[bpo-32070] Clarify the behavior of the staticmethod builtin by haikuginger · Pull Request #4362 · python/cpython
It looks like the original staticmethod docstring might have been based on the classmethod docstring, and it seems like the current description might not be accurate. This change clarifies the docstring to explicitly state that neither the class nor instance is used at all in a static method.
Hello, and thanks for your contribution!
I'm a bot set up to make sure that the project can legally accept your contribution by verifying you have signed the PSF contributor agreement (CLA).
Unfortunately we couldn't find an account corresponding to your GitHub username on bugs.python.org (b.p.o) to verify you have signed the CLA (this might be simply due to a missing "GitHub Name" entry in your b.p.o account settings). This is necessary for legal reasons before we can look at your contribution. Please follow the steps outlined in the CPython devguide to rectify this issue.
Thanks again to your contribution and we look forward to looking at it!
Can you open a ticket on bugs.python.org? This will give a chance for more people to review this change, and make it easier to track backports. Thanks!
@merwok, done. Thanks; I wasn't sure if this was a substantial enough change to require that.
haikuginger
changed the title
Clarify the behavior of the staticmethod builtin
[bpo-32070] Clarify the behavior of the staticmethod builtin
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
See Raymond’s reply on the ticket.
A Python core developer has requested some changes be made to your pull request before we can consider merging it. If you could please address their requests along with any other requests in other reviews from core developers that would be appreciated.
Once you have made the requested changes, please leave a comment on this pull request containing the phrase I have made the requested changes; please review again. I will then notify any core developers who have left a review that you're ready for them to take another look at this pull request.
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters. Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters