New submission from Éric Araujo <mer...@netwok.org>: Following a discussion on IRC:
<birkenfeld> I would even prefer having more of just `object` instead of :func:`object` or :class:`object` I think it would be feasible to write a reST role that would use inspect or pydoc to find the type. It would not violate “In the face of ambiguity, refuse the temptation to guess” if it only resolves `somebuiltin` and `some.fully.qualified.name`. Cons: People unfamiliar with reST might confuse ``code`` with `name`; interpreting the role may prove non-trivial (either requiring importing Python module to introspect them, or keeping a mapping of names→types in some file). Thoughts? ---------- assignee: d...@python components: Documentation messages: 107790 nosy: d...@python, merwok priority: normal severity: normal status: open title: Add a default role to allow writing bare `len` instead of :func:`len` type: feature request _______________________________________ Python tracker <rep...@bugs.python.org> <http://bugs.python.org/issue8996> _______________________________________ _______________________________________________ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
