On Jul 31, 3:09 pm, kj <no.em...@please.post> wrote: > In <09bf4f17-40a5-4bad-81d3-1950545b7...@g6g2000vbr.googlegroups.com> > > Carl Banks <pavlovevide...@gmail.com> writes: > > <snip> > > Thanks. Your remarks at least confirm that my impression was not > simply due to my noob ignorance: the keyboard-accessible docs are > indeed as poor as they look.
In the standard library, docstrings (which is what pydoc prints) are intended to be a brief explanation/reminder of usage, not an exhaustive description. Where docstrings are present, they are more or less adequate for their intended use (although the quality of docstrings does vary highly throughout the library). If you are trying to use pydoc in a way not intended, then yes you would likely find that they are poor when used in that unintended way. Docstrings take up memory in a running process, so they are not ever likely to be converted to an exhaustive description. Your best bet is to figure out a way to automate lookup in the html documentation. Carl Banks -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
