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 | ncogh...@gmail.com | Brisbane, Australia _______________________________________________ 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