Skip to content
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 our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Convert 12 PEPs #187

Merged
merged 2 commits into from
Jan 24, 2017
Merged

Convert 12 PEPs #187

merged 2 commits into from
Jan 24, 2017

Conversation

Mariatta
Copy link
Member

@Mariatta Mariatta commented Jan 23, 2017

PEP 211
PEP 218
PEP 223

  • fix couple typos: 'discussed' and 'incompatibility'
  • add reference to a python-dev discussion titled 'Go \x yourself'

PEP 243

PEP 244
PEP 265
PEP 278
PEP 279

PEP 337
PEP 356
PEP 379
PEP 3144

Ongoing work for #4

PEP 211
PEP 218
PEP 223
- fix couple typos: 'discussed' and 'incompatibility'
- add reference to a python-dev discussion titled 'Go \x yourself'
PEP 243

PEP 244
PEP 265
PEP 278
PEP 279

PEP 337
PEP 356
PEP 379
PEP 3144
non-restartable inner iterators and cache their values.
3. There would have to be some way to distinguish restartable
iterators from ones that couldn't be restarted. For example,
if ``S`` is an input stream (e.g. a file), and ``L`` is a list, then ``S
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Does having a literal spanning lines render properly?

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Renders fine :) see attached screenshot:

screen shot 2017-01-23 at 7 10 46 pm

I believe the most common case would actually be ``by_value=1,
reversed=1``, but the defaults values given here might lead to
fewer surprises by users: ``sorted_items()`` would be the same as
``items()`` followed by ``sort()```.
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Extra backtick.

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Will remove in the next commit.

reversed=1", but the defaults values given here might lead to
fewer surprises by users: sorted_items() would be the same as
items() followed by sort().
I believe the most common case would actually be ``by_value=1,
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

In case multi-line literals are a problem.

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Here's how it looks like (after I removed the extra backticks at the end)

screen shot 2017-01-23 at 7 14 09 pm

@@ -1,203 +1,227 @@
PEP: 279
Title: The enumerate() built-in function
Title: The ``enumerate()`` built-in function
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

No need for the backticks in the title.

PEP 279, remove backticks from title
@brettcannon brettcannon merged commit 4598c39 into python:master Jan 24, 2017
@brettcannon
Copy link
Member

Thanks!

@Mariatta Mariatta deleted the restify-peps branch January 24, 2017 21:15
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants