Any syntactic cleanup likely for Py3? And what about doc standards?

Terry Reedy tjreedy at udel.edu
Wed Sep 5 21:43:38 CEST 2007


"Kenneth McDonald" <kenneth.m.mcdonald at sbcglobal.net> wrote in message 
news:46DEFD2E.5050205 at sbcglobal.net...
| The reading I've done so far on Python 3 (alpha announcement, meta-PEP,
| some other PEPs) is generally encouraging, but there doesn't seem to be
| much on cleaning up the syntax,

I believe that the syntax changes in 3.0.a0 are pretty much what will be in 
3.0.

| Finally, another thing I've perhaps missed, but I can't see anything in
| what I've gone through, about correcting of of what I see to be one of
| Python's most long-standing really serious flaws, which is the lack of
| an official standard documentation markup syntax for writing
| documentation in code. This isn't even a matter of getting something
| developed, it's simply a matter of Guido and the Powers That Be
| bestowing their benediction on one of the several adequate or better
| documentation toolsets out there, so that more of us (slowly) start
| using it. Eventually this will result in work on the toolset itself,
| more people will be willing to use it, and there'll be a nice virtuous
| circle.

Except for the core language, Guido generally avoids trying to pick and 
impose winners (as opposed to recognizing winners).  So, as far as I know, 
he never 'pronounced' on PEP 287.  On the other hand, its author 
volunteered as a PEP editor and posted PEP12.  And for 2.6, the doc sources 
have been converted, I understand, from Latex to .rst due to work led by 
(and mostly done by?) G. Brandl (who is still working on the toolset).  So 
consider that a 'benediction' if you wish.

tjr






More information about the Python-list mailing list