A RetroSearch Logo

Home - News ( United States | United Kingdom | Italy | Germany ) - Football scores

Search Query:

Showing content from https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2002-January/019445.html below:

[niemeyer@conectiva.com: Re: [Python-Dev] Python's footprint]

[niemeyer@conectiva.com: Re: [Python-Dev] Python's footprint] [niemeyer@conectiva.com: Re: [Python-Dev] Python's footprint]Guido van Rossum guido@python.org
Mon, 14 Jan 2002 15:17:19 -0500
> I agree w/ MAL.  I happen to be developing an application on Linux
> right now, but I'm interested in where I might encounter problems
> when it migrates to Windows.  I would much prefer the documentation
> make it eas(y|ier) to identify platform differences.  This holds
> true for docstrings, because they are the most readily available
> documentation format.

But what about optional features that are only available on platform
X?  Do you really want those to clutter up the docstring on platforms
where they aren't available?  On the platform where they *are*, their
docstring should have a "(Platform X only)" note.

--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