Movatterモバイル変換

[0]ホーム
URL:

Skip to content

Navigation Menu

Sign in
Appearance settings

Search code, repositories, users, issues, pull requests...

Provide feedback

We read every piece of feedback, and take your input very seriously.

Saved searches

Use saved searches to filter your results more quickly

 Sign up
Appearance settings

gh-112266: Remove(if defined) part from__dict__ and__weakref__ docstrings#112268

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

Merged
AlexWaygood merged 1 commit intopython:mainfromsobolevn:issue-112266
Nov 19, 2023

Conversation

sobolevn
Copy link
Member

@sobolevnsobolevn commentedNov 19, 2023•
edited by bedevere-appbot
Loading

The PR is quite straight-forward, but I think that others should decide on which wording is best:

  • It got me confused
  • Looks like no other user had reported this issue for like 20 years

Copy link
Member

@AlexWaygoodAlexWaygood left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I like this change. While I don't personally find the existing text unclear, I can see how it could be confusing for some. This change also makes the docstrings more concise, which is generally a good thing; and I honestly don't think the "(if defined)" really provides any additional information, anyway.

Copy link
Member

@hugovkhugovk left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

There is ambiguity of whether it applies to the dictionary, or the instance variables, so fine to remove it.

@hugovk
Copy link
Member

Backport? This seems like a docs fix, or a bug fix, both which should be backported.

@AlexWaygood
Copy link
Member

Backport? This seems like a docs fix, or a bug fix, both which should be backported.

I suppose itcould break people's tests if they're asserting the exact output ofhelp() on a class... but they probably shouldn't be doing that, anyway 😄 So yes, I think we're good to backport this

hugovk and sobolevn reacted with thumbs up emoji

@AlexWaygoodAlexWaygood added needs backport to 3.11only security fixes needs backport to 3.12only security fixes labelsNov 19, 2023
@AlexWaygoodAlexWaygood merged commitf812914 intopython:mainNov 19, 2023
@miss-islington-app
Copy link

Thanks@sobolevn for the PR, and@AlexWaygood for merging it 🌮🎉.. I'm working now to backport this PR to: 3.11, 3.12.
🐍🍒⛏🤖

@miss-islington-app
Copy link

Sorry,@sobolevn and@AlexWaygood, I could not cleanly backport this to3.11 due to a conflict.
Please backport usingcherry_picker on command line.

cherry_picker f8129146ef9e1b71609ef4becc5d508061970733 3.11

miss-islington pushed a commit to miss-islington/cpython that referenced this pull requestNov 19, 2023
…akref__` docstrings (pythonGH-112268)(cherry picked from commitf812914)Co-authored-by: Nikita Sobolev <mail@sobolevn.me>
@bedevere-app
Copy link

GH-112270 is a backport of this pull request to the3.12 branch.

@bedevere-appbedevere-appbot removed the needs backport to 3.12only security fixes labelNov 19, 2023
@AlexWaygood
Copy link
Member

Are you okay to take care of the 3.11 backport,@sobolevn? :)

AlexWaygood pushed a commit that referenced this pull requestNov 19, 2023
…eakref__` docstrings (GH-112268) (#112270)gh-112266: Remove `(if defined)` part from `__dict__` and `__weakref__` docstrings (GH-112268)(cherry picked from commitf812914)Co-authored-by: Nikita Sobolev <mail@sobolevn.me>
@sobolevn
Copy link
MemberAuthor

Yes, will do later

AlexWaygood reacted with heart emoji

sobolevn added a commit to sobolevn/cpython that referenced this pull requestNov 20, 2023
@bedevere-app
Copy link

GH-112276 is a backport of this pull request to the3.11 branch.

@bedevere-appbedevere-appbot removed the needs backport to 3.11only security fixes labelNov 20, 2023
AlexWaygood pushed a commit that referenced this pull requestNov 20, 2023
@hugovk
Copy link
Member

Backport? This seems like a docs fix, or a bug fix, both which should be backported.

I suppose itcould break people's tests if they're asserting the exact output ofhelp() on a class... but they probably shouldn't be doing that, anyway 😄 So yes, I think we're good to backport this

Sphinx says 👋

Their tests have started failing on 3.11-3.13, they have some:

assert'      list of weak references to the object (if defined)'inactual

https://github.com/sphinx-doc/sphinx/actions/runs/7158385030/job/19490408092?pr=11791

I'll open a PR to fix their tests with asys.version_info check.

AlexWaygood reacted with heart emoji

@hugovk
Copy link
Member

Created PRsphinx-doc/sphinx#11793.

aisk pushed a commit to aisk/cpython that referenced this pull requestFeb 11, 2024
Glyphack pushed a commit to Glyphack/cpython that referenced this pull requestSep 2, 2024
Sign up for freeto join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account?Sign in to comment
Reviewers

@hugovkhugovkhugovk approved these changes

@AlexWaygoodAlexWaygoodAlexWaygood approved these changes

@markshannonmarkshannonAwaiting requested review from markshannonmarkshannon is a code owner

Assignees

@AlexWaygoodAlexWaygood

Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants
@sobolevn@hugovk@AlexWaygood
[8]ページ先頭
©2009-2025 Movatter.jp