[Doc-SIG] docstring grammar

[Tony J Ibbs (Tibs)]

Tim Peters wrote:
> It's certainly odd that people who don't use doctest are suddenly worried
> about how to stop it from testing their code <wink/frown>.

OK, I admit it, I've been entirely convinced that ">>>" is indeed enough of
a signifier, and that I should stop worrying now. Tim's explication of why
it wouldn't be a problem does explain to me why it won't be (damn, its
really irksome when someone makes having your mind changed so enjoyable -
maybe I just need a new mind...).

So do we need a "Test" keyword at all now? Only perhaps if one wants to have
a section which *explains* what is going on that has a separate heading, and
maybe *that* just means we want a "Title" keyword or somesuch, and if we're
getting to that level of detail right now I think I should stop.

Eddy's point that we'll probably have something that translates to
<pre>..</pre> is also relevant, although I think that's actually now for
different reasons.

Are we there yet?

David Ascher wrote:
> 'Tim happens.  Get used to it'

Thank you! Thank you! I was wanting a Python signature to use as well as the
HPV ones!

Tibs
--
Tony J Ibbs (Tibs)      http://www.tibsnjoan.demon.co.uk/
'Tim happens. Get used to it'. (David Ascher, on the Doc-SIG)
My views! Mine! Mine! (Unless Laser-Scan ask nicely to borrow them.)