bpo-46646: mention that bytes are accepted in ipaddress docs#31139
bpo-46646: mention that bytes are accepted in ipaddress docs#31139sobolevn wants to merge 1 commit into
bytes are accepted in ipaddress docs#31139Conversation
|
It seems the tests are a bit broken right now, but it wasn't obvious to me which commit or CI change broke things when I looked |
| Return an :class:`IPv4Address` or :class:`IPv6Address` object depending on | ||
| the IP address passed as argument. Either IPv4 or IPv6 addresses may be | ||
| the IP address passed as argument. | ||
| *address* is a string or integer or bytes representing the IP address. | ||
| Either IPv4 or IPv6 addresses may be | ||
| supplied; integers less than ``2**32`` will be considered to be IPv4 by default. | ||
| A :exc:`ValueError` is raised if *address* does not represent a valid IPv4 | ||
| or IPv6 address. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
It makes the diff ugly, but maybe it's still worth reflowing these to fit the style in the rest of the file? Is there a convention when making these changes (to not do this)? (would love a resource if you have one)
Return an :class:`IPv4Address` or :class:`IPv6Address` object depending on
the IP address passed as argument. *address* is a string or integer or bytes
representing the IP address. Either IPv4 or IPv6 addresses may be supplied;
integers less than ``2**32`` will be considered to be IPv4 by default. A
:exc:`ValueError` is raised if *address* does not represent a valid IPv4 or
IPv6 address.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I don't have an opinion on that, I will do anything that is considered the best by maintainers 🙂
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The feedback I got from this PR was that it's generally preferred to keep the diff on docs PRs as small as possible, even if that means that some lines go way over (or way under) the 80-char PEP8 limit.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
If a line really goes way over 80 characters, then split it in two 🙂
MaxwellDupre
left a comment
MaxwellDupre
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The diff doesn't look that bad to me. More important is the finished Docs and they read ok.
We shouldn't be documenting that |
|
@JelleZijlstra should we also document that it also accepts |
|
Not sure, is tuple support tested in CPython? If we document it, we should be precise about what the tuple represents. |
|
This PR is stale because it has been open for 30 days with no activity. |
9 participants
I've also added a simple doctest case for
ip_interface, because it was the only one without it 🙂https://bugs.python.org/issue46646