RetroSearch Browse

Mon Apr 28 00:31:51 CEST 2008 · https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2008-April/078914.html

On Sun, Apr 27, 2008 at 3:29 PM,  <skip at pobox.com> wrote:
>
>     Michael> It seems that any documentation or help tool worth its salt
>     Michael> should fetch the parameters from the definition and so
>     Michael> including them in the docstring should be redundant
>     Michael> duplication.
>
>  That's my position as well.  Currently we have no way to extract the
>  function signatures from C code on-the-fly or in a preprocessing step (might
>  be a good GSoC project), but for functions written in Python I'm of the
>  opinion the docstrings should not include function signatures.

They shouldn't. Maybe the tempfile module came from a third-party that
had some internal doc rule of mentioning the call signature.
Regardless, just rip it out.

-Brett

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

Showing content from https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2008-April/078914.html below:

[Python-Dev] [Doc-SIG] Double specification of function signatures?