Chris Jerdonek added the comment:
Here is the patch for 2.7.
--
Added file: http://bugs.python.org/file26822/issue-15543-6-py27.patch
___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
http://bugs.python.org/issue15543
___
Changes by Chris Jerdonek chris.jerdo...@gmail.com:
Added file: http://bugs.python.org/file26826/issue-15543-6-py32.patch
___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
http://bugs.python.org/issue15543
___
Chris Jerdonek added the comment:
And here are the 3.2 patch and the 3.3 delta after forward-porting. Note
that to forward-port the 3.2 patch to the default 3.3 branch, you can simply
drop the changes to the file Doc/library/bz2.rst. I think that is the only
conflict.
--
Added
Roundup Robot added the comment:
New changeset 273df9789796 by R David Murray in branch '3.2':
#15543: glossary entry for and 'universal newlines', and links to it.
http://hg.python.org/cpython/rev/273df9789796
New changeset e67042b6ad02 by R David Murray in branch '3.2':
#15543: reflow
R. David Murray added the comment:
Thanks Chris.
--
resolution: - fixed
stage: patch review - committed/rejected
status: open - closed
type: - enhancement
___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
http://bugs.python.org/issue15543
Andrew Svetlov added the comment:
Good work.
--
___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
http://bugs.python.org/issue15543
___
___
Python-bugs-list mailing list
Chris Jerdonek added the comment:
Thanks, David! Also, can/did you check that reflows like these still link to
the glossary correctly?
+ :func:`input` function to allow opening files in binary or :term:`universal
+ newlines` mode. Another new parameter, *openhook*, lets you use a function
Andrew Svetlov added the comment:
Yes, it is processed correctly.
--
___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
http://bugs.python.org/issue15543
___
___
Python-bugs-list
Éric Araujo added the comment:
Great patch!
--
nosy: +eric.araujo
___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
http://bugs.python.org/issue15543
___
___
Python-bugs-list
Chris Jerdonek added the comment:
Updating patch to tip again.
--
Added file: http://bugs.python.org/file26799/issue-15543-5.patch
___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
http://bugs.python.org/issue15543
___
R. David Murray added the comment:
Yeah, we might as well be consistent, though it's not a big deal either way.
I'd prefer that as a separate patch.
Any interest in backporting this to 2.7? Being so close to final release on
3.2 I think we can skip 3.2, unless you feel like doing it.
Chris Jerdonek added the comment:
Sure, I'd be happy to do both 2.7 and 3.2. I can upload the patch for the
default branch as a delta to apply after the 3.2 change has been forward-ported
from 3.2 to default. Thanks for taking an interest in this!
--
versions: +Python 2.7, Python
Chris Jerdonek added the comment:
Updating patch to latest again.
--
nosy: +asvetlov
Added file: http://bugs.python.org/file26792/issue-15543-3.patch
___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
http://bugs.python.org/issue15543
R. David Murray added the comment:
Thanks for working on this.
I see nothing wrong with using 'universal newlines mode' as the term, which
would simplify the markup.
--
nosy: +r.david.murray
___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
Chris Jerdonek added the comment:
Sure, you're welcome. And sounds good, I'll change it. The singular was the
prevailing form, but you're right that there is no reason we can't change it.
--
___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
Chris Jerdonek added the comment:
Is it worth standardizing on universal newlines mode in the code as well
(docstrings, etc)? There are about ten occurrences of universal newline mode
that would need to be changed.
--
___
Python tracker
Chris Jerdonek added the comment:
Here is a new patch with David's suggested change (just for doc files though).
--
Added file: http://bugs.python.org/file26796/issue-15543-4.patch
___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
Chris Jerdonek added the comment:
Updating patch to current tip.
--
Added file: http://bugs.python.org/file26714/issue-15543-2.patch
___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
http://bugs.python.org/issue15543
___
Chris Jerdonek added the comment:
Attaching a patch for review.
--
keywords: +patch
stage: - patch review
Added file: http://bugs.python.org/file26706/issue-15543-1.patch
___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
http://bugs.python.org/issue15543
Serhiy Storchaka added the comment:
See issue15204.
--
nosy: +storchaka
___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
http://bugs.python.org/issue15543
___
___
Chris Jerdonek added the comment:
Since universal newline mode is discouraged and getting deprecated in the
built-in open() function, the central place for describing universal newlines
should probably not be the documentation for the open() method. I am leaning
towards a glossary entry.
Chris Jerdonek added the comment:
See also: f17a1410ebe5
--
nosy: +pitrou
___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
http://bugs.python.org/issue15543
___
___
Antoine Pitrou added the comment:
Since universal newline mode is discouraged and getting deprecated in
the built-in open() function
There may (or may not :-)) be a misunderstanding. Universal newlines are not
discouraged; it's the legacy U flag which is deprecated.
--
Chris Jerdonek added the comment:
There may (or may not :-)) be a misunderstanding. Universal newlines are not
discouraged; it's the legacy U flag which is deprecated.
Already understood. :) (I said in the built-in open() function above and
meant mode as in flag.)
I nosied you only
Antoine Pitrou added the comment:
I nosied you only because you copy and pasted information about
universal newlines that might benefit from a glossary entry or some
such about universal newlines.
Yes, it might benefit from a glossary entry. On the other hand, the details of
the *newline*
Chris Jerdonek added the comment:
On the other hand, the details of the *newline* argument should probably
remain in the API descriptions themselves.
Correct. It would be a high-level entry for universal newlines --
independent of any API and suitable for linking to wherever universal
New submission from Chris Jerdonek:
Universal newlines of PEP 278 does not seem to have a central, linkable
description within the documentation. In particular, there does not seem to be
a glossary entry or any index entries for it.
The main documentation seems to be in the middle of the
27 matches
Mail list logo
