| 1 |
> |
| 2 |
> epytext actually- that's what relies on, and is supported by |
| 3 |
> other doc manglers. |
| 4 |
|
| 5 |
|
| 6 |
Change noted in the attached proposal |
| 7 |
|
| 8 |
Bad idea. doc strings rules for doc manglers, the base docstring |
| 9 |
> bleeds through to derivative methods iff the prototype hasn't been |
| 10 |
> mangled. So... you state in the base method, "I use blah". Now |
| 11 |
> you're requiring every derivative to either |
| 12 |
|
| 13 |
|
| 14 |
Agreed. This was taken out of the proposal. A piece was added however use |
| 15 |
L{} to link to any custom objects used as parameters/return values. |
| 16 |
|
| 17 |
No reason to strip it out- file size isn't going to make a difference |
| 18 |
> (the slow bits in terms of imports is forced execution in the module |
| 19 |
> loadup, import lookup, and loading chunks of stdlib). |
| 20 |
> ~harring |
| 21 |
|
| 22 |
|
| 23 |
I think the discussion here was more on code readability as well. Having |
| 24 |
such doc blocks would make the code larger and possibly harder to navigate. |
| 25 |
Though, most IDE's should have the option to code fold these away. |
| 26 |
|
| 27 |
Chris White |
Archives