One of the requirements for acceptance of PEP 3144 if the provision of a reStructuredText API reference. The current plan for dealing with that is to use Spinx apidoc to create a skeleton, and then capture the rewritten ReST produced by autodoc. However, it occurs to me that the module reference could actually *use* autodoc, with additional prose added to supplement the docstrings, rather than completely replacing them. I'd initially dismissed this idea out of hand, but recently realised I didn't have any especially strong arguments against it (and there are all the usual "avoid double-keying data" arguments in favour). So, given the advantages of autodoc, is there a concrete reason why we can't use it for the documentation of *new* standard library modules? Regards, Nick. -- Nick Coghlan | ncoghlan at gmail.com | Brisbane, Australia
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