[2.7] bpo-33216: Clarify the documentation for CALL_FUNCTION_* (GH-8338)#8783
Conversation
…nGH-8338) (cherry picked from commit 76aa2c0) Co-authored-by: larryhastings <[email protected]>
b1f278e to
4d2ca5a
Compare
ericsnowcurrently
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
(conditional approval)
Aside from the "forward-referencing" versionchanged note, LGTM.
| the value of ``argc``. | ||
|
|
||
| .. versionchanged:: 3.5 | ||
| In versions 3.0 to 3.4, the iterable object was above |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Assuming this versionchanged note should be here, for the 2.7 docs we should also mention 2.7, no? :)
In version 2.7 (and 3.0 to 3.4), ...
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Oops! I thought I removed all such notes. This one should be removed too.
| The iterable object is ignored when computing | ||
| the value of ``argc``. | ||
|
|
||
| .. versionchanged:: 3.5 |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Presumably you've added this versionchanged note in the 2.7 docs for the sake of porting. I can see the value of that, but it may not be the right thing to do. Perhaps I've misunderstood the reason?
Regardless, I'm not sure that such a "forward-referencing" versionchanged note is correct here. It's not something that we do anywhere else in the docs. From what I understand, that's what the porting section of the "What's New" doc is for. Otherwise the docs would already be full of forward-referencing versionchanged notes, the devguide would mention it, and folks making changes would be responsible for updating the docs for all the past versions with such notes.
FWIW, I don't see a mention of CALL_FUNCTION_VAR in the porting section for 3.5, so it would probably be worth adding that. I'm sure you're already aware, but remember that the 3.5 "What's New" doc is in each branch from 3.5 onward. I'll open an issue for this.
serhiy-storchaka
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Thanks for your review @ericsnowcurrently . The versionchanged note was left by accident.
| the value of ``argc``. | ||
|
|
||
| .. versionchanged:: 3.5 | ||
| In versions 3.0 to 3.4, the iterable object was above |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Oops! I thought I removed all such notes. This one should be removed too.
|
Thanks for taking care of that, Serhiy. LGTM. |
(cherry picked from commit 76aa2c0)
Co-authored-by: larryhastings [email protected]
https://bugs.python.org/issue33216