From 4cbcd52169e7d93b14702152ad1267afb403d8fa Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: =?UTF-8?q?Sebasti=C3=A1n=20Ram=C3=ADrez?= Date: Mon, 28 Aug 2023 16:05:42 +0200 Subject: [PATCH] =?UTF-8?q?=F0=9F=93=9D=20Simplify=20phrase=20from=20Jelle?= =?UTF-8?q?'s=20feedback,=20typing=5Fextension=20not=20only=20includes=20t?= =?UTF-8?q?yping=20objects?= MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit --- typing_doc.md | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/typing_doc.md b/typing_doc.md index 97eff22d1..937aac572 100644 --- a/typing_doc.md +++ b/typing_doc.md @@ -36,7 +36,7 @@ This doesn't deprecate current usage of docstrings, it's transparent to common d The main proposal is to have a new function `doc()` in the `typing` module. Even though this is not strictly related to the type annotations, it's expected to go in `Annotated` type annotations, and to interact with type annotations. -There's also the particular benefit to having it in `typing` that it could be implemented in the `typing_extensions` package to have support for older versions of Python. +There's also the particular benefit that it could be implemented in the `typing_extensions` package to have support for older versions of Python. This `doc()` function would receive one single parameter `documentation` with a documentation string.