Terry J. Reedy added the comment: I tried the [Create Patch] button. Two problems: the result is about 90% concerned with other issues; it is not reviewable on Rietveld. I will unlink it and upload a cut-down version.
Wtiht the test changes suggested by Berker, I agree that it is time to apply this, with whatever decision we make about 3.4. I am sympathetic to the notion that there is a regression from 2.x. There is precedent for adding a feature to fix a bug (in difflib, a new parameter for SequenceMatcher, for 2.7 3 (or thereabouts)). However, doing so was contentious (discussed on pydev) and not meant to be routine. The bug being fixed had been reported (as I remember) on four separate issues by four people and seconded by other people, so we really wanted the fix in 2.7. Would the following compromise work for Mercurial? The patch already adds a new private function _check_types. For 3.4, also add _diff_bytes as a private function. Merge both into 3.5. Create a 3.5 patch that makes _diff_bytes public by renaming it to diff_bytes, adds the new tests, and documents the new feature. The What's New entry could mention that the function was added privately in 3.4.4. ---------- stage: patch review -> commit review Added file: http://bugs.python.org/file39057/13161c1d9c5-difflibf.diff _______________________________________ Python tracker <rep...@bugs.python.org> <http://bugs.python.org/issue17445> _______________________________________ _______________________________________________ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
