Skip to content
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 and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Jump to bottom

Make traceback functions support negative limits #67163

Closed
vaultah mannequin opened this issue Dec 1, 2014 · 4 comments
Closed

Make traceback functions support negative limits #67163

vaultah mannequin opened this issue Dec 1, 2014 · 4 comments
Labels
stdlib Python modules in the Lib dir type-feature A feature request or enhancement

Comments

@vaultah
Copy link
Mannequin

vaultah mannequin commented Dec 1, 2014

BPO 22974
Nosy @bitdancer, @demianbrecht, @vaultah
Superseder
  • bpo-22619: Possible implementation of negative limit for traceback functions
    		•

    Note: these values reflect the state of the issue at the time it was migrated and might not reflect the current state.

    Show more details

    GitHub fields:

    assignee = None
closed_at = <Date 2014-12-02.04:49:55.102>
created_at = <Date 2014-12-01.15:59:28.548>
labels = ['type-feature', 'library']
title = 'Make traceback functions support negative limits'
updated_at = <Date 2014-12-02.04:55:59.210>
user = 'https://github.com/vaultah'

    bugs.python.org fields:

    activity = <Date 2014-12-02.04:55:59.210>
actor = 'berker.peksag'
assignee = 'none'
closed = True
closed_date = <Date 2014-12-02.04:49:55.102>
closer = 'vaultah'
components = ['Library (Lib)']
creation = <Date 2014-12-01.15:59:28.548>
creator = 'vaultah'
dependencies = []
files = []
hgrepos = []
issue_num = 22974
keywords = ['patch']
message_count = 4.0
messages = ['231943', '231945', '231950', '231962']
nosy_count = 3.0
nosy_names = ['r.david.murray', 'demian.brecht', 'vaultah']
pr_nums = []
priority = 'normal'
resolution = 'duplicate'
stage = 'resolved'
status = 'closed'
superseder = '22619'
type = 'enhancement'
url = 'https://bugs.python.org/issue22974'
versions = ['Python 3.5']
    @vaultah
    Copy link
    Mannequin Author

    vaultah mannequin commented Dec 1, 2014

    This is a complete implementation of negative limits for functions from traceback module (see this proposal - https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-ideas/2014-August/029105.html). I also added some tests.

    @vaultah vaultah mannequin added stdlib Python modules in the Lib dir type-feature A feature request or enhancement labels Dec 1, 2014
    @bitdancer
    Copy link
    Member

    This looks like a duplicate of bpo-22619. Were you under the impression you needed to open a new issue just in order to update your patch? You would be better off posting the patch to bpo-22619 and closing this one, unless I'm missing something.

    @vaultah
    Copy link
    Mannequin Author

    vaultah mannequin commented Dec 1, 2014

    Indeed, this is an exact duplicate, but I feel like that issue is an embarrassment: too many unnecessary actions, bad patches, and most of messages are totally useless. I wanted to start over for once, so I closed that issue. Pardon my initial ignorance.

    @demianbrecht
    Copy link
    Mannequin

    demianbrecht mannequin commented Dec 1, 2014

    It's generally better to keep everything in one issue in order to preserve history and avoid confusion as you've now found :). I'd suggest closing this one and adding the patch to the initial report. Keeping history intact is important for reviewers.

    Absolutely no need for embarrassment, we all start somewhere and have to learn processes and such along the way :)

    @vaultah vaultah mannequin closed this as completed Dec 2, 2014
    @ezio-melotti ezio-melotti transferred this issue from another repository Apr 10, 2022
    Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
    Assignees
    No one assigned
    Labels
    stdlib Python modules in the Lib dir type-feature A feature request or enhancement
    Projects
    None yet
    Milestone
    No milestone
    Development

    No branches or pull requests
    1 participant
    @bitdancer