This issue tracker has been migrated to GitHub, and is currently read-only.
For more information, see the GitHub FAQs in the Python's Developer Guide.

Author eric.araujo
Recipients baptiste.carvello, docs@python, eli.bendersky, eric.araujo, eric.smith, eric.snow, ezio.melotti, georg.brandl, petri.lehtinen, terry.reedy
Date 2011-11-15.14:20:53
SpamBayes Score 1.9790733e-09
Marked as misclassified No
Message-id <1321366854.08.0.0957593955417.issue13386@psf.upfronthosting.co.za>
In-reply-to
Content
>> I think we should fix C functions to accept kwargs for the sake of Python programmers
> And also for compatibility for other implementations like PyPy.
Good point.

> I'm still not sure that is a good idea to do a mass conversion of all the functions though.
If there were only a handful of them it may be okay, but otherwise one issue per class or module sounds good.

>> Sphinx lets us give multiple signatures
> This is something I was considering, but I'm afraid it might get too verbose
I find my example for range much more readable that the current markup with brackets.

> (and introduce yet another convention).
I can live with this special case for the two or three functions that need it.  It becomes moot if range gets fixed to support kwargs :)

> Sometimes this feature is also (mis?)used to group similar functions.
IIUC it *is* the intended use case for the syntax, not a misuse: You tell Sphinx that you want link targets for these functions to end up here, and then you write doc.  See for example the os docs: this syntax allows for nice grouping.
History
Date User Action Args
2011-11-15 14:20:54eric.araujosetrecipients: + eric.araujo, georg.brandl, terry.reedy, eric.smith, ezio.melotti, eli.bendersky, docs@python, eric.snow, baptiste.carvello, petri.lehtinen
2011-11-15 14:20:54eric.araujosetmessageid: <1321366854.08.0.0957593955417.issue13386@psf.upfronthosting.co.za>
2011-11-15 14:20:53eric.araujolinkissue13386 messages
2011-11-15 14:20:53eric.araujocreate