On Fri, Jul 13, 2007 at 02:03:04PM -0400, Jim Fulton wrote: > Of course, I'm a big fan of doctest. Not all tests are documentation > though, even if they are written as doctest. I'm happy with what > we've done. We're making good incremental progress. I think though > that many of our doctests that aspire to be documentation are > actually not good documentation. IMO, we need to separate tests into > 2 classes: executable documentation and tests.
+infinity Absolutely! Trying to reach two unrelated goals (comprehensive tests + human-friendly documentation) with one file is just too hard, if not impossible. > The executable > documentation needs to be **much more readable than it is now**. FWIW, here's a very good example of executable documentation: https://storm.canonical.com/Tutorial Marius Gedminas -- We have enough youth, how about a fountain of SMART?
Description: Digital signature
_______________________________________________ Zope3-dev mailing list Zope3email@example.com Unsub: http://mail.zope.org/mailman/options/zope3-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com