What's "the standard" for code docs?
Paul McGuire
ptmcg at austin.rr.com
Wed Feb 20 03:32:38 EST 2008
More information about the Python-list mailing list
Wed Feb 20 03:32:38 EST 2008
- Previous message (by thread): What's "the standard" for code docs?
- Next message (by thread): What's "the standard" for code docs?
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
On Feb 15, 10:59 am, Preston Landers <pland... at gmail.com> wrote: > Hey guys and gals. What are all the cool kids using these days to > document their code? My goal is to create in-line documentation of > each package/module/class/method and create some semi-nice looking (or > at least usable) packaged documentation from it, in HTML and/or PDF > format. > > I've been using effbot's PythonDoc for a while, but it seems like "the > new standard" (if there is one) is docutils and restructured text > (ReST.) Is that accurate? > > Just from glancing at some samples of ReST the actual format looks > much easier to work with in "plain text" in the text editor. > PythonDoc has not been very popular with my team due to its HTML-ish > nature and I think ReST will gain more acceptance. Of course I don't > want to bother making the jump from PythonDoc to docutils if that > project is somehow a dead end. > > thanks for any info or advice you can provide. > > Preston I use epydoc for pyparsing, and I really like the results. Just make sure that importing your modules doesn't really do anything substantial (like connect to db's, or run unit tests that run for hours); epydoc imports your code and then introspects it to extract the classes, methods, docstrings, etc. (And I think you asked an honest question, and did not deserve the rude answers you got. This NG is normally better behaved.) -- Paul
- Previous message (by thread): What's "the standard" for code docs?
- Next message (by thread): What's "the standard" for code docs?
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
More information about the Python-list mailing list