python文档中的遗漏？ [英] omissions in python docs?

问题描述

1）搁置模块不会将close（）列为方法。


2）fnmatch模块甚至没有提及翻译（）。


我很难相信我是第一个注意到这些遗漏的人。文档是否陈旧且维护不善？或者，这些方法被省略了吗？

Hi,

1) The shelve module doesn''t list close() as a method.

2) The fnmatch module does not even mention translate().

I have a hard time believing I am the first one to notice those
omissions. Are the docs just old and poorly maintained? Or, is there
some reason those methods were omitted?

推荐答案

7stud schrieb：

7stud schrieb:

我很难相信我是第一个注意到这些遗漏的人。文档是否陈旧且维护不善？或者，这些方法被省略了吗？

I have a hard time believing I am the first one to notice those
omissions. Are the docs just old and poorly maintained? Or, is there
some reason those methods were omitted?

你可能是第一个注意到的人，然后再谈这个。


过去经常发生这种情况我们承认补丁不会同时更新文档，因此它们有所不同。这些

天，补丁经常被拒绝，因为没有提供正确的

文件更改。


你现在发现了差异，请写一个补丁并将其提交给sf.net/projects/python

。


问候，

马丁

You are likely the first one to notice, and then talk about that.

It often happened in the past that patches were admitted which don''t
simultaneously update the documentation, hence they diverge. These
days, patches are regularly rejected for not providing proper
documentation changes.

As you now found a difference, please write a patch and submit it
to sf.net/projects/python.

Regards,
Martin

过去经常发生的补丁被认可且不能同时更新文档因此他们分道扬..这些

天，补丁经常被拒绝，因为没有提供正确的b $ b b文档更改。

It often happened in the past that patches were admitted which don''t
simultaneously update the documentation, hence they diverge. These
days, patches are regularly rejected for not providing proper
documentation changes.

尽管如此，文档*仍旧陈旧且维护不善。有时你会在文档中找到你需要的信息，有时候谷歌会更好地获取信息。

更好的信息来源。我发现许多

模块文档中最薄弱的部分就是例子。

Nevertheless, the docs *ARE* old and poorly maintained. Sometimes you
find the info that you need in the docs, and other times Google is a
better source of information. I find that the weakest part of many
module docs are the examples.

me ****** @ yahoo.com schrieb：

me******@yahoo.com schrieb:

>过去经常发生的补丁被认可并没有同时更新文档，因此它们有所不同。这些天，补丁经常被拒绝，因为没有提供正确的文档更改。

>It often happened in the past that patches were admitted which don''t
simultaneously update the documentation, hence they diverge. These
days, patches are regularly rejected for not providing proper
documentation changes.

尽管如此，文档*很老，维护得很差。

Nevertheless, the docs *ARE* old and poorly maintained.

我同意他们已经老了，但他们的维护不好。

有一个严格的政策可以改变代码*必须*

附带文档更新，并提供

文档补丁快速集成（比代码更改更快）b
。所以从维护的角度来看，

文档的代码比代码更好。


问候，

Martin

I agree they are old, but they are *not* poorly maintained.
There is a strict policy that changes to the code *must*
be accompanied by documentation updates, and contributed
documentation patches are quickly integrated (more quickly
than code changes). So from a maintenance point of view,
the documentation is at a better standing than the code.

Regards,
Martin

这篇关于python文档中的遗漏？的文章就介绍到这了，希望我们推荐的答案对大家有所帮助，也希望大家多多支持IT屋！