Martin Panter added the comment: Mouse, I know you originally opened this against 3.5. Apart from the module description at the bottom, my patch should be valid for 3.5 also. The relevant wording is identical to 2.7.
I have resisted removing the magic number 57 for a couple of reasons. Reading existing code that uses this number may be harder. David said he would be happier with it kept. I believed we could solve your original complaint and explain why the number was really there at the same time. It helps explain how the function was originally to be used, and why the newline is appended. Anyway, I think it is best if I let this go, and someone else pick it up. ---------- _______________________________________ Python tracker <rep...@bugs.python.org> <http://bugs.python.org/issue25495> _______________________________________ _______________________________________________ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
