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

bpo-29557: Remove abiguous line in binhex docs #90

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Feb 14, 2017

Conversation

davidwilemski
Copy link
Contributor

"appears to not work in all cases" does not inspire confidence in this
module. I can find no context for what bug this was referencing so it
should be removed.

It appears this comment was from the original documentation for this function in 1995 but the commit also does not include any context regarding a bug: https://hg.python.org/cpython/rev/3911d4a89ab0#l4.40

"appears to not work in all cases" does not inspire confidence in this
module. I can find no context for what bug this was referencing so it
should be removed.
@davidwilemski
Copy link
Contributor Author

There was a bug fixed in the binhex function in 2009 but I have no idea if this was the bug that this documentation line was referring to: https://bugs.python.org/issue6369

I see no other open issues for binhex in the issue tracker so I believe this line should be removed until we have a concrete bug report that can be referenced by the documentation.

@codecov
Copy link

codecov bot commented Feb 14, 2017

Codecov Report

Merging #90 into master will increase coverage by <.01%.
The diff coverage is n/a.

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##           master      #90      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   82.38%   82.38%   +<.01%     
==========================================
  Files        1428     1428              
  Lines      351138   351138              
==========================================
+ Hits       289282   289292      +10     
+ Misses      61856    61846      -10

Continue to review full report at Codecov.

Legend - Click here to learn more
Δ = absolute <relative> (impact), ø = not affected, ? = missing data
Powered by Codecov. Last update d50f188...0a8eecc. Read the comment docs.

Copy link
Member

@berkerpeksag berkerpeksag left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Thanks for the PR! I think your analysis looks correct. However, it would be nice to record your research on bugs.python.org. Also, we can get more feedback from other core developers since not all of them subscribe to the GitHub repository.

See also step 5 at http://cpython-devguide.readthedocs.io/#quick-start

@davidwilemski
Copy link
Contributor Author

Sure, I wasn't sure where to draw the line for a trivial issue so didn't create a bug up front. I've created one now: http://bugs.python.org/issue29557

@davidwilemski davidwilemski changed the title Remove abiguous line in binhex docs bpo-29557: Remove abiguous line in binhex docs Feb 14, 2017
@zware
Copy link
Member

zware commented Feb 14, 2017

@davidwilemski Could you please add your GitHub username to your bpo profile?

@davidwilemski
Copy link
Contributor Author

Sure, done.

@berkerpeksag
Copy link
Member

Thanks!

Mariatta referenced this pull request in Mariatta/cpython Mar 5, 2017
"appears to not work in all cases" does not inspire confidence in this
module. I can find no context for what bug this was referencing so it
should be removed.
(cherry picked from commit 6de2b78)
Mariatta referenced this pull request in Mariatta/cpython Mar 5, 2017
"appears to not work in all cases" does not inspire confidence in this
module. I can find no context for what bug this was referencing so it
should be removed.
(cherry picked from commit 6de2b78)
Mariatta added a commit that referenced this pull request Mar 6, 2017
"appears to not work in all cases" does not inspire confidence in this
module. I can find no context for what bug this was referencing so it
should be removed.
(cherry picked from commit 6de2b78)
Mariatta added a commit that referenced this pull request Mar 6, 2017
"appears to not work in all cases" does not inspire confidence in this
module. I can find no context for what bug this was referencing so it
should be removed.
(cherry picked from commit 6de2b78)
akruis pushed a commit to akruis/cpython that referenced this pull request Sep 9, 2017
…ets.

Unbinding (tasklet.bind(None) ) of main tasklets caused an assertion violation.
Now it raises RuntimError.

https://bitbucket.org/stackless-dev/stackless/issues/90
(grafted from 58b930a8a1d931da2f5bc834681af5d1452e1733 and 46335aa61c7c)
jaraco pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Dec 2, 2022
Update the readme indicating that the PR will be assigned to the
core dev for follow up.
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

5 participants