[issue25179] PEP 498 f-strings need to be documented

Roundup Robot added the comment: New changeset f4d7de7d18c0 by Martin Panter in branch 'default': Issue #25179: Documentation for formatted string literals aka f-strings https://hg.python.org/cpython/rev/f4d7de7d18c0 -- ___ Python tracker

[issue25179] PEP 498 f-strings need to be documented

Martin Panter added the comment: Hopefully that did it. Let me know if I missed anything. -- resolution: -> fixed stage: patch review -> resolved status: open -> closed ___ Python tracker

[issue25179] PEP 498 f-strings need to be documented

Martin Panter added the comment: Updated with Eric’s suggestions -- Added file: http://bugs.python.org/file41864/f-strings.v2.patch ___ Python tracker

[issue25179] PEP 498 f-strings need to be documented

Martin Panter added the comment: Regarding doc strings, it seems that a constant f-string without any interpolations does become a doc string. But I would treat this as an implementation detail, not something to advertise. Attached is my attempt at a patch. Please have a look and let me know

[issue25179] PEP 498 f-strings need to be documented

Roundup Robot added the comment: New changeset f25d8cbd074a by Martin Panter in branch '3.5': Issue #25179: Preparatory cleanup of existing docs on string formatting https://hg.python.org/cpython/rev/f25d8cbd074a New changeset fe692ee6d19a by Martin Panter in branch '2.7': Issue #25179:

[issue25179] PEP 498 f-strings need to be documented

Changes by Ezio Melotti : -- type: -> enhancement ___ Python tracker ___ ___

[issue25179] PEP 498 f-strings need to be documented

Eric V. Smith added the comment: It does not currently work, because the docstring logic looks for a string, not an expression. And an f-string is an expression. It would require changing the compiler to evaluate the f-string expression. -- ___

[issue25179] PEP 498 f-strings need to be documented

Emanuel Barry added the comment: I think f-strings should be valid as docstrings. I don't know the exact details, but I think it would be harder to prevent rather than allow them. It would be exactly the same as doing func.__doc__ = func.__doc__.format(foo=foo, bar=bar) It probably wouldn't

[issue25179] PEP 498 f-strings need to be documented

Eric V. Smith added the comment: Since f-strings are not constant strings, they cannot be used as docstrings without some modifications to the compiler. I'm not sure it's worth evaluating a docstring f-string at compile time to make them become docstrings: I can't think of a use case where

[issue25179] PEP 498 f-strings need to be documented

Emanuel Barry added the comment: I was under the impression that they would work without any additional work (as they'd have access to the outer scope). Of course, trying to access a local variable would be an error as it's not yet defined. My point is more that we shouldn't have to account

[issue25179] PEP 498 f-strings need to be documented

New submission from Eric V. Smith: Issue 24965 add f-strings (see PEP 498). They need to be documented. -- assignee: docs@python components: Documentation messages: 251101 nosy: docs@python, eric.smith priority: normal severity: normal stage: needs patch status: open title: PEP 498