Re: epydoc reST markup for stdlib docstrings
Michael Foord <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.comp.python.documentation |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
On 14/04/2010 01:25, Georg Brandl wrote: > [snip...] >> A PEP might be necessary to make this a firm decision. What do you think >> about adopting epydoc reST markup for documenting the stdlib API? >> > > From me, +1. > > (Also for this reason: Many projects pull docstrings into their Sphinx docs > via autodoc these days, and some also document inherited APIs. When these > inherited APIs come from the stdlib, the markup is often confusing or not > even valid reST.) > Definite +1 from me on adopting reST in docstrings as a standard. I haven't looked at the Epydoc convention for parameters (etc) well enough to have an opinion on that. Michael Foord > Georg > > _______________________________________________ > Doc-SIG maillist - [email protected] > http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/doc-sig > -- http://www.ironpythoninaction.com/ _______________________________________________ Doc-SIG maillist - [email protected] http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/doc-sig