Skip to content

Doc: fix duplicated words #136086

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 20 commits into from
Jun 29, 2025
Merged

Conversation

LamentXU123
Copy link
Contributor

@LamentXU123 LamentXU123 commented Jun 29, 2025

I am translating doc recently. I've noticed that there are duplicate words in every corner of cpython.

This PR fixes all duplicate words I've found in the current main branch. I think I've fixed it all ;)

Summary here:

multiply multiply -> multiply
is is -> is
the the -> the
that that -> that
that that -> that the
Update update -> Update
Idb idb -> Idb
and and -> and
to to -> to
should should -> should
should should -> should
it it -> it is
the the -> the
and and -> and

Skipping issues and news.


📚 Documentation preview 📚: https://cpython-previews--136086.org.readthedocs.build/

@LamentXU123 LamentXU123 changed the title Fix all duplicate words Doc: Fix all duplicate words Jun 29, 2025
@LamentXU123
Copy link
Contributor Author

I am not sure whether I'm going to change the autoconf file here, since it couldn't pass the test.

Copy link
Member

@terryjreedy terryjreedy left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

For learning purposes, see my fixups.

I want the changes to the 4 idlelib files backported, and I am sure that they will do so cleanly. I will not be surprised if cherrypicker fails to make a backport. Are you willing to use it to make backports work? An alternative is to make a separate PR for idlelib and stop if backports of the other changes fails.

The test failure I cannot fix is this:

Run git add -u
Generated files not up to date.
Perhaps you forgot to run make regen-configure ;)
configure files must be regenerated with a specific version of autoconf.
M  aclocal.m4

diff --git a/aclocal.m4 b/aclocal.m4
index 3dec889..9[20](https://github.com/python/cpython/actions/runs/15951688332/job/44992613038?pr=136086#step:7:21)c2b3 100644
--- a/aclocal.m4
+++ b/aclocal.m4
@@ -72,7 +72,7 @@ m4_ifndef([AC_CONFIG_MACRO_DIRS], [m4_defun([_AM_CONFIG_MACRO_DIRS], [])m4_defun
 #   time. The exit code of this test program is a result of indirectly reading
 #   and writing to the memory region where the special value is supposed to
 #   reside. The actual memory addresses used and the values to be written are
-#   derived from the program input ("argv") and are therefore not known at
+#   derived from the the program input ("argv") and are therefore not known at
 #   compile or link time. The compiler has no choice but to defer the
 #   computation to run time, and to prepare by allocating and populating the
 #   data segment with the special value. For further details, refer to the
Error: Process completed with exit code 1.

This implies to me that aclocal.m4 is generated from something else an it is the original source than needs fixing. I have seen this before. Or maybe it means that aclocal.m4 is the source for another file and the other file needs to be generated. I don't know.

@freakboy3742 Is this the file you are an owner of? Do you understand what needs to be done?

EDIT after reading response made while drafting this: Yes, leaving that file alone is an option if we cannot fine out what the issue is.

EDIT 2: I checked all the changes and fixed the 2 that are incorrect and would have merged if not for the aclocal.m4 test failure.

@bedevere-app
Copy link

bedevere-app bot commented Jun 29, 2025

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.

@LamentXU123
Copy link
Contributor Author

LamentXU123 commented Jun 29, 2025

The test failure I cannot fix is this:

Me too.

An alternative is to make a separate PR for idlelib.

Edited: Well yes. I think this alternative could make sure the doc change of idle are not effected by others. I will open one now.

@LamentXU123
Copy link
Contributor Author

An alternative is to make a separate PR for idlelib and stop if backports of the other changes fails.

I've opened it at #136089 and delete the changes in this PR.

@LamentXU123
Copy link
Contributor Author

LamentXU123 commented Jun 29, 2025

So should we remove the change of autoconf file here? I still have no idea of how to deal with it.

@ZeroIntensity
Copy link
Member

The autoconf change is a typo on GNU's end. It's visible here too: https://www.gnu.org/software/autoconf-archive/ax_c_float_words_bigendian.html. Let's remove it from this PR, and then you can submit a fix to their mailing list or whatever they use.

@LamentXU123
Copy link
Contributor Author

LamentXU123 commented Jun 29, 2025

The autoconf change is a typo on GNU's end. It's visible here too: https://www.gnu.org/software/autoconf-archive/ax_c_float_words_bigendian.html. Let's remove it from this PR, and then you can submit a fix to their mailing list or whatever they use.

I will submit the issue through [email protected], and will raise another PR when they accept it(if they don't then I will not)

Let's remove it first here.

Done.

@picnixz picnixz changed the title Doc: Fix all duplicate words Doc: fix duplicated words Jun 29, 2025
@LamentXU123 LamentXU123 requested a review from picnixz June 29, 2025 13:53
@LamentXU123 LamentXU123 requested a review from terryjreedy June 29, 2025 14:10
@terryjreedy terryjreedy dismissed their stale review June 29, 2025 22:02

changes made

@terryjreedy terryjreedy added the needs backport to 3.14 bugs and security fixes label Jun 29, 2025
@terryjreedy terryjreedy merged commit 698bab5 into python:main Jun 29, 2025
45 of 46 checks passed
@miss-islington-app
Copy link

Thanks @LamentXU123 for the PR, and @terryjreedy for merging it 🌮🎉.. I'm working now to backport this PR to: 3.14.
🐍🍒⛏🤖

miss-islington pushed a commit to miss-islington/cpython that referenced this pull request Jun 29, 2025
---------
(cherry picked from commit 698bab5)

Co-authored-by: Weilin Du <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: Terry Jan Reedy <[email protected]>
@bedevere-app
Copy link

bedevere-app bot commented Jun 29, 2025

GH-136108 is a backport of this pull request to the 3.14 branch.

@bedevere-app bedevere-app bot removed the needs backport to 3.14 bugs and security fixes label Jun 29, 2025
@terryjreedy terryjreedy added the needs backport to 3.13 bugs and security fixes label Jun 29, 2025
@miss-islington-app
Copy link

Thanks @LamentXU123 for the PR, and @terryjreedy for merging it 🌮🎉.. I'm working now to backport this PR to: 3.13.
🐍🍒⛏🤖

@miss-islington-app
Copy link

Sorry, @LamentXU123 and @terryjreedy, I could not cleanly backport this to 3.13 due to a conflict.
Please backport using cherry_picker on command line.

cherry_picker 698bab5a4031c8f54e04e1dd42bcbe3e4564eba5 3.13

terryjreedy added a commit that referenced this pull request Jun 29, 2025
Doc: fix duplicated words (GH-136086)

---------
(cherry picked from commit 698bab5)

Co-authored-by: Weilin Du <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: Terry Jan Reedy <[email protected]>
@bedevere-bot
Copy link

⚠️⚠️⚠️ Buildbot failure ⚠️⚠️⚠️

Hi! The buildbot aarch64 Fedora Stable Refleaks 3.x (tier-2) has failed when building commit 698bab5.

What do you need to do:

  1. Don't panic.
  2. Check the buildbot page in the devguide if you don't know what the buildbots are or how they work.
  3. Go to the page of the buildbot that failed (https://buildbot.python.org/#/builders/123/builds/1343) and take a look at the build logs.
  4. Check if the failure is related to this commit (698bab5) or if it is a false positive.
  5. If the failure is related to this commit, please, reflect that on the issue and make a new Pull Request with a fix.

You can take a look at the buildbot page here:

https://buildbot.python.org/#/builders/123/builds/1343

Failed tests:

  • test_perf_profiler

Failed subtests:

  • test_python_calls_appear_in_the_stack_if_perf_activated - test.test_perf_profiler.TestPerfProfilerWithDwarf.test_python_calls_appear_in_the_stack_if_perf_activated

Summary of the results of the build (if available):

==

Click to see traceback logs
Traceback (most recent call last):
  File "/home/buildbot/buildarea/3.x.cstratak-fedora-stable-aarch64.refleak/build/Lib/test/test_perf_profiler.py", line 373, in test_python_calls_appear_in_the_stack_if_perf_activated
    self.assertEqual(stderr, "")
    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~^^^^^^^^^^^^
AssertionError: 'Warning:\nProcessed 799 events and lost 2[34 chars]\n\n' != ''
- Warning:
- Processed 799 events and lost 2 chunks!
- 
- Check IO/CPU overload!
- 


Traceback (most recent call last):
  File "/home/buildbot/buildarea/3.x.cstratak-fedora-stable-aarch64.refleak/build/Lib/test/test_perf_profiler.py", line 373, in test_python_calls_appear_in_the_stack_if_perf_activated
    self.assertEqual(stderr, "")
    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~^^^^^^^^^^^^
AssertionError: 'Warning:\nProcessed 627 events and lost 3[34 chars]\n\n' != ''
- Warning:
- Processed 627 events and lost 3 chunks!
- 
- Check IO/CPU overload!
- 

@LamentXU123
Copy link
Contributor Author

Looks like the expected backport failure happens...... I'll take a look at this this evening.

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.

5 participants