Nick Coghlan ncoghlan at gmail.com
Thu Mar 22 08:23:27 CET 2012

• Previous message: [Python-ideas] Exact integral types in struct
• Next message: [Python-ideas] Exact integral types in struct
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

---

On Thu, Mar 22, 2012 at 5:07 PM, Georg Brandl <g.brandl at gmx.net> wrote:
> On 21.03.2012 13:36, Serhiy Storchaka wrote:
>> 21.03.12 12:14, Simon Sapin написав(ла):
>>> I don’t see this problem when reading the documentation. The idea of
>>> "standard" size is introduced in section 7.3.2.1:
>>
>> Again it is all because of my carelessness. I looked ``pydoc struct``,
>> and not a library documentation.
>
> Well, if "pydoc struct" is not self-contained and mentions "standard
> size" without defining it, that is still a bug.  At the very least it
> would have to refer to the library docs for what the standard size is.

The broader question of whether the docs might be better rephrased to
say "default size" rather than "standard size" still stands, though
(since 'default' is a more typical word for "we defined a value that
is used automatically if you don't explicitly specify an alternative"
than 'standard')

Cheers,
Nick.

-- 
Nick Coghlan   |   ncoghlan at gmail.com   |   Brisbane, Australia

---

• Previous message: [Python-ideas] Exact integral types in struct
• Next message: [Python-ideas] Exact integral types in struct
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

---

More information about the Python-ideas mailing list