[issue32283] Cmd.onecmd documentation is misleading
New submission from Kevin Lyda <ke...@ie.suberic.net>: The documentation for Cmd.onecmd is misleading. It says that "This may be overridden, but should not normally need to be; see the precmd() and postcmd() methods for useful execution hooks." https://github.com/python/cpython/blob/v3.7.0a3/Lib/cmd.py#L193 However a common idiom is to call onecmd directly to process commands coming from sys.argv. This shows up in the Cmd entries the Python MOTW site for instance. https://pymotw.com/3/cmd/#commands-from-sys-argv >From the docs you might think that precmd and postcmd are called when you call >onecmd directly this way. However this is not true - they are only called in >the cmdloop method. https://github.com/python/cpython/blob/v3.7.0a3/Lib/cmd.py#L137 Moving the precmd and postcmd methods into onecmd would make the onecmd docs make more sense. Then they could be used in lieu of overriding onecmd for all uses of onecmd - inside of cmdloop and on its own. But loads of code depends on current behaviour. So instead something in the docs to indicate that those hooks only work when onecmd is called inside cmdloop would be good. Perhaps like so: """Interpret the argument as though it had been typed in response to the prompt. This may be overridden, but should not normally need to be; see the precmd() and postcmd() methods for useful execution hooks when onecmd() is called from cmdloop(). When onecmd() is called directly, make sure to call precmd() and postcmd() yourself. The return value is a flag indicating whether interpretation of commands by the interpreter should stop. """ -- components: Library (Lib) messages: 308082 nosy: lyda priority: normal severity: normal status: open title: Cmd.onecmd documentation is misleading versions: Python 3.6, Python 3.7 ___ Python tracker <rep...@bugs.python.org> <https://bugs.python.org/issue32283> ___ ___ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
[issue17281] Broken links at pypi
New submission from Kevin Lyda: The pypi entry for distutils2 has a comical set of broken links (docs and contributing): https://pypi.python.org/pypi/Distutils2 The following two paragraphs have broken links. Adding a link checker to your browser isn't the worst idea. The Distutils2 codebase is a fork of Distutils. It is not backward compatible with Distutils and does not depend on it. It provides more features and implements new packaging standards. In Python 3.3, Distutils2 is included in the standard library under the module name packaging. Documentation is provided at http://docs.python.org/dev/packaging 404 --for ease of maintenance, it is not duplicated in this repository. You can use the Packaging documentation to use Distutils2; only the package name is different (packaging vs. distutils2), all modules, classes and functions have the same name. If you want to contribute, please have a look at DEVNOTES.txt or http://wiki.python.org/Distutils2/Contributing 404 . -- assignee: eric.araujo components: Distutils2 messages: 182747 nosy: alexis, eric.araujo, lyda, tarek priority: normal severity: normal status: open title: Broken links at pypi type: behavior versions: 3rd party, Python 2.6, Python 2.7, Python 3.1, Python 3.2, Python 3.3, Python 3.4, Python 3.5 ___ Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org http://bugs.python.org/issue17281 ___ ___ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
