Correct information on support for repietition & concatenation for buffer

and xrange objects.
This closes SF bug #550555.

diff --git a/Doc/lib/libstdtypes.tex b/Doc/lib/libstdtypes.tex
index 75787bad60b8d3ef52d86c88e09c6e9a8f2b6fe0..b077fb8f6d3fa48d0a2fa91dca20a48b413f6f0d 100644 (file)
--- a/Doc/lib/libstdtypes.tex
+++ b/Doc/lib/libstdtypes.tex
@@ -393,15 +393,17 @@ item tuple must have a trailing comma, e.g., \code{(d,)}.
 
 Buffer objects are not directly supported by Python syntax, but can be
 created by calling the builtin function
-\function{buffer()}.\bifuncindex{buffer}.  They don't support
-concatenation or repetition.
+\function{buffer()}.\bifuncindex{buffer}.  They support
+concatenation and repetition, but the result is a new string object
+rather than a new buffer object.
 \obindex{buffer}
 
 Xrange objects are similar to buffers in that there is no specific
-syntax to create them, but they are created using the \function{xrange()}
-function.\bifuncindex{xrange}  They don't support slicing,
-concatenation or repetition, and using \code{in}, \code{not in},
-\function{min()} or \function{max()} on them is inefficient.
+syntax to create them, but they are created using the
+\function{xrange()} function.\bifuncindex{xrange}  They don't support
+slicing or concatenation, but do support repetition, and using
+\code{in}, \code{not in}, \function{min()} or \function{max()} on them
+is inefficient.
 \obindex{xrange}
 
 Most sequence types support the following operations.  The \samp{in} and