Antony Lee
Antony Lee
Right now numpydoc format is actually valid rst (just with some special interpretation of certain markup constructs), e.g. the parameters field is a definition list where the type is a...
I think the reference to PEP257 is a misunderstanding, the sentence about raw strings probably refers to the case where the docstring contains a backslash *character*; but in this case,...
(I'm still in favor of requiring a backslash for the continuation (single backslash if using raw-docstrings, double backslash if not), which has the advantage of avoiding the ambiguity with one-character...
I don't see why this would look "obscure" in pydoc (and I use pydoc very regularly). Perhaps inelegant at worst, but I don't think it's particularly bad either.
yes (it's still :doc: that fails)
Yes, I still have the issue when using the leading slash, which is explicitly allowed by sphinx (http://www.sphinx-doc.org/en/master/usage/restructuredtext/roles.html#role-doc).
It would be nice if it matched the features of sphinx's own `.. seealso::`, which supports refering to general items (https://www.sphinx-doc.org/en/master/usage/restructuredtext/directives.html#directive-seealso).
Actually, now that I look at it, perhaps one can just use either the `.. topic::` or the `.. rubric::` rst directives (http://docutils.sourceforge.net/docs/ref/rst/directives.html#topic, http://docutils.sourceforge.net/docs/ref/rst/directives.html#rubric) and call it a day without...
looks like your message was cropped
`.. rubric::` is not followed by an indent block, it's basically a standalone title.