bump

Special method should not have to be part of an ABC to be documented in the special methods doc.

Thing is, I'm not implying any opinion on whether it should be there or not.
What I I'm saying, is that it should be consistent.

At the moment, you have __reduce__ in pickle's docs, __subclasshook__ in abc's docs, and other dunders at their appropriate or relevant places. You don't have all dunders in the same location, apart from those relevant to all objects and classes.

Continuing with that logic, __missing__ should probably be in dict's docs, as that's the only location where it's relevant. Otherwise the documentation is inconsistent.

Furthermore - it's specifically dict.__missing__, not object.__missing__. The docs are misleading in the current state. (Discussion @ mailing list)

As a side note, the PR changes dict.get documentation as well.

Per Guido on the mailing list, maybe @rhettinger can suggest something (seeing that you reviewed/merged #17910 as well).

I agree about not moving the entry.
Other magic methods are also documented as object.__iter__ and so on. In this context it means «some object», not «the object type». Improving that would be a separate issue.

This PR is stale because it has been open for 30 days with no activity.

Closing as stale, the requested changes have not been applied in six years.