David Heiberg added the comment:
Ahh yes of course, I will remove that from the notes. With regards to the
second note, would it do any harm to leave it in? I suppose it does imply that
this was possible before...
--
___
Python tracker
<ht
David Heiberg added the comment:
Agreed. I will fix the documentation and submit a PR this weekend hopefully.
--
___
Python tracker
<https://bugs.python.org/issue35
Change by David Heiberg :
--
keywords: +patch, patch, patch
pull_requests: +11236, 11237, 11238
stage: needs patch -> patch review
___
Python tracker
<https://bugs.python.org/issu
Change by David Heiberg :
--
keywords: +patch
pull_requests: +11236
stage: needs patch -> patch review
___
Python tracker
<https://bugs.python.org/issu
Change by David Heiberg :
--
keywords: +patch, patch
pull_requests: +11236, 11237
stage: needs patch -> patch review
___
Python tracker
<https://bugs.python.org/issu
David Heiberg added the comment:
Since there has been no objection to this yet, would it be alright for me to
take this as my first PR?
On top of the change you mentioned to the __slots__ list, should there also be
a test written so that a similar regression doesn't happen again
David Heiberg added the comment:
Ok thanks for your input, I will work on a PR and hopefully submit one tomorrow
or Wednesday depending on schedule.
--
___
Python tracker
<https://bugs.python.org/issue35
Change by David Heiberg :
--
nosy: +dheiberg
___
Python tracker
<https://bugs.python.org/issue5038>
___
___
Python-bugs-list mailing list
Unsubscribe:
David Heiberg added the comment:
Should the note on arbitrary attributes also be removed? If this was documented
previously then I don't see the need for it here, but if this has never been
documented then maybe some other way of wording it may be sensible to include
Change by David Heiberg :
--
pull_requests: +11374, 11375
stage: needs patch -> patch review
___
Python tracker
<https://bugs.python.org/issue35701>
___
___
Py
Change by David Heiberg :
--
pull_requests: +11374
stage: needs patch -> patch review
___
Python tracker
<https://bugs.python.org/issue35701>
___
___
Python-
Change by David Heiberg :
--
pull_requests: +11374, 11375, 11376
stage: needs patch -> patch review
___
Python tracker
<https://bugs.python.org/issu
Change by David Heiberg :
--
nosy: +dheiberg
___
Python tracker
<https://bugs.python.org/issue35448>
___
___
Python-bugs-list mailing list
Unsubscribe:
David Heiberg added the comment:
I have submitted a PR for the documentation. Hopefully this is enough to
resolve the issue and close.
--
___
Python tracker
<https://bugs.python.org/issue35
David Heiberg added the comment:
Super, thanks for the help, I'll submit a PR as soon as it is ready
--
___
Python tracker
<https://bugs.python.org/issue37
Change by David Heiberg :
--
pull_requests: +14872
pull_request: https://github.com/python/cpython/pull/15133
___
Python tracker
<https://bugs.python.org/issue37
Change by David Heiberg :
--
keywords: +patch
pull_requests: +14811
stage: -> patch review
pull_request: https://github.com/python/cpython/pull/15062
___
Python tracker
<https://bugs.python.org/issu
David Heiberg added the comment:
I'm happy to take a look at this, I found one example here:
https://docs.python.org/3/library/winreg.html#winreg.DisableReflectionKey
How would I go about submitting a patch for all of the docs across the
versions? Would I apply the patch to the relevant
David Heiberg added the comment:
Just playing around with this and I think one thing to consider is how to
handle negative weights. Should they even be allowed? One interesting behaviour
I encountered with the current draft is the following:
>>> r.sample(['katniss', 'pri
David Heiberg added the comment:
Ahh I see, thanks for clearing that up!
On Sun, May 10, 2020, 04:41 Raymond Hettinger
wrote:
>
> Raymond Hettinger added the comment:
>
> Negative weights are undefined for choices() as well. Just like bisect()
> and merge() don't veri
20 matches
Mail list logo
