Shifted footnotes on PEP 595

[JulienPalard]

Looks like footnotes are shifted on PEP 595:

This concern has been raised in the past in a Zulip topic [19].

[...]

[19] The New-bugs-announce mailing list

[gvanrossum]

You're right, they're out of sync. Probably something in the doc confuses the code that numbers footnotes? (Personally I don't like bottom-notes -- I prefer inline URLs. But that's a separate battle.)

[hugovk]

Please see PR #2534 to fix this.

[CAM-Gerlach]

There's actually quite a few instances of that throughout older PEPs; a lot of the ≈250 Sphinx warnings relate (ultimately) to misaligned footnote numbering. It wouldn't have been an issue if authors just used named auto-numbered footnotes instead of hardcoded or implicit numbers, but until I updated it recently, PEP 12 described both methods and lacked a clear recommendation (now it only specifies named auto-numbered footnotes, in cases where footnotes and not direct links are actually required).