[issue38080] 2to3 urllib fixer: missing fix for urllib.getproxies
New submission from 徐靖 : urllib.getproxies can be converted to urllib.request.getproxies, and their documentation looks the same. but in fix_urllib.py and my real test, it is ignored. I do not know why 2to3 does nothing. Is it a bug? -- components: 2to3 (2.x to 3.x conversion tool) messages: 351576 nosy: shiyuchong priority: normal severity: normal status: open title: 2to3 urllib fixer: missing fix for urllib.getproxies type: behavior versions: Python 2.7, Python 3.5, Python 3.6, Python 3.7 ___ Python tracker <https://bugs.python.org/issue38080> ___ ___ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
[issue37602] nonzero fixer problem
New submission from 徐靖 : An easy problem. It seems like nonzero fixer can only fix definition, not usage. nonzero fixer cannot fix problems like below: a = 1 a.__nonzero__() And there are no cases of __nonzero__() usage in test cases from test_fixers.py.(all cases test only definition rename) It might not be a bug, since in DOC it just says "rename", not "convert". (If it is not a bug, the doc must be considered to be kinds of confusing and should add additional description.)but adding this automatic transformation is really useful in my current work, so at least an optional fixer is needed for 2to3. A fixer of __oct__(),__hex__() to oct(),hex() is also in need, but 2to3 lacks such fixer. -- components: 2to3 (2.x to 3.x conversion tool) messages: 348002 nosy: shiyuchong priority: normal severity: normal status: open title: nonzero fixer problem type: behavior versions: Python 2.7 ___ Python tracker <https://bugs.python.org/issue37602> ___ ___ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
[issue37608] _thread: acquire_lock, release_lock still in use while declared to be "gone" in Documentation
New submission from 徐靖 :
In https://docs.python.org/3/whatsnew/3.0.html#library-changes Documentation,
it said "Cleanup of the thread module: acquire_lock() and release_lock() are
gone; use acquire() and release() instead."
But in 3.7, I can still find
{"acquire_lock", (PyCFunction)(void(*)(void))lock_PyThread_acquire_lock,
METH_VARARGS | METH_KEYWORDS, acquire_doc},
in _threadmodule.c line 217, which defined this function. And in my code ,these
functions work, without any warning or error.
So maybe the Documentation should be changed, or the support of these functions
should be removed, or at least add a warning.
It has no effect on code, but truly confusing and waste me an hour to search
for why.
--
assignee: docs@python
components: Documentation
messages: 348053
nosy: docs@python, shiyuchong
priority: normal
severity: normal
status: open
title: _thread: acquire_lock,release_lock still in use while declared to be
"gone" in Documentation
versions: Python 3.7
___
Python tracker
<https://bugs.python.org/issue37608>
___
___
Python-bugs-list mailing list
Unsubscribe:
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
[issue37602] nonzero fixer problem
徐靖 added the comment: Got it. I am just testing all changes in Python 3.X (in preparation for a project porting to 3.7 before I have permission to view the source code), and call __nonzero__() directly for testing. So maybe I cannot provide an example. I did not realize that it should not be called directly. Still, I recommend a documentation change to explain this fact, telling readers the fixer will not change the usage of __nonzero__(). Thanks for your reply. -- assignee: -> docs@python components: +Documentation nosy: +docs@python ___ Python tracker <https://bugs.python.org/issue37602> ___ ___ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
[issue37608] _thread: acquire_lock, release_lock still in use while declared to be "gone" in Documentation
徐靖 added the comment: I got it that it is just my misunderstanding. Thanks. -- ___ Python tracker <https://bugs.python.org/issue37608> ___ ___ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
[issue37626] Documentation：conflict between docs
Change by 徐靖 : -- assignee: docs@python components: Documentation nosy: docs@python, shiyuchong priority: normal severity: normal status: open title: Documentation：conflict between docs versions: Python 3.5, Python 3.6, Python 3.7 ___ Python tracker <https://bugs.python.org/issue37626> ___ ___ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
[issue37626] Documentation：conflict between docs
New submission from 徐靖 : In https://docs.python.org/3/whatsnew/3.4.html#api-and-feature-removals,It is said "inspect.Signature: positional-only parameters are now required to have a valid name." But in https://docs.python.org/3/library/inspect.html?highlight=3.4#inspect.Signature, the actual change happened in inspect.Parameter, " Changed in version 3.4: In Python 3.3 Parameter objects were allowed to have name set to None if their kind was set to POSITIONAL_ONLY. This is no longer permitted." So I wonder is it a mistake? -- ___ Python tracker <https://bugs.python.org/issue37626> ___ ___ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
