| msg270858 - (view) |
Author: Xiang Zhang (xiang.zhang) *  |
Date: 2016-07-20 08:17 |
| For tuple and list, their signatures are tuple([iterable]) and list([iterable]). But actually they support keyword argument *sequence*. The parameter names in doc are sometimes just placeholders but sometimes are real parameter names. So I suggest make the implementation and doc more compliant. One method is make the parameter name in implementation *iterable*. The other is totally suppress keyword argument since it is never documented. This is not a necessary change but I think the compliment is not a bad idea. |
|
|
| msg271034 - (view) |
Author: Terry J. Reedy (terry.reedy) * |
Date: 2016-07-22 21:23 |
| >>> help(tuple) Help on class tuple in module builtins: class tuple(object) | tuple() -> empty tuple |
tuple(iterable) -> tuple initialized from iterable's items ... >>> tuple(sequence=[1,2,3]) (1, 2, 3) I am surprised. Searches with Google, Githup, Nullage turned up no example of such usage. 'tuple(sequence)' has, rather naturally, been used. |
|
| msg271049 - (view) |
Author: Raymond Hettinger (rhettinger) * |
Date: 2016-07-23 03:14 |
| This should have been changed in Python 3.0 which is when were allowed to make non-backwards compatible changes. Since it wasn't, we have to live this mild annoyance forever (you can't change it without breaking somebody's working code somewhere). I'm open to a small documentation patch that indicates that the actual keyword is "sequence" but the main entry of list(iterable) should remain because it is more descriptive of the kind of argument that is allowed. |
|
|
| msg271091 - (view) |
Author: Xiang Zhang (xiang.zhang) * |
Date: 2016-07-23 16:18 |
| Thanks for replies. Attach a small documentation patch. |
|
|
| msg271613 - (view) |
Author: Raymond Hettinger (rhettinger) * |
Date: 2016-07-29 06:44 |
| Can you limit the doc change to just a single occurrence for list and tuple. I'm averse to filling docs with redundant, noisy notes over a very minor nuance that is more of a curiosity than an actual issue. Also, can you inline the text rather than using the ..note directive which adds more visual clutter than is warranted for something so minor. |
|
|
| msg271614 - (view) |
Author: Terry J. Reedy (terry.reedy) * |
Date: 2016-07-29 06:59 |
| I agree with Raymond's comments. No 'note', and once in each doc. Perhaps 'for __ and __, the actual name of parameter 'iterable' is still 'sequence'. ('Still' would be appropriate if the functions predate iterables.) |
|
|
| msg271616 - (view) |
Author: Xiang Zhang (xiang.zhang) * |
Date: 2016-07-29 07:30 |
| Nice to know your opinions. :) Adjust the patch to use Terry's sentence. |
|
|
| msg277508 - (view) |
Author: Serhiy Storchaka (serhiy.storchaka) * |
Date: 2016-09-27 08:52 |
| I would prefer deprecating keyword parameter for list() and tuple(). It is not documented and unlikely used in third party code. |
|
|
| msg289109 - (view) |
Author: Xiang Zhang (xiang.zhang) * |
Date: 2017-03-06 14:39 |
| This issue doesn't make any sense once #29695 is applied. So close. |
|
|