PEP 565: Reword an awkward sentence
This commit is contained in:
parent
aaa64f53d0
commit
47ea35f051
10
pep-0565.rst
10
pep-0565.rst
|
@ -290,11 +290,11 @@ deprecation warnings. Most notably:
|
|||
all warnings emitted *by* a particular dependency prior to upgrading it
|
||||
(the third-party ``warn`` module [3_] does provide this, but enabling it
|
||||
involves monkeypatching the standard library's ``warnings`` module).
|
||||
* Re-enabling deprecation warnings by default in ``__main__`` doesn't help in
|
||||
handling cases where software has been factored out into support modules, but
|
||||
those modules still have little or no automated test coverage. Near term, the
|
||||
best currently available answer is to run such applications with
|
||||
``PYTHONWARNINGS=default::DeprecationWarning`` or
|
||||
* When software has been factored out into support modules, but those modules
|
||||
have little or no automated test coverage, re-enabling deprecation warnings
|
||||
by default in ``__main__`` isn't likely to help find API compatibility
|
||||
problems. Near term, the best currently available answer is to run affected
|
||||
applications with ``PYTHONWARNINGS=default::DeprecationWarning`` or
|
||||
``python -W default::DeprecationWarning`` and pay attention to their
|
||||
``stderr`` output. Longer term, this is really a question for researchers
|
||||
working on static analysis of Python code: how to reliably find usage of
|
||||
|
|
Loading…
Reference in New Issue