compiler package needs better documentation.

[freddrake]

BPO	223616
Nosy	@freddrake, @facundobatista

^{Note: these values reflect the state of the issue at the time it was migrated and might not reflect the current state.}

Show more details

GitHub fields:

assignee = None
closed_at = <Date 2007-04-10.14:00:11.000>
created_at = <Date 2000-11-27.18:33:59.000>
labels = ['type-feature', 'docs']
title = 'compiler package needs better documentation.'
updated_at = <Date 2007-04-10.14:00:11.000>
user = 'https://github.com/freddrake'

bugs.python.org fields:

activity = <Date 2007-04-10.14:00:11.000>
actor = 'fdrake'
assignee = 'jhylton'
closed = True
closed_date = None
closer = None
components = ['Documentation']
creation = <Date 2000-11-27.18:33:59.000>
creator = 'fdrake'
dependencies = []
files = []
hgrepos = []
issue_num = 223616
keywords = []
message_count = 8.0
messages = ['2486', '2487', '2488', '2489', '2490', '2491', '2492', '2493']
nosy_count = 3.0
nosy_names = ['jhylton', 'fdrake', 'facundobatista']
pr_nums = []
priority = 'high'
resolution = 'fixed'
stage = None
status = 'closed'
superseder = None
type = 'enhancement'
url = 'https://bugs.python.org/issue223616'
versions = []

[freddrake]

The compiler package is not documented; this needs to be done before tools are likely to be written on top of it.

[freddrake]

Jeremy -- is there anything that can be done to make it easier for you to get this done? I think these should really be documented and moved into the library.

[freddrake]

Logged In: YES
user_id=3066

Jeremy said he'd work on this next week, so I'm bumping the
priority as a reminder.

[freddrake]

Logged In: YES
user_id=3066

I'll note that Jeremy has written basic docs, and they are
in the Library Reference. But he really needs to polish
them a bit as well, so this stays open but gets a new summary.

[jhylton]

Logged In: YES
user_id=31392

jeremy, get your butt in gear on this!

[facundobatista]

This is one of the oldest bugs we have...

As the compiler package surely got revised with the inclusion of AST, and the bug was only to remember about polishing... this still needs to be open?

[facundobatista]

The SVN log reflects that the docs *have* been moved into the Library Reference, and that they have been corrected and polished.

Fred, you said they needed polishing in December 2001. From then, corrections have been made from Georg, Raymond, Brett and edloper.

I'm closing this, but feel free to reopen it if you think that this docs *still* need more polishing.

Regards,

[freddrake]

I think this is fine, Facundo. All docs need polishing, but that's not a bug so long as they're complete, accurate, and readable.

Thanks for checking on this.