[Doc-SIG] Docststring markup process

[Tony J Ibbs (Tibs)]

Edward D. Loper wrote:
> As far as I can tell, the current problems lie less in not being able
> to agree on a markup format, and more in not being able to define
> one.  STminus is working to fix that, but it will take
> several iterations before we have something that would be worthy
> of putting in a PEP.

I actually would like to see the PEP for STpy I'm working on and the
(eventual) PEP for STminus *both* accepted - that is, it's useful to
have the "full blown Common Lisp" approach for doing Python specific
work, but it's also useful to have the "tight and well defined Scheme"
approach for writing stuff that you *know* will "compile" under both
systems...

> > Of course we can discuss the various proposals here, but it's a big
> > step forward to get them written up and all in one place
> for comparison.

Which is why I have changed my mind (gosh, Doc-SIG does that to me) and
decided the PEP thing *is* a good idea (don't you just hate those Python
people who change your mind?)

> I would appreciate it if we can make the deadline far away enough
> that we can have a real formal definition for whatever it is
> we're proposing.

We're not aiming at Python 2.1 with any of this anyway. I say let things
slide for at least another fortnight before thinking of even thinking of
a deadline...

Tibs

--
Tony J Ibbs (Tibs)      http://www.tibsnjoan.co.uk/
"How fleeting are all human passions compared with the massive
continuity of ducks." - Dorothy L. Sayers, "Gaudy Night"
My views! Mine! Mine! (Unless Laser-Scan ask nicely to borrow them.)