Link: https://docs.python.org/3/library/contextlib.html#contextlib.ContextDecorator

"from contextlib import ContextDecorator

class mycontext(ContextBaseClass, ContextDecorator):"

"ContextBaseClass" is referenced but its no where to be found in source.

ContextBaseClass is meant to represent a user-defined class that is a parent of mycontext.

Going a bit OT, in the contextlib doc there are two examples that have both normal code and shell code in the same code block. In this way we loose the prompt syntax highlight, and the code block can also confuse the reader.  In the patch attached the two examples are executed entirely in the shell, and both are under doctest.

@SilentGhost
You are right, I see it now!

If this is the case maybe "ContextBaseClass" should be changed to "UserDefinedContextClass" (or something...) having "Base" in the class name was confusing, since module "io" has IOBase class that refer to its "base class" figured it was the same concept for contextlib as well.

Also it would be nice if example was improved a bit.


Another Idea:
 - why not have an empty context manager base class? like:

def ContextBase:

    def __enter__(self):
        return self

    def __exit__(self, *errors):
        pass

This is something anyone can use to extend their class to support context manager? I actually have a class like this i have used many times in my projects! Its simple yet useful.

typo:
def ContextBase:
to
class ContextBase:

I am going to vote for "not a bug" here. From the context is it understood that the `ContextBaseClass` is to be provided by the user.

> Existing context managers that already have a base class can be extended by using ContextDecorator as a mixin class:

The idea here is the illustrate the Mixin possibility with a Base class and not to provide a full example with Base class code as well.

@Marco, also not a good ticket add more doc strings to this module.rst. If the docs of those can be improved, they can done separately, concentrating on all the possible improvements.

I would think that the idea of simply adding some reference to `User` such as was suggested with `UserDefinedContextClass` would be reasonable and helpful.  This doesn't involve any more code merely a more explanatory name.