RetroSearch Browse

Mon Jan 27 13:12:25 CET 2014 · https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2014-January/132134.html

On Mon, 27 Jan 2014 04:01:02 -0800
Larry Hastings <larry at hastings.org> wrote:
> 
> On 01/27/2014 01:39 AM, Antoine Pitrou wrote:
> > On Sun, 26 Jan 2014 21:01:08 -0800
> > Larry Hastings <larry at hastings.org> wrote:
> >> On 01/26/2014 08:40 PM, Alexander Belopolsky wrote:
> >>> On Sun, Jan 26, 2014 at 11:26 PM, Vajrasky Kok
> >>> <sky.kok at speaklikeaking.com <mailto:sky.kok at speaklikeaking.com>> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>      In case we are taking "not backporting anything at all" road, what is
> >>>      the best fix for the document?
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> I would say no fix is needed for this doc because the signature
> >>> suggests (correctly) that passing times by keyword is not supported.
> >> Where does it do that?
> > In the "[,times]" spelling, which is the spelling customarily used for
> > positional-only arguments.
> 
> That's not my experience.

But it's mine :-) (try "help(str)" or "help(list)")

That said, it's fair to say that whatever convention there is isn't
very strictly followed on this particular point.

Regards

Antoine.

Home - News ( United States | United Kingdom | Italy | Germany ) - Football scores

Showing content from https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2014-January/132134.html below:

[Python-Dev] Negative times behaviour in itertools.repeat for Python maintenance releases (2.7, 3.3 and maybe 3.4)