Prefer "similar" over "equivalent" in tutorial (GH-125343)
In the datastructures tutorial doc, some operations are described as
"equivalent to" others. This has led to some user-confusion -- at
least in the Discourse forums -- about cases in which the operations
differ.
This change doesn't systematically eliminate the word "equivalent"
from the tutorial. It just substitutes "similar to" in several cases
in which "equivalent to" could mislead users into expecting exact
equivalence.
(cherry picked from commit 4a2282b067)
Co-authored-by: Stephen Rosen <sirosen@globus.org>
gh-122944: Fix incorrect prompt strings in the Python Tutorial (GH-122949)
In the REPL, top level comments are followed by a primary, not secondary prompt.
Fix the places in the in the tutorial that use the latter.
(cherry picked from commit be90648fb2)
Co-authored-by: Damien <81557462+Damien-Chen@users.noreply.github.com>
Improve references in the tutorial (GH-108069)
* Use full qualified names for references (even if they do not work now,
they will work in future).
* Silence references to examples.
(cherry picked from commit 622ddc4167)
Co-authored-by: Serhiy Storchaka <storchaka@gmail.com>
Use unnumbered footnote in this file to avoid reseting the footnotes numbering.
Example: when building the tutorial into a PDF and using `latex_show_urls = "footnotes"`; this footnote become the number 8. However, without this change, the footnote shows the number 1.
#85757https://docs.python.org/3/tutorial/datastructures.html#nested-list-comprehensions
I do think this is clearer, but I wonder if 'nested' should be kept though to get the terminology out there more often. So perhaps it could be something like 'inner (nested) listcomp' or 'nested (inner) listcomp' despite sounding a bit redundant
Automerge-Triggered-By: GH:rhettinger
We don't want to go into a full explanation of scopes at this point in the
tutorial, so we just mention that the loop creates or overwrites a persistent
variable while the listcomp doesn't. Not mentioning this would lead someone
to incorrectly assume loops and listcomps were *completely* equivalent, which
would confuse them later.
Original patch by Rose Ames, tweaked to remove the word 'scope'.
