[Python-checkins] CVS: python/nondist/peps pep-0224.txt,1.4,1.5

[M.-A. Lemburg]

Update of /cvsroot/python/python/nondist/peps
In directory usw-pr-cvs1:/tmp/cvs-serv28499

Modified Files:
	pep-0224.txt 
Log Message:
Added section about Guido's rejection comments.



Index: pep-0224.txt
===================================================================
RCS file: /cvsroot/python/python/nondist/peps/pep-0224.txt,v
retrieving revision 1.4
retrieving revision 1.5
diff -C2 -r1.4 -r1.5
*** pep-0224.txt	2001/03/21 17:52:20	1.4
--- pep-0224.txt	2001/03/23 11:46:44	1.5
***************
*** 169,173 ****
      attribute there is no breakage.
  
!     
  Copyright
  
--- 169,243 ----
      attribute there is no breakage.
  
! 
! Comments from our BDFL
! 
!     Early comments on the PEP from Guido:
! 
!         I "kinda" like the idea of having attribute docstrings (meaning
!         it's not of great importance to me) but there are two things I
!         don't like in your current proposal:
! 
!         1. The syntax you propose is too ambiguous: as you say,
!         stand-alone string literal are used for other purposes and could
!         suddenly become attribute docstrings.
! 
!         2. I don't like the access method either (__doc_<attrname>__).
! 
!     The author's reply:
! 
!         > 1. The syntax you propose is too ambiguous: as you say, stand-alone
!         >    string literal are used for other purposes and could suddenly
!         >    become attribute docstrings.
! 
!         This can be fixed by introducing some extra checks in the
!         compiler to reset the "doc attribute" flag in the compiler
!         struct.
! 
!         > 2. I don't like the access method either (__doc_<attrname>__).
! 
!         Any other name will do. It will only have to match these
!         criteria:
! 
!         * must start with two underscores (to match __doc__)
!         * must be extractable using some form of inspection (e.g. by using
!           a naming convention which includes some fixed name part)
!         * must be compatible with class inheritence (i.e. should be
!           stored as attribute)
! 
!     Later on in March, Guido pronounced on this PEP in March 2001 (on
!     python-dev). Here are his reasons for rejection mentioned in
!     private mail to the author of this PEP:
! 
!         ...
! 
!         It might be useful, but I really hate the proposed syntax.
! 
!             a = 1
!             "foo bar"
!             b = 1
! 
!         I really have no way to know whether "foo bar" is a docstring
!         for a or for b.
! 
!         ...
!         
!         You can use this convention:
! 
!             a = 1
!             __doc_a__ = "doc string for a"
! 
!         This makes it available at runtime.
! 
!         > Are you completely opposed to adding attribute documentation
!         > to Python or is it just the way the implementation works ? I
!         > find the syntax proposed in the PEP very intuitive and many
!         > other users on c.l.p and in private emails have supported it
!         > at the time I wrote the PEP.
! 
!         It's not the implementation, it's the syntax.  It doesn't
!         convey a clear enough coupling between the variable and the
!         doc string.
! 
!         
  Copyright