On 06/07/2013 11:45 PM, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
On 08/06/13 15:18, Stephen J. Turnbull wrote:
Ethan Furman writes:
> Enumerations can be pickled and unpickled::
>
> >>> from enum import Enum
> >>> class Fruit(Enum):
> ... tomato = 1
> ... banana = 2
>
Here is attached a list of obsoleted RFCs referred in the *.rst, *.txt,
*.py, *.c and *.h files. I think it would be worthwhile to update the
source code and documentation for more modern RFCs.
For example for updating RFC3548 to RFC4648 there is an issue #16995.
821: Simple Mail Transfer Proto
08.06.13 10:03, Ethan Furman написав(ла):
Indeed, and it is already in several different ways. But it would be
nice to have a pickle example in the docs that worked with doctest.
I ended up doing what Barry did:
>>> from test.test_enum import Fruit
>>> from pickle import dumps, loads
2013/6/8 Serhiy Storchaka :
> Here is attached a list of obsoleted RFCs referred in the *.rst, *.txt,
> *.py, *.c and *.h files. I think it would be worthwhile to update the source
> code and documentation for more modern RFCs.
Just because you change the reference, doesn't mean the code is
automa
On 08.06.2013 09:45, Serhiy Storchaka wrote:
> Here is attached a list of obsoleted RFCs referred in the *.rst, *.txt, *.py,
> *.c and *.h files. I
> think it would be worthwhile to update the source code and documentation for
> more modern RFCs.
Thanks for creating such a list.
BTW: What is rf
08.06.13 11:23, Benjamin Peterson написав(ла):
2013/6/8 Serhiy Storchaka :
Here is attached a list of obsoleted RFCs referred in the *.rst, *.txt,
*.py, *.c and *.h files. I think it would be worthwhile to update the source
code and documentation for more modern RFCs.
Just because you change t
On 06/08/2013 01:07 AM, Serhiy Storchaka wrote:
08.06.13 10:03, Ethan Furman написав(ла):
Indeed, and it is already in several different ways. But it would be
nice to have a pickle example in the docs that worked with doctest.
I ended up doing what Barry did:
>>> from test.test_enum impo
08.06.13 11:42, M.-A. Lemburg написав(ла):
On 08.06.2013 09:45, Serhiy Storchaka wrote:
Here is attached a list of obsoleted RFCs referred in the *.rst, *.txt, *.py,
*.c and *.h files. I
think it would be worthwhile to update the source code and documentation for
more modern RFCs.
Thanks for
By mistake some local files were added to the list. Here's an updated
list. It now also contains low-case references.
Attached also a script used to generate this list.
3: Documentation conventions. (Obsoleted by RFC0010)
Lib/test/math_testcases.txt
10: Documentation conventions. (Obsoleted
08.06.13 11:47, Ethan Furman написав(ла):
In this case it is better to exclude a code example from doctests or
add auxiliary code (i.e. as Steven suggested) to pass the doctest.
Are you saying there is something wrong about what I have in place now?
I would think that one line showing something
On 2013-06-08 10:59, Serhiy Storchaka wrote:
08.06.13 11:23, Benjamin Peterson ... :
2013/6/8 Serhiy Storchaka ... :
Here is attached a list of obsoleted RFCs referred in the *.rst, *.txt,
*.py, *.c and *.h files. I think it would be worthwhile to update the
source
code and documentation for mo
On Sat, 08 Jun 2013 12:51:23 +0300, Serhiy Storchaka
wrote:
> 08.06.13 11:42, M.-A. Lemburg напиÑав(ла):
> > On 08.06.2013 09:45, Serhiy Storchaka wrote:
> >> Here is attached a list of obsoleted RFCs referred in the *.rst, *.txt,
> >> *.py, *.c and *.h files. I
> >> think it would be w
On 06/08/2013 03:09 AM, Serhiy Storchaka wrote:
08.06.13 11:47, Ethan Furman написав(ла):
In this case it is better to exclude a code example from doctests or
add auxiliary code (i.e. as Steven suggested) to pass the doctest.
Are you saying there is something wrong about what I have in place n
Serhiy Storchaka writes:
> 08.06.13 11:23, Benjamin Peterson написав(ла):
> > 2013/6/8 Serhiy Storchaka :
> >> Here is attached a list of obsoleted RFCs referred in the *.rst,
> >> *.txt, *.py, *.c and *.h files. I think it would be worthwhile
> >> to update the source code and documentation f
On 6/8/13, Ethan Furman wrote:
> On 06/08/2013 03:09 AM, Serhiy Storchaka wrote:
>> 08.06.13 11:47, Ethan Furman написав(ла):
[...]
>
> Fair point. But I suppose that if the end-user is running a doc test, it is
> not too much to require that the other
> tests be installed as well. Plus, we defi
On 8 June 2013 17:41, Ethan Furman wrote:
> On 06/08/2013 03:09 AM, Serhiy Storchaka wrote:
>>
>> Is it possible to add "invisible" code which doesn't displayed in the
>> resulting documentation, but taken into account by
>> doctest?
>
>
> I have no idea. This is my first time using doctest.
>
A
On Sat, 08 Jun 2013 19:54:18 +0200, =?UTF-8?Q?=C5=81ukasz_Rekucki?=
wrote:
> On 8 June 2013 17:41, Ethan Furman wrote:
> > On 06/08/2013 03:09 AM, Serhiy Storchaka wrote:
> >>
> >> Is it possible to add "invisible" code which doesn't displayed in the
> >> resulting documentation, but taken into
Expected behaviour:
>>> float('\N{MINUS SIGN}12.34')
-12.34
Current behaviour:
Traceback (most recent call last):
...
ValueError: could not convert string to float: '−12.34'
Please note: '\N{MINUS SIGN}' == '\u2212'
--
Best regards,
Łukasz Langa
WWW: http://lukasz.langa.pl/
Twitter: @llanga
[Diverting to python-ideas, since this isn't as clear-cut as you think.]
Why exactly is that expected behavior? What's the use case? (Surely
you don't have a keyboard that generates \u2212 when you hit the minus
key? :-)
Is there a Unicode standard for parsing numbers? IIRC there are a
variety of
On 08/06/2013 23:30, Guido van Rossum wrote:
[Diverting to python-ideas, since this isn't as clear-cut as you think.]
Why exactly is that expected behavior? What's the use case? (Surely
you don't have a keyboard that generates \u2212 when you hit the minus
key? :-)
Is there a Unicode standard f
On Sun, 09 Jun 2013 01:39:59 +0100, MRAB wrote:
> On 08/06/2013 23:30, Guido van Rossum wrote:
> > [Diverting to python-ideas, since this isn't as clear-cut as you think.]
> >
> > Why exactly is that expected behavior? What's the use case? (Surely
> > you don't have a keyboard that generates \u221
On 9 June 2013 04:17, R. David Murray wrote:
> On Sat, 08 Jun 2013 19:54:18 +0200, =?UTF-8?Q?=C5=81ukasz_Rekucki?=
> wrote:
>> On 8 June 2013 17:41, Ethan Furman wrote:
>> > On 06/08/2013 03:09 AM, Serhiy Storchaka wrote:
>> >>
>> >> Is it possible to add "invisible" code which doesn't displaye
On 06/08/2013 09:21 PM, Nick Coghlan wrote:
Using the test suite in the enum docstrings initially is fine. In the
future, once we migrate a module like socket to using enum.IntEnum
instead of bare integers, it would be appropriate to change the enum
docs to reference that rather than the test su
23 matches
Mail list logo
