-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 30.3k
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
gh-95913: Fix and copyedit New Features section of 3.11 What's New #95915
gh-95913: Fix and copyedit New Features section of 3.11 What's New #95915
Conversation
when dealing with deeply nested :class:`dict` objects and multiple function calls: | ||
|
||
.. code-block:: python |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Can't we use this here?
when dealing with deeply nested :class:`dict` objects and multiple function calls: | |
.. code-block:: python | |
when dealing with deeply nested :class:`dict` objects and multiple function calls:: |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I didn't see a strong reason to change this from the original source, since it renders equivalently, is a little more explicit and (IIRC) warns if the syntax used doesn't actually lex according to the declared lexer (vs. ::
fails silently). But I can if you think its important
.. index:: object; code, code object | ||
|
||
.. _codeobjects: | ||
|
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
How does this change affect :ref:
and index entries linking (if it does)?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
It doesn't affect the index entries (it still links to the same place, right above the section) but fixes an issue with the ref target not actually being the section as intended, and thus not having a generated link text causing :ref:`codeobjects`
to error out. It won't affect any existing refs, since it only changes the generated link text and not the ref target location, which the existing refs could not be using or they would have errored and failed the build.
As well as complex arithmetic expressions: | ||
|
||
.. code-block:: python |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
As well as complex arithmetic expressions: | |
.. code-block:: python | |
As well as complex arithmetic expressions:: |
Same here, and possibly elsewhere.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
See above—I can do this if you really think its necessary, but I'm not sure it is.
Doc/whatsnew/3.11.rst
Outdated
that is not available at the time when the exception is raised. | ||
The added notes appear in the default traceback. | ||
See :pep:`678` for more details. | ||
(Contributed by Irit Katriel in :issue:`45607`.) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
(Contributed by Irit Katriel in :issue:`45607`.) | |
(Contributed by Irit Katriel in :gh:`89770`.) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I thought about this, but I didn't end up updating these, since the BPO issue was canonical at the time the work was done, and the links redirect to the up to date GH issue. Is there any guidance on whether old :issue:
refs should be manually converted, or left as-is? I couldn't find any in the devguide; if not, it might be better to make this a separate issue/discussion and be done consistently throughout.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
IMO it's best to avoid links to redirects, but it's not a big deal.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Yup, if people agree I'm happy to go through and convert them; I just think its best to do it in a separate PR after these more important ones are all merged, so it can be decided there, its consistent and we don't hold up the rest of the changes since we're on the clock here.
|
||
The :option:`-X` ``no_debug_ranges`` option and the environment variable | ||
:envvar:`PYTHONNODEBUGRANGES` can be used to disable this feature. | ||
- The :c:func:`PyCode_Addr2Location` function in the C API. | ||
|
||
See :pep:`657` for more details. (Contributed by Pablo Galindo, Batuhan Taskaya | ||
and Ammar Askar in :issue:`43950`.) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
and Ammar Askar in :issue:`43950`.) | |
and Ammar Askar in :gh:`88116`.) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
See above
Approved the pep 678 related edits. |
c6e9c6d
to
3c4a03a
Compare
Thanks @iritkatriel and sorry for the delay getting to this @ezio-melotti — I responded to the comments, fixed the conflict caused by #95937 changing the title of the next section, cherry-picked in @iritkatriel 's #95955 (to fix the conflicts with this), and added a commit adding consistent, standardized section ref labels to the touched sections. Closes #95955 |
LGTM other than the discussion about bpo vs GH issue linking being unresolved. |
This is an improvement, so I'll merge it. |
Thanks @CAM-Gerlach for the PR, and @encukou for merging it 🌮🎉.. I'm working now to backport this PR to: 3.11. |
GH-96933 is a backport of this pull request to the 3.11 branch. |
…New (pythonGH-95915) (cherry picked from commit 8ee27e3) Co-authored-by: C.A.M. Gerlach <[email protected]>
…H-95915) (cherry picked from commit 8ee27e3) Co-authored-by: C.A.M. Gerlach <[email protected]>
…H-95915) (cherry picked from commit 8ee27e3) Co-authored-by: C.A.M. Gerlach <[email protected]>
Part of #95913
Fixes Sphinx and textual issues in the What's New in Python 3.11 "New Features" section, improves the clarity, quality and non-duplication of the text, and links to referenced documentation sections.
Nothing too major, but a few highlights:
BaseException.add_note()
method