Following on in the vein of #171:

The "these" argument is documented as having something to do with properties in multiple places. But, does it? In what way does @property not work with @attr.s already? This program works exactly as I expect it would:

import attr

@attr.s
class propertized(object):
    _x = attr.ib()
    @property
    def x(self):
        return self.x ** 2

p3 = propertized(3)
p3prime = propertized(x=3)
print(p3 == p3prime)
print(p3)

It also describes the class body as being "ignored". This is accurate in the extremely narrow sense of the implementation of what exactly @attr.s does - either reading the attr.ib objects out of the class namespace or not, which were presumably defined during the class body - but it is somewhat unclear for users who want to know what attr.s's interface is rather than the mechanics of its internals.

The passive voice of "will be ignored" also suggests that everything will ignore the class body - attrs, python, random passers-by - whereas the docs mean to rather specifically say "@attr.s will ignore the class body". I think it should be even more specific: attr.s will not transform any attr.ib declarations into arguments or parts of the repr, leaving them instead as private _CountingAttr objects. I'd even go so far as to say that attr.s should emit a warning if any such objects are found, but that's probably a more complex discussion.

Also, properties is not an identifier and should not be typeset as such; "property objects" or somesuch would be a better way to express that (if it needs to be expressed).