Hi Vladimir,
> You should take a look at NumPy docstring conventions which are fully
> supported by Sphinx, and are actually human-readable.
There are two questions here:
1. Where to put type information?
* Docstrings
* ReStructured Text
(http://sphinx-doc.org/domains.html#the-pyt
Hi Andrey,
1. I'm a docstring bigot, so the only thing I can recommend is that *if* you
decide to use docstrings for type annotations, please, select the format that
is readable and well-supported (i.e. NumPy).
2. I don't have much to comment on how the types should be specified, but you
shoul
As long as the docstrings can be easily parsed (I think there's I library,
haven't tried it myself) then would it matter much? It seems like a large
change for a small benefit
-George
On Nov 7, 2013 9:17 AM, "Vladimir Keleshev" wrote:
> Hi Andrey,
>
> 1. I'm a docstring bigot, so the only thing I
As far as I understand, this format is going to be used not just for 1 repository, but by all the library authors that want their libraries to be static-analysis-friendly. That's a lot of people. That's why I think that readability matters. —Vladimir 07.11.2013, 19:22, "George Schneeloch" :As lon
