Skip to content

A couple of issues with compiler.rst #181

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

Closed
DimitrisJim opened this issue Apr 27, 2017 · 1 comment
Closed

A couple of issues with compiler.rst #181

DimitrisJim opened this issue Apr 27, 2017 · 1 comment

Comments

@DimitrisJim
Copy link
Contributor

There's a couple of issues I've found, I'm creating this issue to see if some of them were intentional.

I'm not sure if the following were intentional or not:

  • Many of the functions and filenames aren't highlighted in any way. This fact leads to, at least in my opinion, harder to read sentences. Backticks and :file: directives could be used.
  • The C snippet isn't highlighted with a code-block directive.
  • A couple of macros contain the type for the arguments they receive, others don't.

Some changes that need to be made:

  • NEW_BLOCK was removed in 3.6, if I'm not mistaken.
  • PyEval_EvalFrameEx was changed with PEP 523, PyEval_EvalFrameDefault contains the big switch as mentioned.

I've probably missed some other functions that were renamed/tweaked, I'll keep checking to see if anything else is needed.


All in all, this file is a really useful resource for anyone interested in the CPython compiler; it should be polished up and, if possible, linked in exploring.rst in some way.

@brettcannon
Copy link
Member

All of the formatting issues are because I originally wrote that doc as an informational PEP before I wrote the original version of the devguide (which makes me realize how much I write 😅 ). So fixing the formatting of the page to utilize reST better is totally fine.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants