NotificationsYou must be signed in to change notification settings
Fork32k
Star67.3k

[3.11] Clarify re docs for byte pattern group names (GH-99308)#101001

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to ourterms of service andprivacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub?Sign in to your account

Jump to bottom

Merged

hauntsaninja merged 1 commit intopython:3.11fromGreatFruitOmsk:fix-re-docstring-3.11

Mar 4, 2023

Merged

[3.11] Clarify re docs for byte pattern group names (GH-99308)#101001

hauntsaninja merged 1 commit intopython:3.11fromGreatFruitOmsk:fix-re-docstring-3.11

Mar 4, 2023

Conversation

Copy link

Contributor

Kentzo commentedJan 12, 2023•
edited by bedevere-bot
Loading

Issue:Cryptic deprecation notice in the re module #99308

pythongh-99308: Fix wording of the deprecation notice in re for 3.11

7b84a3d

bedevere-bot added the awaiting review label

Jan 12, 2023

bedevere-bot mentioned this pull request

Jan 12, 2023

Cryptic deprecation notice in the re module#99308

Closed

bedevere-bot added docs

Documentation in the Doc dir

skip news labels

Jan 12, 2023

Copy link

Contributor

slateny commentedJan 14, 2023

Percomment I don't believe there should be a backport for this.

Copy link

ContributorAuthor

Kentzo commentedJan 14, 2023

#99308 (comment) says otherwise

CAM-Gerlach reviewed

Jan 14, 2023

View reviewed changes

Copy link

Member

CAM-Gerlach left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others.Learn more.

Thanks@Kentzo . One set of suggestions, otherwise LGTM

Doc/library/re.rstShow resolvedHide resolved

CAM-Gerlach requested a review fromhauntsaninja

January 14, 2023 04:09

hauntsaninja approved these changes

Jan 17, 2023

View reviewed changes

Copy link

Contributor

hauntsaninja left a comment•
edited
Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others.Learn more.

Thanks for backporting this!

Looks like it's common enough for past versions of docs to contain "removed" for future versions of Python, so would you mind applying CAM's suggestions?

Edit: Since this has been lying around, I think this is fine to merge as is without the more specific directives; 3.12 isn't finalised and this seems like a short time between deprecation and removal.