Skip to content

switch descriptor howto to return value annotation #7796

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

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Sep 10, 2018

Conversation

NotAFile
Copy link
Contributor

This is a quick thing I noticed. This text was written before python type annotation were widely used, so I've modified to use those instead. That way, readers will immediately recognize it as a return type.

@the-knights-who-say-ni
Copy link

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 our records indicate you have not signed the CLA. For legal reasons we need you to sign this before we can look at your contribution. Please follow the steps outlined in the CPython devguide to rectify this issue.

When your account is ready, please add a comment in this pull request
and a Python core developer will remove the CLA not signed label
to make the bot check again.

Thanks again for your contribution, we look forward to reviewing it!

@NotAFile
Copy link
Contributor Author

CLA review is now complete. I didn't read the "full business day" thing...

@pablogsal
Copy link
Member

Hi @NotAFile and thank you for your contribution!

Do you mind modifying the Pull Request title to include the issue in the bug tracker that this PR is adressing? You can find more information here:

https://devguide.python.org/pullrequest/#submitting

If there is no issue created you can open a new one al add that number to the PR title.

@NotAFile
Copy link
Contributor Author

NotAFile commented Jun 21, 2018

@pablogsal I forgot to mention this in the PR text. I did not create a bpo issue for this, as "simple documentation/spelling fixes" are mentioned as not requiring an issue in the python (docs) contribution guide. I have also looked through similar edits in the PR history and seen the skip-issue tag on them.

EDIT: I should also mention that I have grepped the docs for usage of --> for return values and found no other instance.

Copy link
Contributor

@taleinat taleinat left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

LGTM

@miss-islington
Copy link
Contributor

Thanks @NotAFile for the PR, and @benjaminp for merging it 🌮🎉.. I'm working now to backport this PR to: 3.7.
🐍🍒⛏🤖

miss-islington pushed a commit to miss-islington/cpython that referenced this pull request Sep 10, 2018
@bedevere-bot
Copy link

GH-9144 is a backport of this pull request to the 3.7 branch.

miss-islington added a commit that referenced this pull request Sep 11, 2018
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

8 participants