[issue37891] Exceptions tutorial page does not mention raise from
Bonifacio added the comment: Version 3.9 of the docs already cover the syntax Neils talks about in his original message. https://docs.python.org/3.9/tutorial/errors.html#exception-chaining Is there anything left to be done here? If so, I'm glad to help with them, but I would need directions. -- nosy: +Bonifacio2 ___ Python tracker <https://bugs.python.org/issue37891> ___ ___ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
[issue13498] os.makedirs exist_ok documentation is incorrect, as is some of the behavior
Bonifacio added the comment: I just read this issue's history and it looks like it is out of date. The docs now match the behaviour. > If the file exists but the mode is different than that specified (or > defaulted) after applying the umask, then an error is raised regardless of > the value of exist_ok. This isn’t true anymore. > The above wording also implies that if the directory exists but has a > different mode, that the mode will be changed. Again, this is not what the > code does. The docs now state the behaviour explicitly: “The file permission bits of existing parent directories are not changed.” This means the reported issue no longer exists. But somewhere along the discussion it became one about adding a new flag to control the behaviour when there are mode mismatches. I tried applying Hynek’s patch locally, but it doesn’t work anymore. If we want to go ahead with adding this new flag we would have to create a new patch. If we want to drop the change then this issue can be closed. If we decide to go with the flag addition I’m glad to help fixing Hynek’s patch’s incompatibilities if he is ok with that. -- nosy: +Bonifacio2 ___ Python tracker <https://bugs.python.org/issue13498> ___ ___ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
[issue11176] [doc] give more meaningful argument names in argparse documentation
Bonifacio added the comment: I tried applying the latest patch version but it failed. Are the original authors still interested in moving forward with this patch? If not then I could give this issue a try. -- nosy: +Bonifacio2 ___ Python tracker <https://bugs.python.org/issue11176> ___ ___ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
[issue11176] [doc] give more meaningful argument names in argparse documentation
Change by Bonifacio : -- pull_requests: +24885 stage: needs patch -> patch review pull_request: https://github.com/python/cpython/pull/26279 ___ Python tracker <https://bugs.python.org/issue11176> ___ ___ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
[issue16970] argparse: bad nargs value raises misleading message
Bonifacio added the comment: Every PR related to this issue (even the ones only referenced during the discussion) was already merged. Latest message is from more than one year and a half ago. The only thing left to do here would be the backport to 3.7, but according to Guido it could just be skipped (since it's just an improved error message). I don't think Sushma is still interested in this, so I guess this could be closed? -- nosy: +Bonifacio2 ___ Python tracker <https://bugs.python.org/issue16970> ___ ___ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
[issue16845] warnings.simplefilter should validate input
Change by Bonifacio : -- keywords: +patch nosy: +Bonifacio2 nosy_count: 3.0 -> 4.0 pull_requests: +25281 pull_request: https://github.com/python/cpython/pull/26696 ___ Python tracker <https://bugs.python.org/issue16845> ___ ___ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
