Éric Araujo <mer...@netwok.org> added the comment: >> I think we should fix C functions to accept kwargs for the sake of Python >> programmers > And also for compatibility for other implementations like PyPy. Good point.
> I'm still not sure that is a good idea to do a mass conversion of all the > functions though. If there were only a handful of them it may be okay, but otherwise one issue per class or module sounds good. >> Sphinx lets us give multiple signatures > This is something I was considering, but I'm afraid it might get too verbose I find my example for range much more readable that the current markup with brackets. > (and introduce yet another convention). I can live with this special case for the two or three functions that need it. It becomes moot if range gets fixed to support kwargs :) > Sometimes this feature is also (mis?)used to group similar functions. IIUC it *is* the intended use case for the syntax, not a misuse: You tell Sphinx that you want link targets for these functions to end up here, and then you write doc. See for example the os docs: this syntax allows for nice grouping. ---------- _______________________________________ Python tracker <rep...@bugs.python.org> <http://bugs.python.org/issue13386> _______________________________________ _______________________________________________ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
