Mark Dickinson <dicki...@gmail.com> added the comment: Thanks for the doc suggestions.
Actually, the current docs were revised recently; this issue is a helpful reminder to me that those doc revisions need to be backported. :) If you want to see the current docs, look at: http://docs.python.org/dev/library/struct.html I'm +0 on adding the standard sizes to the table of format codes. I also agree it might make sense to swap the 'Format Character' section and the 'Byte Order, Size and Alignment' section. That's all for now; I'll look at this properly sometime soon. The standard/native terminology is fairly ingrained; I'm not sure whether it's really worth changing it, but we can look at the explanations and make sure that they're clear. > Programming skills and platform knowledge at C level should not be a > requirement to understand and use struct, so perhaps the references to > C > should be less high-profile, Agreed, though I think the references to C should certainly be there, since they will help some users, and since part of the struct module's raison d'etre is to allow communication with data written/read by C programs. The note about ILqQ returning Python longs might be better omitted; the difference between int and long should be irrelevant to most users. ---------- _______________________________________ Python tracker <rep...@bugs.python.org> <http://bugs.python.org/issue8469> _______________________________________ _______________________________________________ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
