bpo-33333 by chrBrd · Pull Request #6567 · 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
Conversation4 Commits3 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 }})
Documentation for ConfigParser.items() states:
When section is not given, return a list of section_name, section_proxy pairs, including DEFAULTSECT.
Otherwise, return a list of name, value pairs for the options in the given section. Optional arguments have the same meaning as for the get() method.
This fix aligns behaviour to that specified in the documentation.
As well as fixing bpo-33333 this also resolves bpo-33251 (related PR #6446).
chrBrd added 3 commits
section keys being returned by RawConfigParser.items.
Hello, and thanks for your contribution!
I'm a bot set up to make sure that the project can legally accept your contribution by verifying you have signed the PSF contributor agreement (CLA).
Unfortunately our records indicate you have not signed the CLA. For legal reasons we need you to sign this before we can look at your contribution. Please follow the steps outlined in the CPython devguide to rectify this issue.
When your account is ready, please add a comment in this pull request
and a Python core developer will remove the CLA not signed label
to make the bot check again.
Thanks again to your contribution and we look forward to looking at it!
Contributor
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
We won't be doing this. This is intentional behavior of configparser for backwards compatibility with versions older than 3.2 (most notably 2.7).
If cfgparser.items(section) is surprising, use cfgparser[section].items() instead.
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 thought there'd be b/c issues, closing.
