[issue31567] Inconsistent documentation around decorators

Éric Araujo added the comment: Cheers! -- resolution: -> fixed stage: patch review -> resolved status: open -> closed ___ Python tracker ___ __

[issue31567] Inconsistent documentation around decorators

Éric Araujo added the comment: New changeset 205dd4e14de77f9c8ed2903ddebbcf9968bbb6a9 by Éric Araujo (Miss Islington (bot)) in branch '3.6': [3.6] bpo-31567: add or fix decorator markup in docs (GH-3959) (GH-3966) https://github.com/python/cpython/commit/205dd4e14de77f9c8ed2903ddebbcf9968bbb6a

[issue31567] Inconsistent documentation around decorators

Éric Araujo added the comment: New changeset 03b9537dc515d10528f83c920d38910b95755aff by Éric Araujo in branch 'master': bpo-31567: more decorator markup fixes in docs (GH-3959) (#3966) https://github.com/python/cpython/commit/03b9537dc515d10528f83c920d38910b95755aff --

[issue31567] Inconsistent documentation around decorators

Berker Peksag added the comment: > That said, staticmethod as a non-decorator has an important use case for > function injection in tests (using self.func in TestCase classes that work > with > a C module and an equivalent Python version). Maybe this deserves an extra > example? Yes, that wou

[issue31567] Inconsistent documentation around decorators

Éric Araujo added the comment: I think existing uses of the decorator markup rely on the reader’s understanding that it’s syntactic sugar for a call and an assignment, and they don’t have decorator+function markup. The PRs for this ticket follow that. That said, staticmethod as a non-decorat

[issue31567] Inconsistent documentation around decorators

Change by Éric Araujo : -- pull_requests: +3945 ___ Python tracker ___ ___ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: https://mail.p

[issue31567] Inconsistent documentation around decorators

Berker Peksag added the comment: Use of classmethod and staticmethod decorators as functions is still a valid use case. I think the old signatures should be kept. It should be possible to document both uses in same place: .. function:: classmethod(function) .. decorator:: classmethod

[issue31567] Inconsistent documentation around decorators

Change by Roundup Robot : -- pull_requests: +3944 ___ Python tracker ___ ___ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: https://mail

[issue31567] Inconsistent documentation around decorators

Éric Araujo added the comment: New changeset 0e61e67a57deb4abc677808201d7cf3c38138e02 by Éric Araujo (Daisuke Miyakawa) in branch 'master': bpo-31567: add or fix decorator markup in docs (#3959) https://github.com/python/cpython/commit/0e61e67a57deb4abc677808201d7cf3c38138e02 -- ___

[issue31567] Inconsistent documentation around decorators

Change by Daisuke Miyakawa : -- keywords: +patch pull_requests: +3935 stage: -> patch review ___ Python tracker ___ ___ Python-bugs-

[issue31567] Inconsistent documentation around decorators

Change by Henk-Jaap Wagenaar : -- nosy: +Henk-Jaap Wagenaar ___ Python tracker ___ ___ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: ht

[issue31567] Inconsistent documentation around decorators

Éric Araujo added the comment: > What does @ mean here? If there's some meaning, the next question is, why doc > for staticmethod() > (and classmethod() in the same page) does not have it? @ means that the function is meant to be used as a decorator (the markup looks like the actual code). s

[issue31567] Inconsistent documentation around decorators

New submission from Daisuke Miyakawa: I can see inconsistency in library documentation around functions that are suitable for decorators. I'd like to clarify if it is based on my misunderstanding, or a real documentation problem. Examples: - https://docs.python.org/3/library/functions.html#st