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.

Title: Wording of s * n in Common Sequence Operations is not optimal
Type: Stage: resolved
Components: Documentation Versions:
Status: closed Resolution: fixed
Dependencies: Superseder:
Assigned To: docs@python Nosy List: chavdar, docs@python, mdk
Priority: normal Keywords: easy, patch

Created on 2020-10-04 16:20 by mdk, last changed 2022-04-11 14:59 by admin. This issue is now closed.

Pull Requests
URL Status Linked Edit
PR 22570 merged chavdar, 2020-10-05 19:51
Messages (3)
msg377958 - (view) Author: Julien Palard (mdk) * (Python committer) Date: 2020-10-04 16:20
As reported by Graham Ewart on docs@,


s * n or n * s | equivalent to adding s to itself n times

is badly worded. In fact it's more like n-1 times, but yet it's not adding s to itself.

I'd go for "n times the s sequence" or "n copies of the s sequence" instead, which both avoid the "n-1" and the "to itself" parts.
msg378069 - (view) Author: Chavdar Yotov (chavdar) * Date: 2020-10-05 18:01
Looks like a fitting first contribution. Working on a PR now :-)
msg388786 - (view) Author: Julien Palard (mdk) * (Python committer) Date: 2021-03-15 22:50
New changeset 0269ce87c9347542c54a653dd78b9f60bb9fa822 by Chavdar Yotov in branch 'master':
bpo-41933: Clarify wording for s * n in Common Sequence Operations (GH-22570)
Date User Action Args
2022-04-11 14:59:36adminsetgithub: 86099
2021-03-15 22:51:22mdksetstatus: open -> closed
resolution: fixed
stage: patch review -> resolved
2021-03-15 22:50:56mdksetmessages: + msg388786
2020-10-05 19:51:19chavdarsetkeywords: + patch
stage: patch review
pull_requests: + pull_request21566
2020-10-05 18:01:23chavdarsetnosy: + chavdar
messages: + msg378069
2020-10-04 16:20:21mdkcreate