Fix list formatting in PEP 573. (GH-1158)

pep-0573.rst

@@ -78,13 +78,13 @@ Rationale
 PEP 489 introduced a new way to initialize extension modules, which brings
 several advantages to extensions that implement it:
 
-    * The extension modules behave more like their Python counterparts.
-    * The extension modules can easily support loading into pre-existing
-      module objects, which paves the way for extension module support for
-      ``runpy`` or for systems that enable extension module reloading.
-    * Loading multiple modules from the same extension is possible, which
-      makes testing module isolation (a key feature for proper sub-interpreter
-      support) possible from a single interpreter.
+* The extension modules behave more like their Python counterparts.
+* The extension modules can easily support loading into pre-existing
+  module objects, which paves the way for extension module support for
+  ``runpy`` or for systems that enable extension module reloading.
+* Loading multiple modules from the same extension is possible, which
+  makes testing module isolation (a key feature for proper sub-interpreter
+  support) possible from a single interpreter.
 
 The biggest hurdle for adoption of PEP 489 is allowing access to module state
 from methods of extension types.
@@ -143,11 +143,11 @@ Background
 The implementation of a Python method may need access to one or more of
 the following pieces of information:
 
-   * The instance it is called on (``self``)
-   * The underlying function
-   * The class the method was defined in
-   * The corresponding module
-   * The module state
+* The instance it is called on (``self``)
+* The underlying function
+* The class the method was defined in
+* The corresponding module
+* The module state
 
 In Python code, the Python-level equivalents may be retrieved as::
 
@@ -178,14 +178,14 @@ This means that they only have access to their arguments and C level thread-loca
 and process-global states. Traditionally, many extension modules have stored
 their shared state in C-level process globals, causing problems when:
 
-    * running multiple initialize/finalize cycles in the same process
-    * reloading modules (e.g. to test conditional imports)
-    * loading extension modules in subinterpreters
+* running multiple initialize/finalize cycles in the same process
+* reloading modules (e.g. to test conditional imports)
+* loading extension modules in subinterpreters
 
 PEP 3121 attempted to resolve this by offering the ``PyState_FindModule`` API, but this still has significant problems when it comes to extension methods (rather than module level functions):
 
-    * it is markedly slower than directly accessing C-level process-global state
-    * there is still some inherent reliance on process global state that means it still doesn't reliably handle module reloading
+* it is markedly slower than directly accessing C-level process-global state
+* there is still some inherent reliance on process global state that means it still doesn't reliably handle module reloading
 
 It's also the case that when looking up a C-level struct such as module state, supplying
 an unexpected object layout can crash the interpreter, so it's significantly more important to ensure that extension
@@ -205,13 +205,13 @@ The additional module level context described above can be made available with t
 Both additions are optional; extension authors need to opt in to start
 using them:
 
-    * Add a pointer to the module to heap type objects.
+* Add a pointer to the module to heap type objects.
 
-    * Pass the defining class to the underlying C function.
+* Pass the defining class to the underlying C function.
 
-      The defining class is readily available at the time built-in
-      method object (``PyCFunctionObject``) is created, so it can be stored
-      in a new struct that extends ``PyCFunctionObject``.
+  The defining class is readily available at the time built-in
+  method object (``PyCFunctionObject``) is created, so it can be stored
+  in a new struct that extends ``PyCFunctionObject``.
 
 The module state can then be retrieved from the module object via
 ``PyModule_GetState``.
@@ -233,12 +233,12 @@ The problem with slot methods is that their C API is fixed, so we can't
 simply add a new argument to pass in the defining class.
 Two possible solutions have been proposed to this problem:
 
-    * Look up the class through walking the MRO.
-      This is potentially expensive, but will be useful if performance is not
-      a problem (such as when raising a module-level exception).
-    * Storing a pointer to the defining class of each slot in a separate table,
-      ``__typeslots__`` [#typeslots-mail]_.  This is technically feasible and fast,
-      but quite invasive.
+* Look up the class through walking the MRO.
+  This is potentially expensive, but will be useful if performance is not
+  a problem (such as when raising a module-level exception).
+* Storing a pointer to the defining class of each slot in a separate table,
+  ``__typeslots__`` [#typeslots-mail]_.  This is technically feasible and fast,
+  but quite invasive.
 
 Due to the invasiveness of the latter approach, this PEP proposes adding an MRO walking
 helper for use in slot method implementations, deferring the more complex alternative