[2.7] bpo-33006 - Correct filter doc string to clarify 2nd argument can be iterable by TonyFlury · Pull Request #6015 · python/cpython (original) (raw)
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service andprivacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub?Sign in to your account
Conversation6 Commits6 Checks0 Files changed
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
[ Show hidden characters]({{ revealButtonHref }})
| iteration, or an iterator. If iterable is a string or a tuple, the result\n\ |
|---|
| also has that type; otherwise it is always a list. If function is None, the\n\ |
| identity function is assumed, that is, all elements of iterable that are\n\ |
| false are removed."); |
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
While accurate, it seems a bit too verbose for a doc string. How about using the current Python 3 docstring as a starting point?
| Return an iterator yielding those items of iterable for which function(item)
| is true. If function is None, return the items that are true.
s/an iterator/a sequence/ and include the 'If iterable is a string or tuple ...' sentence?
A Python core developer has requested some changes be made to your pull request before we can consider merging it. If you could please address their requests along with any other requests in other reviews from core developers that would be appreciated.
Once you have made the requested changes, please leave a comment on this pull request containing the phrase I have made the requested changes; please review again. I will then notify any core developers who have left a review that you're ready for them to take another look at this pull request.
I have made the requested changes; please review again.
Thanks for making the requested changes!
@ned-deily: please review the changes made to this pull request.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
LGTM, thanks for making the changes @TonyFlury. And thanks for the reminder @csabella!
bpo-33006 - Correct filter doc string to clarify 2nd argument can be iterable [2.7] bpo-33006 - Correct filter doc string to clarify 2nd argument can be iterable
@TonyFlury: Status check is done, and it's a success ✅ .