From charras at me.com Sun Apr 3 06:04:29 2011 From: charras at me.com (Guido Carballo-Guerrero) Date: Sun, 03 Apr 2011 01:04:29 -0300 Subject: [Doc-SIG] Python tutorial Message-ID: <84B1D056-412A-43A8-B710-828D1FFA331A@me.com> I just start writing a tutorial about Python, and will like to share it with you guys. It's a project that I just start, so any comment is very much appreciated: http://web.me.com/charras/Python/Welcome.html Guido Carballo From robert at robertlehmann.de Wed Apr 6 15:56:22 2011 From: robert at robertlehmann.de (Robert Lehmann) Date: Wed, 6 Apr 2011 15:56:22 +0200 Subject: [Doc-SIG] Python tutorial In-Reply-To: <84B1D056-412A-43A8-B710-828D1FFA331A@me.com> References: <84B1D056-412A-43A8-B710-828D1FFA331A@me.com> Message-ID: Hi Guido, have you had a look at the official tutorial [1]_ and the Using Python [2]_ guides? If so, what did you find particularly lacking about them? We are always open for suggestions and happy to improve! (I'm keeping this on-list purposefully for these questions; we usually discuss the *Python* documentation here, but we're quite low-traffic anyways, so..) .. [1] http://docs.python.org/tutorial/ .. [2] http://docs.python.org/using/ All the best, Robert PS. You need to tweak the styling: the links should stand out a little more and code needs to be monospaced. I am quite a fan of linking to external resources, too, which would give your readers a better starting point. On Sun, Apr 3, 2011 at 6:04 AM, Guido Carballo-Guerrero wrote: > I just start writing a tutorial about Python, and will like to share it with you guys. It's a project that I just start, so any comment is very much appreciated: > > http://web.me.com/charras/Python/Welcome.html > > Guido Carballo > _______________________________________________ > Doc-SIG maillist ?- ?Doc-SIG at python.org > http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/doc-sig > From aahz at pythoncraft.com Thu Apr 7 05:23:53 2011 From: aahz at pythoncraft.com (Aahz) Date: Wed, 6 Apr 2011 20:23:53 -0700 Subject: [Doc-SIG] Python tutorial In-Reply-To: <84B1D056-412A-43A8-B710-828D1FFA331A@me.com> References: <84B1D056-412A-43A8-B710-828D1FFA331A@me.com> Message-ID: <20110407032353.GA14958@panix.com> On Sun, Apr 03, 2011, Guido Carballo-Guerrero wrote: > > I just start writing a tutorial about Python, and will like to share > it with you guys. It's a project that I just start, so any comment is > very much appreciated: > > http://web.me.com/charras/Python/Welcome.html If you're looking for feedback, you'll likely get better responses from comp.lang.python -- Aahz (aahz at pythoncraft.com) <*> http://www.pythoncraft.com/ "Beware of companies that claim to be like a family. They might not be lying." --Jill Lundquist From sgscaffidi3 at yahoo.com Thu Apr 21 00:31:47 2011 From: sgscaffidi3 at yahoo.com (Greg Scaffidi) Date: Wed, 20 Apr 2011 15:31:47 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [Doc-SIG] PEP 258 Message-ID: <434755.71511.qm@web112115.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> Hello, I am working on a project for my Masters' Verification & Validation class. The topic of the project is to explore the possibilities of implementing a modeling language for Python that supports Design-by-Contract and Unit-testing. In my research, I came across the Docutils project. I was wondering why the project was rejected from the PEP. I also noticed that the Docstring Processing System Framework (PEP-256), was also rejected. The reason given for the rejection of PEP-256 is that, "Proposal seems to have run out of steam." Since PEP-256 serves as a, "Rationale" for PEP-258, I was also wondering if PEP-258 was rejected for the same reason. Both projects seem like worthy pursuits. What other reasons, if any, are there for rejecting them? Thank you very much for your help. Sincerely - Greg Scaffidi -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From goodger at python.org Thu Apr 21 01:59:25 2011 From: goodger at python.org (David Goodger) Date: Wed, 20 Apr 2011 19:59:25 -0400 Subject: [Doc-SIG] PEP 258 In-Reply-To: <434755.71511.qm@web112115.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> References: <434755.71511.qm@web112115.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> Message-ID: On Wed, Apr 20, 2011 at 18:31, Greg Scaffidi wrote: > I am working on a project for my Masters' Verification & Validation class. > ?The topic of the project is to explore the possibilities of implementing a > modeling language for Python that supports Design-by-Contract and > Unit-testing. ?In my research, I came?across?the Docutils project. ?I was > wondering why the project was rejected from the PEP. ?I also noticed that > the Docstring Processing System Framework (PEP-256), was also rejected. ?The > reason given for the rejection of PEP-256 is that, "Proposal seems to have > run out of steam." ?Since PEP-256 serves as a, "Rationale" for PEP-258, I > was also wondering if PEP-258 was rejected for the same reason. ?Both > projects seem like worthy pursuits. ?What other reasons, if any, are there > for rejecting them? PEP 258's "Rejection Notice" states: "While this may serve as an interesting design document for the now-independent docutils, it is no longer slated for inclusion in the standard library." While relevant to Docutils, PEP 258 is simply not relevant to Python the language or Python's standard library. As for PEP 256, it has effectively been implemented in Sphinx, which uses Docutils. Both projects are have been implemented, but outside of the standard library, and that's just fine. When I wrote the PEPs I had the goal of standard library inclusion, but that proved not to be so important. Thanks to its own merits, some small initial nudges from me (like proposing reST as a markup for PEPs themselves), and the efforts of many people, Docutils & reStructuredText have become a standard in the Python world. -- David Goodger