> > I was originally going to make it an unnamed string
> > literal -- maybe that's better?
>
> In PEP 258 I call those "Additional Docstrings":
>
> Many programmers would like to make extensive use of docstrings
> for API documentation. However, docstrings do take up space in
> the running program, so some of these programmers are reluctant to
> "bloat up" their code. Also, not all API documentation is
> applicable to interactive environments, where __doc__ would be
> displayed.
>
> The docstring processing system's extraction tools will
> concatenate all string literal expressions which appear at the
> beginning of a definition or after a simple assignment. Only the
> first strings in definitions will be available as __doc__, and can
> be used for brief usage text suitable for interactive sessions;
> subsequent string literals and all attribute docstrings are
> ignored by the Python bytecode compiler and may contain more
> extensive API information.
>
> Example::
>
> def function(arg):
> """This is __doc__, function's docstring."""
> """
> This is an additional docstring, ignored by the bytecode
> compiler, but extracted by the Docutils.
> """
> pass
>
> (Original idea from Moshe Zadka.)
Ah, I thought there had to be something like that. :-)
Do you also recognize this if there are comments between? Or blank
lines? E.g.
def f():
"""
foo
"""
# blah
"""
bar
"""
--Guido van Rossum (home page: http://www.python.org/~guido/)
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