Aahz Maruch wrote:
>
> [p&e]
>
> In article <39AA22A0.D533598A@lemburg.com>,
> M.-A. Lemburg <mal@lemburg.com> wrote:
> >
> >> >>> docs(instance)
> >> {'a': 'Description of a.', 'b': 'Description of b.'}
> >>
> >> There are repercussions here. A module containing the example from (3) above
> >> would have a __docs__ dictionary containing mappings for docstrings for each
> >> top-level class and function defined, in addition to docstrings for each
> >> global variable.
> >
> >This would not work well together with class inheritance.
>
> Could you provide an example explaining this? Using a dict *seems* like
> a good idea to me, too.
class A:
" Base class for database "
x = "???"
" name of the database; override in subclasses ! "
y = 1
" run in auto-commit ? "
class D(A):
x = "mydb"
""" name of the attached database; note that this must support
transactions
"""
This will give you:
A.__doc__x__ == " name of the database; override in subclasses ! "
A.__doc__y__ == " run in auto-commit ? "
D.__doc__x__ == """ name of the attached database; note that this must support
transactions
"""
D.__doc__y__ == " run in auto-commit ? "
There's no way you are going to achieve this using dictionaries.
Note: You can always build dictionaries of docstring by using
the existing Python introspection features. This PEP is
meant to provide the data -- not the extraction tools.
--
Marc-Andre Lemburg
______________________________________________________________________
Business: http://www.lemburg.com/
Python Pages: http://www.lemburg.com/python/
RetroSearch is an open source project built by @garambo | Open a GitHub Issue
Search and Browse the WWW like it's 1997 | Search results from DuckDuckGo
HTML:
3.2
| Encoding:
UTF-8
| Version:
0.7.4