On Mon, Jan 19, 2009 at 11:56 PM, Brett Cannon <br...@python.org> wrote: > On Mon, Jan 19, 2009 at 19:19, Benjamin Peterson <benja...@python.org> wrote: >> On Mon, Jan 19, 2009 at 9:11 PM, Brett Cannon <br...@python.org> wrote: >>> On Mon, Jan 19, 2009 at 19:01, Benjamin Peterson <benja...@python.org> >>> wrote: >>>> On Mon, Jan 19, 2009 at 8:24 PM, Brett Cannon <br...@python.org> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> 2. Should we start using function annotations? >>>> >>>> No, I think that information is better stored in the function description. >>>> >>> >>> Why? Putting it in the signature makes it very succinct and a simple >>> glance at the doc to see what type/ABC is expected. >> >> Well, I guess it's just not been explored. Feel free to try it out if >> you wish, though. >> > > I just might.
We might be opening a can of worms, though. Do we document everything that takes a dictionary argument with collections.Mapping or everything that takes a integer numbers.Rationale? What if multiple types are possible? >>>>> 4. The var directive is not working even though the docs list it as a >>>>> valid directive; so is it still valid and something is broken, or the >>>>> docs need to be updated? >>>> >>>> The docs should be updated. "data" is the one to use now. >>> >>> So the 'data' directive turns into any variable, not just a module >>> variables? >> >> "data" is for module level objects. If you're documenting properties >> or attributes in classes, use "attribute". > > Then what are we supposed to use for arguments? Just ``literal``? No, use *some_argument*. -- Regards, Benjamin _______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com