➜
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 2012-04-23 17:48 by ssm, last changed 2022-04-11 14:57 by admin.
| Files | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| File name | Uploaded | Description | Edit | |
| ssm_validate.patch | ssm, 2012-04-23 17:48 | review | ||
| ssm_validate.patch | ssm, 2012-05-17 14:21 | Don’t use tuples when using only len() to format a string | review | |
| issue14652.diff | berker.peksag, 2015-02-13 19:23 | review | ||
| Messages (4) | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| msg159053 - (view) | Author: Sidney San Martín (ssm) * | Date: 2012-04-23 17:48 | |
wsgiref’s validation middleware is missing messages for many of its assertions, and its docstring doesn’t reflect read() now requiring an argument (said that it took an optional argument). Here’s a patch to add some and update the comment. |
|||
| msg160951 - (view) | Author: Jeff McNeil (mcjeff) * | Date: 2012-05-17 04:04 | |
I went through the patch real quick and I noticed that your using single element tuples in your string formatting. That makes sense in situations where the argument might itself be a tuple, however, not on calls to len() as that will return an integer. |
|||
| msg160971 - (view) | Author: Sidney San Martín (ssm) * | Date: 2012-05-17 14:21 | |
Thanks Jeff, I’m actually a relatively new Python developer and got the impression that it was best practice to always use a tuple for string formatting, for consistency. Here’s an updated patch which drops the tuples for those cases. |
|||
| msg235914 - (view) | Author: Berker Peksag (berker.peksag) *  |
Date: 2015-02-13 19:23 | |
Here is an updated patch. For InputWrapper.read(), see issue 18610. |
|||
| History | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Date | User | Action | Args |
| 2022-04-11 14:57:29 | admin | set | github: 58857 |
| 2015-02-13 19:23:25 | berker.peksag | set | files:
+ issue14652.diff versions: + Python 3.4, Python 3.5, - Python 3.3 nosy: + berker.peksag messages: + msg235914 stage: patch review |
| 2012-05-17 14:21:00 | ssm | set | files:
+ ssm_validate.patch messages: + msg160971 |
| 2012-05-17 04:04:23 | mcjeff | set | nosy:
+ mcjeff messages: + msg160951 |
| 2012-04-23 17:48:02 | ssm | create | |