Ok, let's reopen this thread in a year or so and check the then current situation of docstrings in the wild :)
On Oct 5, 11:47 pm, Fernando Perez <fperez....@gmail.com> wrote: > Howdy, > > On Mon, Oct 5, 2009 at 1:47 PM, Oben <obenso...@googlemail.com> wrote: > > > @Fernando: Do you know if integrating the numpy doc extension into > > Sphinx is in discussion or already in progress? > > I don't think it's happened yet, though I only joined this list very > recently. But I'm pretty sure nobody in numpy would be opposed to it, > we've always talked informally about it being nice if all the various > extensions we have floating around got upstreamed, it's just a matter > of making it happen. > > If there's interest from the sphinx devs, I'm happy to drop a line on > the numpy list about it, to query in case someone has any more plans > or thoughts on the matter. > > Honestly I think the numpy standard is quite acceptable, and I'd love > it if more and more projects adopted it. It came to be after a fair > amount of discussion on the numpy list, so even if not perfect > (nothing is), I think it's a very reasonable solution to the problem, > and one that's already at least used by: numpy, scipy, ipython > (partly, we still have a bunch of epydoc leftovers), nipy (including > the core nipy code and the 'children' projects nipype and nitime). I > haven't checked, but I wouldn't be surprised if several of the scikits > also use it. > > Cheers, > > f --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "sphinx-dev" group. To post to this group, send email to sphinx-dev@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to sphinx-dev+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sphinx-dev?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
