Marc-Andre: > I can take over the coercion PEP: I've been working > on this before (see the proposal on my Python Pages). Thanks, excellent (although I haven't seen your proposal yet). > I would also like to know whether the PEP-0224 will be considered > for 2.1 if I update the patch to make it a little more robust > w/r to the problems mentioned in that PEP -- I'd really like > to see this in Python soon, since it makes documenting Python > programs so much easier. I "kinda" like the idea of having attribute docstrings (meaning it's not of great importance to me) but there are two things I don't like in your current proposal: 1. The syntax you propose is too ambiguous: as you say, stand-alone string literal are used for other purposes and could suddenly become attribute docstrings. 2. I don't like the access method either (__doc_<attrname>__). > Note that I won't get around to do much work on these before > January... way too busy at the moment :-/ That's a problem -- we really want to have the PEPs ready for review by mid December. This will also be a problem for the coercion PEP -- if you think you won't be able to work on it before then, I'd prefer to find another (co-)author. --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