Message281799
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.)" |
|
Date |
User |
Action |
Args |
2016-11-26 20:33:54 | terry.reedy | set | recipients:
+ terry.reedy, gvanrossum, rhettinger, eric.smith, ned.deily, martin.panter, serhiy.storchaka, yselivanov |
2016-11-26 20:33:54 | terry.reedy | set | messageid: <1480192434.32.0.286892010005.issue28739@psf.upfronthosting.co.za> |
2016-11-26 20:33:54 | terry.reedy | link | issue28739 messages |
2016-11-26 20:33:53 | terry.reedy | create | |
|