There's a blank line between "Short description" and "Longer 
description..." in the docstring (got removed by the forum formatting).

On Sunday, December 29, 2019 at 10:46:22 PM UTC-4, YKdvd wrote:
>
> I'll probably do something standalone before sphinx to build the 
> additional rst files.
>
> One more thing, the "napoleon" extension doesn't seem to give any examples 
> where the short or longer comment inside the docstring has multiple lines:
>
> """Short description
>> Longer description goes across multiple lines.
>> Like this.
>> And also like this.
>> ... <more docstring:
>> """
>
>
> Napoleon seems to turn this into:
>
> Short description
>
>  
>
>> Longer description goes across multiple lines. Like this. And also like 
>> this.
>
>
> Napoleon isn't designed to honor the linebreaks in the longer part of the 
> description, and it gets treated like RST text and flowed together?  You'd 
> have to put something like "|" on the lines in the doctring to get 
> linebreaks?  Or am I missing a napoleon setting?
>
> On Sunday, December 22, 2019 at 7:24:19 AM UTC-4, Komiya Takeshi wrote:
>>
>> It is hard to generate new document from directive. To do that, you 
>> need to hack Sphinx core deeply. Indeed, you can do it by extensions. 
>> For example, autosummary extension parses reSturcturedText by itself 
>> and generate stub files before reading document. But it is very hacky 
>> and difficult way to implement it. 
>>
>> Thanks, 
>> Takeshi KOMIYA 
>>
>> 2019年12月22日(日) 10:08 YKdvd <[email protected]>: 
>> > 
>> > I've got a rudimentary version of this working- my domain and 
>> directive's run() is returning the node children results of parsing some 
>> MEL text I pull out of a source file, something like autodoc does.  I was 
>> wondering if there is anything it could return to create RST source that 
>> would be processed into multiple output files?  So a directive is in 
>> "source.rst" and run() provides content for "source.html", but I'd like to 
>> be able to have it generate "source2.html", "source3.html" as well.  For 
>> instance, the directive might create an output file for each procedure it 
>> discovers, rather than accumulating them all in the current output. 
>> > 
>> > On Friday, October 11, 2019 at 11:21:59 PM UTC-3, Komiya Takeshi wrote: 
>> >> 
>> >> Hi, 
>> >> 
>> >> Yes, your understanding is correct. autodoc reads a python script and 
>> >> generates reST code containing "py:*" directives. After that, 
>> >> generated code are parsed by nested_parse() 
>> >> I hope source code of AutoDirective class will help you. 
>> >> 
>> https://github.com/sphinx-doc/sphinx/blob/7faeb793e2e16cde4e5759443fb7f84efddcd9ea/sphinx/ext/autodoc/directive.py#L109-L158
>>  
>> >> 
>> >> Thanks, 
>> >> Takeshi KOMIYA 
>> >> 
>> >> 2019年10月12日(土) 3:03 YKdvd <[email protected]>: 
>> >> > 
>> >> > We use Autodesk's Maya 3D software, which embeds Python as a 
>> scripting language, and I have a sphinx setup to create some docs for that. 
>>  But Maya also has an older, TCL-based scripting language called MEL which 
>> is used for a lot of our codebase, and it would be nice to somehow pull 
>> some documentation out of that as well.  I was looking at the autodoc and 
>> sphinx-js extensions code, and was wondering if I could do a fairly quick 
>> and dirty extension that might help out? 
>> >> > 
>> >> > I haven't dug into all the details, but is this a reasonable 
>> high-level idea of what an extension might do?  It would register a domain, 
>> say "mel:", and my .rst source file would use a directive like ".. 
>> mel:automelfile:: some_mel_filename".  My extension would implement a 
>> subclass of SphinxDirective for this, and its run() method would return "a 
>> list of nodes".  I'd be responsible for finding and parsing the MEL file, 
>> but if I could extract various blocks of text in Google docstring format 
>> (we use the Napoleon extension for our Python autodocs), there would be 
>> sphinx functions to turn them into py:module or py:function nodes or 
>> whatnot for my run() method to return, similar to what autodoc is 
>> presumably doing? 
>> >> > 
>> >> > I wouldn't do anything fancy for the parsing, probably just some 
>> regular expression stuff to try and get a top-level comment and the ones 
>> associated with global procedures, but am I on the right track as to the 
>> design of an extension like this? 
>> >> > 
>> >> > -- 
>> >> > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google 
>> Groups "sphinx-users" group. 
>> >> > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, 
>> send an email to [email protected]. 
>> >> > To view this discussion on the web visit 
>> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/sphinx-users/3dbf618a-2e36-460e-a724-24989b8f8687%40googlegroups.com.
>>  
>>
>> > 
>> > -- 
>> > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google 
>> Groups "sphinx-users" group. 
>> > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send 
>> an email to [email protected]. 
>> > To view this discussion on the web visit 
>> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/sphinx-users/8144f58c-483a-4e83-bcc6-6415f999f693%40googlegroups.com.
>>  
>>
>>
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"sphinx-users" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to [email protected].
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/sphinx-users/87ddbdf2-64e5-4ba7-b6cc-f684beda399a%40googlegroups.com.

Reply via email to