Would you be able to submit a patch to address the docstring issues?
--Guido (mobile)
On Dec 21, 2015 2:09 PM, "Chris Barker" wrote:
> On Sun, Dec 20, 2015 at 2:28 PM, Chris Angelico wrote:
>
>>
>> Would there be value in changing the repr to use
I still think the repr change to use keywords has a good chance for 3.6.
--Guido (mobile)
On Dec 21, 2015 2:09 PM, "Chris Barker" wrote:
> On Sun, Dec 20, 2015 at 2:28 PM, Chris Angelico wrote:
>
>>
>> Would there be value in changing the repr to use
On Sun, Dec 20, 2015 at 2:28 PM, Chris Angelico wrote:
>
> Would there be value in changing the repr to use keyword arguments?
>
this thread got long, but it sounds like that won't be worth the backwards
compatibility...
> Worse, help(datetime.timedelta) in 3.6 doesn't
On 21/12/2015 21:57, Steve Dower wrote:
Was Py_MOVEREF (or MOVE_REF) ever suggested?
Those are valid objections, and now they're raised I remember them from
last time. But I don't think they're a huge concern - setting a ref
count directly doesn't seem useful anyway, and the compiler/IDE will
Was Py_MOVEREF (or MOVE_REF) ever suggested?
Those are valid objections, and now they're raised I remember them from last
time. But I don't think they're a huge concern - setting a ref count directly
doesn't seem useful anyway, and the compiler/IDE will let you know pretty quick
if you put an
On Dec 21, 2015, at 14:07, Chris Barker wrote:
>
> and there are a LOT of next-to worthless docstrings in the stdlib -- it would
> be nice to clean them all up.
>
> Is there any reason not to, other than someone having to do the work?
Is this just a matter of
On 16.12.15 16:12, Serhiy Storchaka wrote:
Please put your vote (a floating number from -1 to 1 including) for
every of proposed name. You also can propose new name.
Thank you all for your votes.
Results of the poll:
Py_SETREF: +5 = +5 (Victor, Steve, Yury, Brett, Nick) +0 (Ryan, Martin)
>> and there are a LOT of next-to worthless docstrings in the stdlib -- it
>> would be nice to clean them all up.
>>
>> Is there any reason not to, other than someone having to do the work?
And yes, I'd be willing to submit a patch.
> Is this just a matter of _datetimemodule.c (and various
Guido van Rossum writes:
> I'm sure that one often catches people by surprise. However, I don't
> think we can fix that one without also fixing the values of the
> attributes -- in that example days is -1 and seconds is 86340 (which
> will *also* catch people by surprise). And
On 21 December 2015 at 23:46, Serhiy Storchaka wrote:
> On 16.12.15 16:12, Serhiy Storchaka wrote:
>>
>> Please put your vote (a floating number from -1 to 1 including) for
>> every of proposed name. You also can propose new name.
>
>
> Thank you all for your votes.
>
>
We're now thoroughly in python-ideas land.
On Mon, Dec 21, 2015 at 7:39 AM, Random832 wrote:
> Guido van Rossum writes:
> > I'm sure that one often catches people by surprise. However, I don't
> > think we can fix that one without also fixing the
11 matches
Mail list logo