[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Gzz] ``bug_test_rst--benja``: Marking failing tests to use ReST
From: |
Tuomas Lukka |
Subject: |
Re: [Gzz] ``bug_test_rst--benja``: Marking failing tests to use ReST |
Date: |
Fri, 22 Nov 2002 14:22:45 +0200 |
User-agent: |
Mutt/1.4i |
On Fri, Nov 22, 2002 at 12:07:01PM +0100, Benja Fallenstein wrote:
> =============================================================
> ``bug_test_rst--benja``: Marking failing tests to use ReST
> =============================================================
>
> :Author: Benja Fallenstein
> :Last-Modified: $Date: 2002/11/22 10:49:04 $
> :Revision: $Revision: 1.1 $
> :Status: Current
>
>
> Tuomas' "`Handling Bugs`_" PEG specifies that an RFC 2822-like
> syntax should be used to mark failing PEGs. However,
Hmm... probably it would make sense to refer to PEGs by their unique
id, as a principle?
> - RFC 2822 headers are supposed to be at the beginning of
> something; putting them at the end of something
> (as "Handling Bugs" does) isn't really well-specified
> and needs our own parser.
> - These headers aren't meant to be used in docstrings.
>
> Therefore, I propose to use reStructuredText_ field lists
> instead. They're designed to be very much like RFC 2822 headers,
> but can appear anywhere in a reST fragment-- and reStructuredText
> was designed for use in Python docstrings.
>
> .. _Handling Bugs: ../bug_test--tjl/peg.html
> .. _reStructuredText: http://docutils.sourceforge.net/rst.html
I like this.
Tuomas