No, I was actually talking about Python comments more generally.

However, it would be a good idea probably to choose between either the
OpenLayers or Ext coding guidelines.  Documentation extraction is one issue
to think about for those.


On Thu, Jul 8, 2010 at 3:06 PM, David Winslow <[email protected]> wrote:

>  so you're actually talking about formatting comments for a documentation
> extractor like Javadoc/epydoc/naturaldocs?
>
> -d
>
>
> On 07/08/2010 03:00 PM, Sebastian Benthall wrote:
>
> On Thu, Jul 8, 2010 at 10:43 AM, David Winslow <[email protected]>wrote:
>
>> On 07/08/2010 09:30 AM, Sebastian Benthall wrote:
>>
>>> One thing I can think of right off the bat that is comments on the Python
>>> stuff in particular.  I think it would be good to adopt a standard for that
>>> and try to stick to it.
>>>
>>>  I'm not sure I understood this; it is a vague response to a long email.
>>  Are you saying that we should have some coding guidelines for patches to
>> the Python code that stipulate comment formatting?
>>
>
>  Yes.  Precisely.
>
>
>> http://docs.codehaus.org/display/GEOT/5.1.1+Coding+Conventions
>> http://docs.djangoproject.com/en/dev/internals/contributing/#coding-style
>> http://trac.openlayers.org/wiki/CodingStandards
>
>
>  Yes.  The reason why I mentioned Python specifically was because I
> thought we had more or less de facto had the OpenLayers commenting standards
> for the JavaScript (though I suppose we should decide whether we should use
> those or the Ext ones, which if I recall correctly are different in order to
> support API doc generation from the restructured text comments)  and (I had
> assumed) the GeoServer standards for the GeoServer-y parts.
>
>  Adopting the Django coding style for the Python bits sounds like a great
> idea for me.
>
>  I notice that it though it provides something of a style guide for
> docstrings, though, it doesn't say much more than "use action words."  I
> guess that's better than nothing.  We could go with that and then adjust
> later if its not sufficient.
>
>  Along these lines, I'd also be interested in having some browsable API
>> documentation once dev.geonode.org is available to us for such things.  A
>> certain level of documentation coverage could be another factor in patch
>> acceptability.
>>
>>
>> --
>> David Winslow
>> OpenGeo - http://opengeo.org/
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Sebastian Benthall
> OpenGeo - http://opengeo.org
>
>
>


-- 
Sebastian Benthall
OpenGeo - http://opengeo.org

Reply via email to