Class data members are included in the documentation when the type is explicitly defined.

[ravenexp]

Problem Description

As I understand it, pdoc does not document the class data members by default.
But, when the data member type is specified explicitly in __init__(), pdoc documents it by default.

Steps to reproduce the behavior:

class Foo:
    def __init__(self) -> None:
        """
        Foo() constructor
        """

        self.a = 0
        self.b: int = 0

Data member a is not included in the Foo class documentation, but data member b is.

System Information

pdoc: 7.1.1
Python: 3.9.6
Platform: Linux-5.12.14-arch1-1-x86_64-with-glibc2.33

[mhils]

Hi there!

This is more or less expected behavior. pdoc documents all attributes that have either a docstring or a type annotation. We don't document members for which neither is present, mostly because there's really not much to document. If you want members to not be public, I'd recommend you prefix them with an underscore, which is a more general Python convention. Does that make sense?

[ravenexp]

Probably. I wasn't prefixing the data members with underscores (as I should have been), but I also use type annotations everywhere. It didn't bother me at all because the type of the data members was correctly inferred in 99% of cases. But then I needed something like foo: Optional[Foo] = None and it stood out like a sore thumb...

[mhils]

By "I also use type annotations everywhere", you mean everywhere but for attributes/data members?

I guess I do have some sympathy for your use case. A reasonable change here would be to only add variables with docstrings instead of adding variables that have a docstring, an annotation, or both. I think it should be enough to remove those four lines:

pdoc/pdoc/doc.py

Lines 475 to 476 in fdb6fde

	for name in self._var_annotations:
	members.setdefault(name, empty)

pdoc/pdoc/doc.py

Lines 583 to 584 in fdb6fde

	for name in self._var_annotations:
	unsorted.setdefault(name, empty)

I feel both approaches are valid, maybe other folks want to chime in. :)

[ravenexp]

By "I also use type annotations everywhere", you mean everywhere but for attributes/data members?

There's no need, because the data members are typically defined like

def __init__(self):
    ...
    self.foo = Foo()
    ...

where the foo data type is automatically inferred from the RHS of the assignment.

[mhils]

You've convinced me here, this behavior will be changed with the next release!