[svn.haxx.se] · SVN Dev · SVN Users · SVN Org · TSVN Dev · TSVN Users · Subclipse Dev · Subclipse Users · this month's index

Re: svn commit: r1297921 - /subversion/trunk/subversion/tests/cmdline/svntest/sandbox.py

From: Philip Martin <philip.martin_at_wandisco.com>
Date: Wed, 07 Mar 2012 12:54:32 +0000

"Bert Huijben" <bert_at_qqmail.nl> writes:

>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: MARTIN PHILIP [mailto:codematters_at_ntlworld.com] On Behalf Of Philip
>> Martin
>> Sent: woensdag 7 maart 2012 13:42
>> To: Greg Stein
>> Cc: dev_at_subversion.apache.org
>> Subject: Re: svn commit: r1297921 -
>> /subversion/trunk/subversion/tests/cmdline/svntest/sandbox.py
>> Greg Stein <gstein_at_gmail.com> writes:
>> > Geez. Be smart, Philip. Obviously, that quoted content is dumb. I'm
> talking
>> > about format. Specifically not following the basic rule of "one line
>> > summary. One blank line. Details." Julian's change is missing the blank
>> > lines, which many tools parse.
>> That's what I don't understand. Are we expecting people to use tools to
>> parse these docstrings? If we have to repeat default parameters in the
>> docstring it it something we can get wrong, if we don't repeat them they
>> can't be wrong. What do we gain?
> I wouldn't be surprised if some editors (Eclipse? Others) use or will use
> this syntax for tooltips, to help users when editing.

So which bits of PEP-257 do we follow? Do we stop writing parameters in
CAPITALS? Do we repeat arguments one per line? With defaults? Do we
document the exceptions that can be raised? Whether "keyword arguments
are part of the interface"?

uberSVN: Apache Subversion Made Easy
Received on 2012-03-07 13:55:14 CET

This is an archived mail posted to the Subversion Dev mailing list.