On 24/03/2006 2:57 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > Gotta love the attitude of people on .lang newsgroups.... > > > The unraw '\t' might work, but all the example in the tutorial use raw > strings, so why not be consistent in the example scripts?
classfix.py is not an *example* script. It is (was!) a *tool* script. > > 1.5.2? Aren't we at 2.4.2 now? So the regs documentation was pulled, > yet the source code shipped with the installer still uses it? You are missing the point. The whole *regex* module was deprecated around 1.something. It was replaced by the *re* module. At some stage the whole regex docs were "pulled". 1.5.2 is the latest version that I have on my machine that still provided the docs for regex. The regs attribute is documented there. When you said "Nothing in the Python lib reference on the regs attribute for regex objects" you must have been referring to the *re* documentation. > How are > people suppose to make heads or tails of a language when it ships with > deprecated, undocumented code? Here is line 3 of classfix.py: # This script is obsolete -- it is kept for historical purposes only. > sheesh. Sheesh vobiscum :-) -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
