[issue5811] io.BufferedReader.peek(): Documentation differs from Implementation

2009-04-21 Thread Torsten Rottmann
Torsten Rottmann added the comment: Proposed patch to fix this: set the default of n to 1 as stated by docs: def _peek_unlocked(self, n=1): return n bytes: return self._read_buf[self._read_pos:self._read_pos+n] -- ___ Python tracker <h

[issue5811] io.BufferedReader.peek(): Documentation differs from Implementation

2009-04-21 Thread Torsten Rottmann
Torsten Rottmann added the comment: Note: this is also in Python 2.6 -- ___ Python tracker <http://bugs.python.org/issue5811> ___ ___ Python-bugs-list mailin

[issue5811] io.BufferedReader.peek(): Documentation differs from Implementation

2009-04-21 Thread Torsten Rottmann
New submission from Torsten Rottmann : The documented behavior of io.BufferedReader.peek([n]) states: peek([n]) Return 1 (or n if specified) bytes from a buffer without advancing the position. Thereas the parameter n is the _max_ length of returned bytes. Implementation is: def

[issue4098] surprised by default list parameter

2008-10-10 Thread Torsten Rottmann
Torsten Rottmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> added the comment: OK. I've read the Python Reference Manual 7.6 "Function Definition". It "explains" why this happens. BUT: Why can`t the compiler make a copy of the default object, if it's mutable (e.g. a

[issue4098] surprised by default list parameter

2008-10-10 Thread Torsten Rottmann
New submission from Torsten Rottmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: The attached file produced the following result: __ trott$ python2.5 p6.py [] [1234] __ I expected both times the empty list since the print statement prints just a defaulted parameter (&quo