Author terry.reedy
Recipients eric.smith, gvanrossum, martin.panter, ned.deily, rhettinger, serhiy.storchaka, terry.reedy, yselivanov
Date 2016-11-26.20:33:53
SpamBayes Score -1.0
Marked as misclassified Yes
Message-id <1480192434.32.0.286892010005.issue28739@psf.upfronthosting.co.za>
In-reply-to
Content
I withdraw my previously suggested addition to the Docstring glossary entry (msg281740).  It implies that trivial f-strings are acceptable and I agree that other implementations and future Cpython should be free to strictly follow the literal meaning of the first sentence: docstring = initial string literal expression.

I suggest instead that 'string literal' in the first sentence link to https://docs.python.org/3/reference/lexical_analysis.html#string-and-bytes-literals.  This would make it clearer that 'string literal' is being used the the Python technical sense rather than in any more informal English sense.

We could possibly add a version of what Guido said above, such as: "(Acceptance of anything other than a string literal as a docstring is an implementation accident and should not be relied upon.)"
History
Date User Action Args
2016-11-26 20:33:54terry.reedysetrecipients: + terry.reedy, gvanrossum, rhettinger, eric.smith, ned.deily, martin.panter, serhiy.storchaka, yselivanov
2016-11-26 20:33:54terry.reedysetmessageid: <1480192434.32.0.286892010005.issue28739@psf.upfronthosting.co.za>
2016-11-26 20:33:54terry.reedylinkissue28739 messages
2016-11-26 20:33:53terry.reedycreate