/link/ I agree. -- ___ Python tracker ___ ___ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe

[issue14112] tutorial intro talks of "shallow copy" concept without explanation

Raymond Hettinger added the comment: How about we just like "shallow copy" to the copy module docs. That way, a person can follow-up with more detail if they're interested, yet still can read-on without interruption if they choose (this entry occurs *very* early in the tutorial). -

[issue14112] tutorial intro talks of "shallow copy" concept without explanation

Change by Raymond Hettinger : -- pull_requests: +15113 pull_request: https://github.com/python/cpython/pull/15408 ___ Python tracker ___ ___

[issue14112] tutorial intro talks of "shallow copy" concept without explanation

Changes by Tim Golden : -- nosy: -tim.golden ___ Python tracker ___ ___ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: https://mail.pyth

[issue14112] tutorial intro talks of "shallow copy" concept without explanation

Georg Brandl added the comment: The text talks about containers which, although often the case, is not general enough; copy() and deepcopy() can work with any object. -- ___ Python tracker

[issue14112] tutorial intro talks of "shallow copy" concept without explanation

Ezio Melotti added the comment: Here is a patch that adds glossary entries for deep and shallow copy. I tried to keep them simple and clear enough. FWIW http://docs.python.org/3.4/library/copy.html also has a definition of the terms. If my definitions are OK I will add links to the terms wer

[issue14112] tutorial intro talks of "shallow copy" concept without explanation

Raymond Hettinger added the comment: FWIW, the shallow/deep terminology is not unique to Python and is commonly used in computer science. In my experience teaching Python, the terms are somewhat self-descriptive and only become perplexing when someone over-explains them. That said, a glossar

[issue14112] tutorial intro talks of "shallow copy" concept without explanation

Terry J. Reedy added the comment: 'Shallow' is a common English word: "Stay in shallow water until you learn to swim!" But that is not the issue here. I think the underlying issue is that the first sentence "All slice operations return a new list containing the requested elements." is wrong.

[issue14112] tutorial intro talks of "shallow copy" concept without explanation

Tshepang Lekhonkhobe added the comment: On Sun, Feb 26, 2012 at 00:11, Ned Deily wrote: > "shallow copy" and "deep copy" are both standard computer science terms by no > means unique to or invented by Python.  We should be cautious about > documentation bloat and trying to redefine standard t

[issue14112] tutorial intro talks of "shallow copy" concept without explanation

Ned Deily added the comment: "shallow copy" and "deep copy" are both standard computer science terms by no means unique to or invented by Python. We should be cautious about documentation bloat and trying to redefine standard terms. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Object_copy#Shallow_copy

[issue14112] tutorial intro talks of "shallow copy" concept without explanation

Éric Araujo added the comment: A link to a glossary may be better than a link to the top of the copy module. I wonder if we could use glossary markup in the copy module docs instead of adding terms to the global glossary. Tim: I like “undeep”, it’s used to describe a geographical feature of

[issue14112] tutorial intro talks of "shallow copy" concept without explanation

Ezio Melotti added the comment: > FWIW it's pretty much the only way of saying what it means. However, even using "not deep" here would still be ambiguous. What's a deep copy? What's a non-deep copy? Using "shallow" might be a problem, but the real problem is that regardless of the wording,

[issue14112] tutorial intro talks of "shallow copy" concept without explanation

Tshepang Lekhonkhobe added the comment: On Sat, Feb 25, 2012 at 09:35, Éric Araujo wrote: > What about this: > >  All slice operations return a new list containing the requested elements.   > This > -means that the following slice returns a shallow copy of the list *a*:: > +means that the follo

[issue14112] tutorial intro talks of "shallow copy" concept without explanation

Ramchandra Apte added the comment: +1 for Éric Araujo's idea. -- nosy: +ramchandra.apte ___ Python tracker ___ ___ Python-bugs-list m

[issue14112] tutorial intro talks of "shallow copy" concept without explanation

Tim Golden added the comment: On 25/02/2012 08:09, Ezio Melotti wrote: > Even if they know the meaning of "shallow" (which is not a really common word > AFAICT) FWIW it's pretty much the only way of saying what it means. I've no idea how many people used it last year or anything, but if I need

[issue14112] tutorial intro talks of "shallow copy" concept without explanation

Ezio Melotti added the comment: Even if they know the meaning of "shallow" (which is not a really common word AFAICT), they might not know what it means in this context. Adding an entry to glossary might be a better solution. In this context I think the best solution would be to actually show

[issue14112] tutorial intro talks of "shallow copy" concept without explanation

Éric Araujo added the comment: I think it’s a common English term (i.e. “shallow water” to describe a small lake-like thing where you can go without swimming), but non-native speakers may not know it (I don’t remember if I knew it before learning Python, for example). What about this: All s

[issue14112] tutorial intro talks of "shallow copy" concept without explanation

New submission from Tshepang Lekhonkhobe : Relevant line: http://hg.python.org/cpython/file/e2eccc906354/Doc/tutorial/introduction.rst#l487 When the concept is introduced, it appears like there's an assumption that the reader would know what it means. I'm curious if it's that common a term tha