RetroSearch Browse

Tue Mar 15 16:24:09 CET 2011 · https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2011-March/109306.html

On Tue, 15 Mar 2011 11:17:18 -0400
Nick Coghlan <ncoghlan at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 15, 2011 at 10:22 AM, Michael Foord
> <fuzzyman at voidspace.org.uk> wrote:
> > On 15/03/2011 07:59, Nick Coghlan wrote:
> >> While I actually think the current API design is a decent compromise,
> >> another option to consider would be to move the underscore to the
> >> *end* (as_dict_, replace_, make_) as is sometimes done for code that
> >> needs to avoid conflicting with a keyword.
> >>
> >> Namespace collisions with actual fields would remain unlikely, while
> >> pydoc would pick up the new names correctly.
> >>
> >
> > Although it's a backwards incompatible change. Teaching pydoc to recognise
> > the private methods isn't.
> 
> If we can find a good way to do it, making pydoc smarter would
> definitely be a nicer option.

Wouldn't a decorator be adequate?

    @pydoc.public_api
    def _asdict(self):
        """some docstring"""
        ...

Regards

Antoine.

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

Showing content from https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2011-March/109306.html below:

[Python-Dev] pydoc for named tuples is missing methods