Re: What's "the standard" for code docs?

2008-02-20 Thread castironpi
On Feb 20, 4:42 am, Marc 'BlackJack' Rintsch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Tue, 19 Feb 2008 16:37:23 -0800, Preston  Landers wrote: > > On Feb 19, 4:31 pm, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > > But after reading some of your other recent posts on other topics, I'm > > not confident that it was intended

Re: What's "the standard" for code docs?

2008-02-20 Thread Preston Landers
On Feb 20, 2:32 am, Paul McGuire <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I use epydoc for pyparsing, and I really like the results. Just make > sure that importing your modules doesn't really do anything > substantial (like connect to db's, or run unit tests that run for > hours); epydoc imports your code a

Re: What's "the standard" for code docs?

2008-02-20 Thread Paul Boddie
On 20 Feb, 09:32, Paul McGuire <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I use epydoc for pyparsing, and I really like the results. Just make > sure that importing your modules doesn't really do anything > substantial (like connect to db's, or run unit tests that run for > hours); epydoc imports your code an

Re: What's "the standard" for code docs?

2008-02-20 Thread Marc 'BlackJack' Rintsch
On Tue, 19 Feb 2008 16:37:23 -0800, Preston Landers wrote: > On Feb 19, 4:31 pm, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > But after reading some of your other recent posts on other topics, I'm > not confident that it was intended to make sense at all. Have a little bit patience, the bot is still in its ear

Re: What's "the standard" for code docs?

2008-02-20 Thread Paul McGuire
On Feb 15, 10:59 am, Preston Landers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hey guys and gals.  What are all the cool kids using these days to > document their code?  My goal is to create in-line documentation of > each package/module/class/method and create some semi-nice looking (or > at least usable) pac

Re: What's "the standard" for code docs?

2008-02-20 Thread cokofreedom
On Feb 20, 9:12 am, "Diez B. Roggisch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Are people really writing pure HTML snippets in docstrings to document > > each module/class/method? For anything other than a toy project? > > > One of the main reasons I'm considering moving to epydoc + reST is > > precisely b

Re: What's "the standard" for code docs?

2008-02-20 Thread Diez B. Roggisch
> Are people really writing pure HTML snippets in docstrings to document > each module/class/method? For anything other than a toy project? > > One of the main reasons I'm considering moving to epydoc + reST is > precisely because it's very un-HTML. > > Mind you I want to be able to produce HTM

Re: What's "the standard" for code docs?

2008-02-19 Thread Preston Landers
On Feb 19, 4:31 pm, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > bash-2.04$ man precious I understand now that you were referring to unix manual pages, but I'm afraid I still don't understand what your original reply (man serious) has to do with anything in particular. But after reading some of your other recent

Re: What's "the standard" for code docs?

2008-02-19 Thread castironpi
On Feb 19, 4:21 pm, Preston Landers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Feb 19, 4:16 pm, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > > On Feb 19, 4:12 pm, Preston  Landers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > On Feb 16, 1:56 am, John Nagle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > Preston Landers wrote: > > > > > Hey guys

Re: What's "the standard" for code docs?

2008-02-19 Thread Tim Chase
HTML. Text-only docs are so last-cen. >>> My sarcasometer is broken today... are you being serious? >> man serious > > As opposed to woman serious? [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~$ man -k serious serious: nothing appropriate. -tkc -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list

Re: What's "the standard" for code docs?

2008-02-19 Thread Preston Landers
On Feb 19, 4:16 pm, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > On Feb 19, 4:12 pm, Preston Landers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > On Feb 16, 1:56 am, John Nagle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > Preston Landers wrote: > > > > Hey guys and gals. What are all the cool kids using these days to > > > > document t

Re: What's "the standard" for code docs?

2008-02-19 Thread castironpi
On Feb 19, 4:12 pm, Preston Landers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Feb 16, 1:56 am, John Nagle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Preston Landers wrote: > > > Hey guys and gals.  What are all the cool kids using these days to > > > document their code? > > >    HTML.  Text-only docs are so last-cen

Re: What's "the standard" for code docs?

2008-02-19 Thread Preston Landers
On Feb 16, 1:56 am, John Nagle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Preston Landers wrote: > > Hey guys and gals. What are all the cool kids using these days to > > document their code? > >HTML. Text-only docs are so last-cen. My sarcasometer is broken today... are you being serious? -- http://ma

Re: What's "the standard" for code docs?

2008-02-15 Thread John Nagle
Preston Landers wrote: > Hey guys and gals. What are all the cool kids using these days to > document their code? HTML. Text-only docs are so last-cen. John Nagle -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list

Re: What's "the standard" for code docs?

2008-02-15 Thread Jeff Schwab
Preston Landers wrote: > Hey guys and gals. What are all the cool kids using these days to > document their code? My goal is to create in-line documentation of > each package/module/class/method and create some semi-nice looking (or > at least usable) packaged documentation from it, in HTML and/o

Re: What's "the standard" for code docs?

2008-02-15 Thread Torsten Bronger
Hallöchen! Preston Landers writes: > [...] > > I've been using effbot's PythonDoc for a while, but it seems like > "the new standard" (if there is one) is docutils and restructured > text (ReST.) Is that accurate? In my opinion this is true. And with Epydoc being the best tool for generating