[Doc-SIG] Python docs in reST?

Torsten Bronger bronger at physik.rwth-aachen.de
Thu May 26 01:53:20 CEST 2005


Felix Wiemann <Felix.Wiemann at gmx.net> writes:

> Torsten Bronger wrote:
>> I use field lists at the moment.  That's okay, but it's not real
>> logical markup since the reST interpreter has no chance to
>> recognise it as a function definition.  Besides, its pdf and HTML
>> results are poor.
> The PDF output is being worked on.  What's bothering you about the
> HTML output?

I dislike this table-like style.  Currently, my source may contain


Relinquish a lock for the specified resource.

:Call: unlock(vi)
    `vi` : ViSession
        Unique logical identifier to a session.
:Return values:

I want "Call" and "Parameters" to go away, and I don't want to feel
forced to start a new section for every function.  But first and
foremost, I want to have the impression that I tell the reST
interpreter everything I can.  Here, for example, I know that
"unlock" is the function's name, "vi" is a parameter object,
"ViSession" is a type.  However, I can't pass this knowledge to

http://pp3.sf.net/manual/Other-layout-parameters.html shows how it
could look like:  Just a signature line with proper emphasis on the
functions's name and all identifiers in italics.  Big skip before
it, and indentation of the whole explanation.


Torsten Bronger, aquisgrana, europa vetus

More information about the Doc-SIG mailing list