[docs] [issue12672] Some problems in documentation extending/newtypes.html
report at bugs.python.org
Thu Aug 11 18:02:45 CEST 2011
Éric Araujo <merwok at netwok.org> added the comment:
> I know perfectly well that .append is valid Python,
> but I don't think this is the clearest way to give an example of an
> object method. I think spelling .append's meaning more explicitly
> would be better.
Would it be clearer if we replaced the literal with a name?
These C functions are called “type methods” to distinguish them from
- things like .append (which we call “object methods”).
+ methods bound to specific instances (things like sys.path.append),
+ which we call “object methods”.
> I'm also aware that there are tab problems all over the code base.
> I'm not suggesting a large cleanup.
*I* was suggesting a large cleanup :), but we can do that in another commit. If you want to clean the example code in Doc/extending or even just in newtypes.rst, I think you can just go ahead.
Python tracker <report at bugs.python.org>
More information about the docs