gh-85453: Adapt datetime.rst to devguide recommendations for code snippets and variables

[uatach]

Pull request based on PR #21447 that was closed due to being too big, I've added only the changes related to backquotes in this PR.

• Issue: Wrong/missing code formats in datetime documentation #85453

---

📚 Documentation preview 📚: https://cpython-previews--118068.org.readthedocs.build/

[ghost]

All commit authors signed the Contributor License Agreement.

[JelleZijlstra]

Most of those changes seem unnecessary. In particular, simple integers don't need code formatting.

[erlend-aasland]

IMO, this PR falls into the same trap as #21447 did. I suggest to follow my advice when I closed that PR: implement the improvements as a series of small changes, one kind of change per PR. Resist the temptation to add any unrelated change. See also Diátaxis, our documentation north star, for more information/inspiration.

IMO, this PR should perform one kind of change only:

Mark up code samples, variables and literals with double backquotes.

This implies: do not add other types of markup such as pairs of * or rephrasings.

Follow up with a PR that adds missing :attr: and :class: markups. If needed, follow up with a PR that consistently marks up parameter names using pairs of *.

[erlend-aasland]

For future reference, @uatach: we try to avoid force-pushes on pull requests. In order to sync with main, instead do:

$ git switch main
$ git pull
$ git switch wip
$ git merge --no-ff main -m "Pull in main"

See also the devguide :)

[erlend-aasland]

Some comments:

• L323-324, L586-587, and L589 should also be updated
• Please address Jelle's comment: https://github.com/python/cpython/pull/118068/files#r1571709802
• I think the formatting tables (L2400 and onwards) should be left alone (perhaps they are worth their own PR); the changes made unfortunately seem to make the markup in those tables more inconsistent.

[uatach]

@erlend-aasland as I address the comments, should I also resolve the conversations?

[serhiy-storchaka]

I am not sure that the code formatting should be used for all numbers. Perhaps a variant without this could be simpler to review.

I am not sure that the code formatting instead of italic should be used for references to variables.

[erlend-aasland]

@serhiy-storchaka:

I am not sure that the code formatting instead of italic should be used for references to variables.

This is our recommended style as per the devguide.

[uatach]

I have made the requested changes; please review again

[bedevere-app]

Thanks for making the requested changes!

@erlend-aasland, @JelleZijlstra: please review the changes made to this pull request.

[erlend-aasland]

Thank you so much for picking this up, @uatach! Sorry if this turned out an unpleasant review experience for you; thank you for enduring all the nitpicking!

Feel free to create a PR for any of the remaining items; they should be easier to review, and hopefully you'll get a better contribution experience :)

[miss-islington-app]

Thanks @uatach for the PR, and @erlend-aasland for merging it 🌮🎉.. I'm working now to backport this PR to: 3.12.
🐍🍒⛏🤖

[bedevere-app]

GH-118244 is a backport of this pull request to the 3.12 branch.