Terry J. Reedy <tjre...@udel.edu> added the comment:
Sorry, I was thinking of something else when I closed this. What you want is a new -x option, for some 'x'. The following would help, especially as there is no one who specifically maintains pydoc. a) a specific proposal or set of proposals as to what letter to use for the option and what the result should be. b) a currently failing test case (based on the above). c. a patch for test.test_pydoc adding the test, preferably self-contained (no added file) -- or does any current test already involve an 'at 0xnnnnnnnn' output? d. a patch for pydoc.py making the test pass. ---------- resolution: third party -> stage: resolved -> test needed status: closed -> open title: Run-dependent Pydoc output for functions default parameters -> Pydoc: add option to remove run-specific ids (addresses) type: behavior -> enhancement versions: +Python 3.9 _______________________________________ Python tracker <rep...@bugs.python.org> <https://bugs.python.org/issue39391> _______________________________________ _______________________________________________ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
