RetroSearch Browse

Mon Jan 27 17:40:56 CET 2014 · https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2014-January/132148.html

Am 27.01.2014 13:12, schrieb Antoine Pitrou:
> 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)")

It's also the convention we've been using for the docs.

Georg

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

Showing content from https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2014-January/132148.html below:

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