Re: [Python-Dev] cpython: Fix 5931 - Python runtime hardcoded in wsgiref.simple_server - Now it specifies

2012-07-08 Thread Georg Brandl

On 07.07.2012 23:29, senthil.kumaran wrote:

http://hg.python.org/cpython/rev/34e705fa4da4
changeset:   77983:34e705fa4da4
user:Senthil Kumaran 
date:Sat Jul 07 14:29:58 2012 -0700
summary:
   Fix 5931 - Python runtime hardcoded in wsgiref.simple_server - Now it 
specifies an implementation specific term.

files:
   Doc/library/wsgiref.rst  |   5 +
   Lib/test/test_wsgiref.py |  10 --
   Lib/wsgiref/simple_server.py |   3 ++-
   Misc/NEWS|   3 +++
   4 files changed, 18 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)


diff --git a/Doc/library/wsgiref.rst b/Doc/library/wsgiref.rst
--- a/Doc/library/wsgiref.rst
+++ b/Doc/library/wsgiref.rst
@@ -609,6 +609,11 @@
as :class:`BaseCGIHandler` and :class:`CGIHandler`) that are not HTTP 
origin
servers.

+  .. versionchanged:: 3.3
+
+  The term "Python" is replaced with implementation specific term like
+  "CPython", "Jython" etc.


Please fix the markup: no blank line, but indented. E.g.

.. versionchanged:: 3.3
   Blah, blah.

Georg

___
Python-Dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe: 
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com


Re: [Python-Dev] cpython: Fix 5931 - Python runtime hardcoded in wsgiref.simple_server - Now it specifies

2012-07-08 Thread Senthil Kumaran
On Sun, Jul 8, 2012 at 1:12 AM, Georg Brandl  wrote:
>
> Please fix the markup: no blank line, but indented. E.g.
>
> .. versionchanged:: 3.3
>Blah, blah.

Done. Sorry for that, I only built the docs and saw if the directive
was affected and assumed it okay.

Fixed that.

Thanks,
Senthil
___
Python-Dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe: 
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com


Re: [Python-Dev] [Python-checkins] cpython: Issue 14814: The new systematic tests aren't just about error reporting any

2012-07-08 Thread Nick Coghlan
On Mon, Jul 9, 2012 at 3:22 AM, Terry Reedy  wrote:
> On 7/8/2012 9:14 AM, nick.coghlan wrote:
> If you want to report both errors, when present:

I don't really - when there are multiple things wrong with the
address, ipaddress just reports the first one it notices (e.g.
IPv4Address("google.com") will complain about the lack of "."
separators rather than the fact that "google" and "com" are not valid
octets).

This was just a case where I started to reorder the checks to do the
faster one first, and then realised it was more user friendly to check
the other way around (since the success case will always include both
checks, it only makes a difference to the speed of rejection of some
invalid cases). Most of the other validation checks have a more
obvious suitable order (for example, there's no reason to start
checking individual parts if we can't even split the parts up
appropriately).

>> +class BaseTestCase(unittest.TestCase):
>>   # One big change in ipaddress over the original ipaddr module is
>>   # error reporting that tries to assume users *don't know the rules*
>>   # for what constitutes an RFC compliant IP address
>
>
> Good assumption. There *will* be people who learn by trial and error.

*cough* It's conceivable I started down this path due to using the
REPL for exploration while making an initial attempt at writing method
and data attribute docs over the weekend. I'm firmly in the category
of IPv4 network programming engineers with next to no IPv6 experience
:)

Cheers,
Nick.

-- 
Nick Coghlan   |   [email protected]   |   Brisbane, Australia
___
Python-Dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe: 
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com