Re: [Doc-SIG] Double specification of function signatures?
Michael Foord <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.comp.python.devel,gmane.comp.python.documentation |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
[email protected] wrote: > While cleaning up the documentation for the tempfile module I noticed that > the docstrings for the mk*temp functions in the module itself list their > signatures (incompletely) in the first line. I don't know if that was > intentional, but it seems both redundant and error-prone to me. The help() > function already displays the signatures of Python functions. There's no > need to put them in docstrings and risk having them out-of-date. For > example: > > >>> help(tempfile.mkdtemp) > Help on function mkdtemp in module tempfile: > > mkdtemp(suffix='', prefix='tmp', dir=None) > mkdtemp([suffix, [prefix, [dir]]]) > User-callable function to create and return a unique temporary > directory. The return value is the pathname of the directory. > > Am I way off-base here? Let me know, as I have a couple minor tweaks to > check in besides these. > It seems that any documentation or help tool worth its salt should fetch the parameters from the definition and so including them in the docstring should be redundant duplication. Michael Foord > Thx, > > Skip > _______________________________________________ > Doc-SIG maillist - [email protected] > http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/doc-sig > _______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list [email protected] http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/python-python-dev%40m.gmane.org