gh-136216: Update JSON RFC references from 7159 to 8259 #144453
Conversation
bedevere-app
bot
added
awaiting review
docs
Doc/library/json.rst
Outdated
| boolean, number, or string value. :rfc:`7159` (now :rfc:`8259`) removed that | ||
| restriction, and this module does not and has never implemented that restriction | ||
| in either its serializer or its deserializer. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Do not change the flow of the text here. Reduce the diff.
|
|
||
| .. [#rfc-errata] As noted in `the errata for RFC 7159 | ||
| <https://www.rfc-editor.org/errata_search.php?rfc=7159>`_, | ||
| .. [#rfc-errata] As noted in `the errata for RFC 8259 |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Be careful here. Is it still the correct errata?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I didn't have an answer here. I'm surprised that both RFCs have the same errata.
|
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 |
RFC 8259 obsoleted RFC 7159 in December 2017. Update the json module documentation to reference the current RFC. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.5 <[email protected]>
kovan
force-pushed
the
gh-136216-json-rfc-update
branch
from
0e2da51 to
0dbf920
Compare
|
I have made the requested changes; please review again |
|
Thanks for making the requested changes! @picnixz: please review the changes made to this pull request. |
|
If my comments are not addressed (by replying to them / changing code), please don't request a review. |
2 participants
Summary
Test plan
make checkpassed🤖 Generated with Claude Code
jsonmodule #136216📚 Documentation preview 📚: https://cpython-previews--144453.org.readthedocs.build/