[issue13386] Document documentation conventions for optional args

[Ezio Melotti]

Ezio Melotti <ezio.melotti at gmail.com> added the comment:

> Me too.  (Can you give the #ids of these other issues?)

See for example #13012.

> I think we should fix C functions to accept kwargs for the sake of 
> Python programmers, not merely to ease documentation (that would just 
> be a nice side-effect :)

And also for compatibility for other implementations like PyPy.  I'm still not sure that is a good idea to do a mass conversion of all the functions though.

> Sphinx lets us give multiple signatures.  I’ve just checked that this 
> markup is valid and does not create duplicate index entries

This is something I was considering, but I'm afraid it might get too verbose (and introduce yet another convention).  Sometimes this feature is also (mis?)used to group similar functions.

----------

_______________________________________
Python tracker <report at bugs.python.org>
<http://bugs.python.org/issue13386>
_______________________________________