[issue29812] test for token.py, and consistency tests for tokenize.py

Berker Peksag added the comment: Yes, they are. I like the idea of generating C files from Lib/token.py. Let's see what David thinks about issue 30455. -- nosy: +berker.peksag ___ Python tracker

[issue29812] test for token.py, and consistency tests for tokenize.py

Serhiy Storchaka added the comment: See also issue30455. Don't these issues conflict one other? -- nosy: +serhiy.storchaka ___ Python tracker ___

[issue30302] Improve .__repr__ implementation for datetime.timedelta

Serhiy Storchaka added the comment: I don't have very strong preferences, but I concur with Alexander. His arguments match my initial opinion about this issue (msg293213). -- ___ Python tracker

[issue30822] Python implementation of datetime module is not being tested correctly.

Serhiy Storchaka added the comment: > This is confirmed by changing the code to the following: Yes, this is other way to fix test_datetime. But this breaks running tests via datetimetester: ./python -m test -vuall datetimetester -- ___ Python

[issue29812] test for token.py, and consistency tests for tokenize.py

Changes by Berker Peksag : -- stage: needs patch -> patch review ___ Python tracker ___

[issue30790] Can't use proxy to connect internet on windows

Changes by Wu Zongyong : -- pull_requests: +2602 ___ Python tracker ___ ___

[issue19613] test_nntplib: sporadic failures, test_article_head_body()

Martin Panter added the comment: It looks like I was fairly confident about my patch, but it was all theoretical and I was never able to analyze the failure myself. Sorry but I am unlikely to spend much time on this or open a pull request any time soon. --

[issue28879] smtplib send_message should add Date header if it is missing, per RFC5322

R. David Murray added the comment: Yes. There's a chance someone else will review it if you do that. I'm still not likely to have time for a while, myself, but ping me again in a month if I haven't gotten to it. -- ___ Python tracker

[issue30824] Add mimetype for extension .json

R. David Murray added the comment: Per our current policy with respect to mime types, this should be added to all currently maintained versions. -- stage: -> needs patch versions: +Python 2.7, Python 3.5, Python 3.6 ___ Python tracker

[issue30829] 'Cannot serialize socket object' after ssl.wrap_socket

Changes by Anderson : -- title: 'Cannot serialize socket object' after ssl_wrap -> 'Cannot serialize socket object' after ssl.wrap_socket ___ Python tracker

[issue30829] 'Cannot serialize socket object' after ssl_wrap

New submission from Anderson: --- Traceback (most recent call last): File "/usr/local/lib/python3.6/socketserver.py", line 317, in _handle_request_noblock self.process_request(request, client_address) File "/opt/storage_server/server_tcp.py", line

[issue30822] Python implementation of datetime module is not being tested correctly.

Utkarsh Upadhyay added the comment: So the problem is occurring because a single `Test` class is being instantiated with three different tests here in datetimetester.py: for name in ZoneInfo.zonenames(): Test = type('ZoneInfoTest[%s]' % name, (ZoneInfoTest,), {})

[issue30822] Python implementation of datetime module is not being tested correctly.

Serhiy Storchaka added the comment: New changeset 34b54873b51a1ebee2a3c57b7205537b4f33128d by Serhiy Storchaka in branch 'master': bpo-30822: Deduplicate ZoneInfoTest classes in test_datetime. (#2534) https://github.com/python/cpython/commit/34b54873b51a1ebee2a3c57b7205537b4f33128d

[issue30822] Python implementation of datetime module is not being tested correctly.

Serhiy Storchaka added the comment: > Are there any guides re: backporting commits? > > Just to confirm verify that I'm going about it right; I’m planning on > cherry-picking relevant commits back to branch 3.5, 3.6, resolving the merge > conflicts, and then opening two separate PRs for them

[issue30822] Python implementation of datetime module is not being tested correctly.

Serhiy Storchaka added the comment: The quick solution -- just deduplicate test classes. But the code needs rewriting. Current code is tricky and fragile. It doesn't work with --list-cases (and I suppose it doesn't work well with other advanced unittest features). This would be not easy.

[issue30822] Python implementation of datetime module is not being tested correctly.

Changes by Serhiy Storchaka : -- pull_requests: +2601 ___ Python tracker ___ ___

[issue30302] Improve .__repr__ implementation for datetime.timedelta

Changes by Alexander Belopolsky : -- nosy: +tim.peters ___ Python tracker ___

[issue30302] Improve .__repr__ implementation for datetime.timedelta

Alexander Belopolsky added the comment: Sorry for being late to the discussion, but please allow me to add a -1 vote. The time.struct_time precedent is indeed comically verbose. Whenever I need to inspect a struct_time, I cast it to a plain tuple Compare >>> time.gmtime(1121871596)

[issue30822] Python implementation of datetime module is not being tested correctly.

Changes by Serhiy Storchaka : -- assignee: -> serhiy.storchaka nosy: +belopolsky ___ Python tracker ___

[issue30822] Python implementation of datetime module is not being tested correctly.

Utkarsh Upadhyay added the comment: I can reproduce the names with `_Pure_Pure_Pure` if I run the tests with `-utzdata`. Investigating. ~ ut -- ___ Python tracker

[issue30822] Python implementation of datetime module is not being tested correctly.

Serhiy Storchaka added the comment: Oh, test.datetimetester.ZoneInfoTest[Europe/Andorra]_Pure_Pure_Pure -- something looks wrong. -- ___ Python tracker

[issue30822] Python implementation of datetime module is not being tested correctly.

Ned Deily added the comment: Serhiy, it appears that the added tests are taking a long time to run and thus causing many buildbot failures, for example: http://buildbot.python.org/all/builders/ARMv7%20Ubuntu%203.x/builds/1013 -- nosy: +ned.deily

[issue30822] Python implementation of datetime module is not being tested correctly.

Utkarsh Upadhyay added the comment: Are there any guides re: backporting commits? Just to confirm verify that I'm going about it right; I’m planning on cherry-picking relevant commits back to branch 3.5, 3.6, resolving the merge conflicts, and then opening two separate PRs for them with

[issue27584] New addition of vSockets to the python socket module

Nick Coghlan added the comment: I'm attempting to figure out whether or not we have a buildbot in the Buildbot fleet that will cover this test case. Based on the pre-merge CI run, it seems Ubuntu 14.04 is too old to include the required kernel headers. However, it looks like RHEL/CentOS are

[issue30822] Python implementation of datetime module is not being tested correctly.

Changes by Serhiy Storchaka : -- stage: needs patch -> backport needed ___ Python tracker ___

[issue30822] Python implementation of datetime module is not being tested correctly.

Serhiy Storchaka added the comment: New changeset 98b6bc3bf72532b784a1c1fa76eaa6026a663e44 by Serhiy Storchaka (Utkarsh Upadhyay) in branch 'master': bpo-30822: Fix testing of datetime module. (#2530) https://github.com/python/cpython/commit/98b6bc3bf72532b784a1c1fa76eaa6026a663e44

[issue30826] More details in reference 'Looping through a list in Python and modifying it'

Raymond Hettinger added the comment: The example would be more clear if we replaced the opaque idiom "words[:]" with the more explicit alternative "words.copy()". -- assignee: docs@python -> rhettinger nosy: +rhettinger ___ Python tracker

[issue30828] Out of bounds write in _asyncio_Future_remove_done_callback

New submission from Ned Williamson: This is very similar to the issue reported in https://bugs.python.org/issue28963 - this function is still buggy when items are pushed onto the done callbacks, as the new list is assumed to be large enough. The issue was pointed out on the code review page

[issue30713] Reject newline character (U+000A) in URLs in urllib.parse

Martin Panter added the comment: It might help if you explained why you want to make these changes. Otherwise I have to guess. Is a compromise between strictly rejecting all non-URL characters (not just control characters), versus leaving it up to user applications to validate their URLs? I

[issue30827] Tweak order of links in https://www.python.org/downloads/source/

Berker Peksag added the comment: Thank you for the report, Sarge. This is already reported to python.org issue tracker at https://github.com/python/pythondotorg/issues/1079 Closing this as 'third party'. -- nosy: +berker.peksag resolution: -> third party stage: -> resolved status:

[issue30827] Tweak order of links in https://www.python.org/downloads/source/

New submission from Sarge Borsch: Right now, there are these links in https://www.python.org/downloads/source/: Latest Python 2 Release - Python 2.7.13 Latest Python 3 Release - Python 3.6.1 Python 3 should be the first, because it's the real Python now, and Python 2 is deprecated and

[issue30826] More details in reference 'Looping through a list in Python and modifying it'

Anmol Gupta added the comment: Wrong documentaion section linked. Correct seciton: Section 4.2 on https://docs.python.org/3/tutorial/controlflow.html The last line needs more explanation. -- ___ Python tracker