From: Antony L. <ant...@be...> - 2017-10-04 17:58:04
|
Hi all, Currently, RST specifies that entries in a definition list may be followed by a series of classifiers all on the same line, as in term : classifier one : classifier 2 Definition This syntax is used by numpydoc (the de facto docstring standard in the scientific Python world) to document individual parameters of callables, as in parameter_name : type_of_parameter Description of the parameter. (see https://github.com/numpy/numpy/blob/master/doc/HOWTO_DOCUMENT.rst.txt#sections for details). In general, this approach yields highly legible raw docstrings, and can easily be converted into the Sphinx standard field list format (tools to do so include numpydoc and sphinx.ext.napoleon). However, it is awkward to include very long parameter "types" (e.g., an enumeration of allowable string values -- which I know is not strictly a type, but remains a common API) using this method, due to the restriction that the classifiers need to stay in one line. In practice, this means that it is necessary to use a line continuation in the docstring, either parameter_name : some long type \ description Description of parameter. or parameter_name : some long type \ description Description of the parameter. The first form is ugly in the source, the second form is ugly when the docstring is viewed as a string (e.g. by pydoc) as all the spaces before ``description`` end up in the literal docstring. See e.g. https://github.com/numpy/numpydoc/issues/87 for a longer discussion of the issue. While numpydoc can of course invent its own syntax, it would seem preferable if a standard way to write multi-line classifiers was specified by the RST standard. Just checking for indentation is actually a bit ambiguous, because it is not clear how to parse a : b c (is ``c`` a continuation or a description?). A possibility would be to support backslashed-line continuations at the RST level, so the Python docstring would look like parameter_name : some long type \\ description Description of the parameter but RST would see a single backslash and know what to do; or require that continued classifier lines start also with ``: ``: parameter_name : some long type : description Description of the parameter Neither option is strictly fully back-compatible, but I hope one of them, or some similar solution, can be adopted. Antony Lee PS: As suggested on the docutils mailing list page, I am not subscribed to the list, so please CC me in the reply. Thanks! |