On 04Apr2019 15:40, Ben Finney wrote:
Cameron Simpson writes:
To answer my own question ...
On 04Apr2019 14:05, Cameron Simpson wrote:
> Is it unreasonable to promote bare format strings as candidates for
> the docstring?
Sigh. Because such a string _should_ be evaluated in the runtime scope
Cameron Simpson writes:
> To answer my own question ...
>
> On 04Apr2019 14:05, Cameron Simpson wrote:
> > Is it unreasonable to promote bare format strings as candidates for
> > the docstring?
>
> Sigh. Because such a string _should_ be evaluated in the runtime scope
> context of the _called_ f
On 04Apr2019 14:14, Cameron Simpson wrote:
Is it unreasonable to promote bare format strings as candidates for
the docstring?
Yes it is. But being annoyed by this I've written this decorator:
def fmtdoc(func):
''' Decorator to replace a function's docstring with that string
f
To answer my own question ...
On 04Apr2019 14:05, Cameron Simpson wrote:
I just wrote this (specifics changed for confidentiality reasons):
DEFAULT_ENVVAR = 'APP_VALUE'
def get_handle(setting=None):
f'''Get a handle.
Parameter:
* `setting`: the application setting.
Default
