Author terry.reedy
Recipients BTaskaya, Batuhan Taskaya, pablogsal, terry.reedy
Date 2020-01-22.21:06:44
SpamBayes Score -1.0
Marked as misclassified Yes
Message-id <1579727205.21.0.438626832837.issue39411@roundup.psfhosted.org>
In-reply-to
Content
A separate doc change issue and PR would be fine.  Should we add a note explaining the module name as a contraction of an originally restricted scope?  Make me nosy and invite review.

Actually, a doc issue for the module as is should *fully* explain readmodule_ex first (its entry is now incomplete), and then explain readmodule as a filtered version kept for back compatibility.  This could be a separate PR on the same issue, written by one of us, if too much for your friend.

I understood limits of this PR. I should have said change notes were intended for your 'second PR'. 

Changing the return value to a Module should mean a third function, which would then become the main function, as readmodule_ex would then be Module.children.

I have thought about making it possible to browse non-source modules, at least for the module being browsed.  I might implement that first in IDLE.
History
Date User Action Args
2020-01-22 21:06:45terry.reedysetrecipients: + terry.reedy, pablogsal, BTaskaya, Batuhan Taskaya
2020-01-22 21:06:45terry.reedysetmessageid: <1579727205.21.0.438626832837.issue39411@roundup.psfhosted.org>
2020-01-22 21:06:45terry.reedylinkissue39411 messages
2020-01-22 21:06:44terry.reedycreate