Barry A. Warsaw writes: > I don't agree that socket.connect() and friends need this fix. Yes, > obviously append() needed fixing because of the application of Tim's > Twelfth Enlightenment to the semantic ambiguity. But socket.connect() > has no such ambiguity; you may spell it differently, but you know > exactly what you mean. Crock. The address representations have been fairly well defined for quite a while. Be explicit. > sock.connect(addr) This is the only legal signature. (host, port) is simply the form of addr for a particular address family. > One nit on the documentation of the socket module. The second entry > says: > > bind (address) > Bind the socket to address. The socket must not already be > bound. (The format of address depends on the address family -- > see above.) > > Huh? What "above" part should I see? Note that I'm reading this doc > off the web! Definately written for the paper document! Remind me about this again in a month and I'll fix it, but I don't want to play games with this little stuff until the 1.5.2p2 and 1.6 trees have been merged. Harrumph. -Fred -- Fred L. Drake, Jr. <fdrake at acm.org> Corporation for National Research Initiatives
RetroSearch is an open source project built by @garambo | Open a GitHub Issue
Search and Browse the WWW like it's 1997 | Search results from DuckDuckGo
HTML:
3.2
| Encoding:
UTF-8
| Version:
0.7.4