This issue tracker has been migrated to GitHub ,
and is currently read-only.
For more information,
see the GitHub FAQs in the Python's Developer Guide.
Created on 2011年06月09日 15:49 by eric.araujo, last changed 2022年04月11日 14:57 by admin. This issue is now closed.
| Files | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| File name | Uploaded | Description | Edit | |
| atexit-doc.diff | eric.araujo, 2011年06月09日 15:49 | review | ||
| Messages (9) | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| msg137995 - (view) | Author: Éric Araujo (eric.araujo) * (Python committer) | Date: 2011年06月09日 15:49 | |
I wanted to know the behavior of atexit.register with the same function added more than once and found out it is not explicitly documented. I experimented and made a patch to the doc. |
|||
| msg153097 - (view) | Author: Éric Araujo (eric.araujo) * (Python committer) | Date: 2012年02月11日 05:23 | |
Maybe one of you gentlemen would like to review this. |
|||
| msg153159 - (view) | Author: Terry J. Reedy (terry.reedy) * (Python committer) | Date: 2012年02月12日 04:20 | |
I assume the patch is an improved description of reality. The old 'without binding the original name to ``None``.' is confusing to me in that context, so good riddance. However, I am not familiar with atexit or how it is intended to work. If you are not sure either, you might ask on pydev. |
|||
| msg153176 - (view) | Author: Éric Araujo (eric.araujo) * (Python committer) | Date: 2012年02月12日 05:12 | |
I wrote the patch after testing in a shell, so I’m confident it describes reality; I was more asking a wording/phrasing review. |
|||
| msg153246 - (view) | Author: Terry J. Reedy (terry.reedy) * (Python committer) | Date: 2012年02月13日 04:03 | |
+ This function returns *func* which makes it possible add , after 'func'. +This obviously only works with functions that ... I think I would like this better without 'obviously' (which you inherited). Otherwise, seems good to go to me. |
|||
| msg153405 - (view) | Author: Éric Araujo (eric.araujo) * (Python committer) | Date: 2012年02月15日 15:51 | |
Thanks. I’ve also realized that the doc does not mention that any callable can be used; I don’t know if we should say it explicitly (I think I did a change like that recently in another file), or if we expect people to just know it from experience, or if we should add an entry for "function" in the glossary. |
|||
| msg153407 - (view) | Author: Roundup Robot (python-dev) (Python triager) | Date: 2012年02月15日 16:15 | |
New changeset 55fc092dad72 by Éric Araujo in branch '3.2': Improve doc for atexit.register and unregister (#12297) http://hg.python.org/cpython/rev/55fc092dad72 New changeset f7163afecb97 by Éric Araujo in branch 'default': Merge fixes for #1326113 and #12297 from 3.2 http://hg.python.org/cpython/rev/f7163afecb97 |
|||
| msg153410 - (view) | Author: Roundup Robot (python-dev) (Python triager) | Date: 2012年02月15日 16:15 | |
New changeset a99632426af5 by Éric Araujo in branch '2.7': Improve doc for atexit.register (#12297) http://hg.python.org/cpython/rev/a99632426af5 |
|||
| msg153414 - (view) | Author: Éric Araujo (eric.araujo) * (Python committer) | Date: 2012年02月15日 16:46 | |
Closing as fixed, but if you have any feedback on my function vs. callable question, please share. |
|||
| History | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Date | User | Action | Args |
| 2022年04月11日 14:57:18 | admin | set | github: 56506 |
| 2012年02月15日 16:46:46 | eric.araujo | set | status: open -> closed resolution: fixed messages: + msg153414 stage: patch review -> resolved |
| 2012年02月15日 16:15:55 | python-dev | set | messages: + msg153410 |
| 2012年02月15日 16:15:07 | python-dev | set | nosy:
+ python-dev messages: + msg153407 |
| 2012年02月15日 15:51:05 | eric.araujo | set | messages: + msg153405 |
| 2012年02月13日 04:03:28 | terry.reedy | set | messages: + msg153246 |
| 2012年02月12日 05:12:57 | eric.araujo | set | messages: + msg153176 |
| 2012年02月12日 04:20:39 | terry.reedy | set | messages: + msg153159 |
| 2012年02月11日 05:23:11 | eric.araujo | set | nosy:
+ terry.reedy, ezio.melotti messages: + msg153097 |
| 2011年06月09日 15:49:10 | eric.araujo | create | |