diff --git a/Doc/lib/libparser.tex b/Doc/lib/libparser.tex
index 4398177..2264c89 100644
--- a/Doc/lib/libparser.tex
+++ b/Doc/lib/libparser.tex
@@ -236,19 +236,25 @@
 \subsection{AST Objects}
 
 AST objects (returned by \code{expr()}, \code{suite()}, and
-\code{tuple2ast()}, described above) have no methods of their own.
+\code{sequence2ast()}, described above) have no methods of their own.
 Some of the functions defined which accept an AST object as their
 first argument may change to object methods in the future.
 
 Ordered and equality comparisons are supported between AST objects.
 
 
-\subsection{Example}
+\subsection{Examples}
 
 The parser modules allows operations to be performed on the parse tree
 of Python source code before the bytecode is generated, and provides
 for inspection of the parse tree for information gathering purposes as
-well.  While many useful operations may take place between parsing and
+well.  Two examples are presented.  The simple example demonstrates
+emulation of the \code{compile()} built-in function and the complex
+example shows the use of a parse tree for information discovery.
+
+\subsubsection{Emulation of {\tt compile()}}
+
+While many useful operations may take place between parsing and
 bytecode generation, the simplest operation is to do nothing.  For
 this purpose, using the \code{parser} module to produce an
 intermediate data structure is equivelent to the code
@@ -273,6 +279,25 @@
 10
 \end{verbatim}
 
+An application which needs both AST and code objects can package this
+code into readily available functions:
+
+\begin{verbatim}
+import parser
+
+def load_suite(source_string):
+    ast = parser.suite(source_string)
+    code = parser.compileast(ast)
+    return ast, code
+
+def load_expression(source_string):
+    ast = parser.expr(source_string)
+    code = parser.compileast(ast)
+    return ast, code
+\end{verbatim}
+
+\subsubsection{Information Discovery}
+
 Some applications can benfit from access to the parse tree itself, and
 can take advantage of the intermediate data structure provided by the
 \code{parser} module.  The remainder of this section of examples will
@@ -293,6 +318,16 @@
 which are not part of the Python installation are located in the
 \file{Demo/parser} directory of the distribution.
 
+The dynamic nature of Python allows the programmer a great deal of
+flexibility, but most modules need only a limited measure of this when
+defining classes, functions, and methods.  In this example, the only
+definitions that will be considered are those which are defined in the
+top level of their context, e.g., a function defined by a \code{def}
+statement at column zero of a module, but not a function defined
+within a branch of an \code{if} ... \code{else} construct, thought
+there are some good reasons for doing so in some situations.  Nesting
+of definitions will be handled by the code developed in the example.
+
 To construct the upper-level extraction methods, we need to know what
 the parse tree structure looks like and how much of it we actually
 need to be concerned about.  Python uses a moderately deep parse tree,
@@ -300,7 +335,8 @@
 read and understand the formal grammar used by Python.  This is
 specified in the file \file{Grammar/Grammar} in the distribution.
 Consider the simplest case of interest when searching for docstrings:
-a module consisting of a docstring and nothing else:
+a module consisting of a docstring and nothing else.  (See file
+\file{docstring.py}.)
 
 \begin{verbatim}
 """Some documentation.
@@ -376,7 +412,7 @@
 rather than list form, allowing a simple variable representation to be
 \code{['variable\_name']}.  A simple recursive function can implement
 the pattern matching, returning a boolean and a dictionary of variable
-name to value mappings.
+name to value mappings.  (See file \file{example.py}.)
 
 \begin{verbatim}
 from types import ListType, TupleType
@@ -399,32 +435,36 @@
 \end{verbatim}
 
 Using this simple recursive pattern matching function and the symbolic
-node types, the pattern for the candidate docstring subtrees becomes:
+node types, the pattern for the candidate docstring subtrees becomes
+fairly readable.  (See file \file{example.py}.)
 
 \begin{verbatim}
->>> DOCSTRING_STMT_PATTERN = (
-...     symbol.stmt,
-...     (symbol.simple_stmt,
-...      (symbol.small_stmt,
-...       (symbol.expr_stmt,
-...        (symbol.testlist,
-...         (symbol.test,
-...          (symbol.and_test,
-...           (symbol.not_test,
-...            (symbol.comparison,
-...             (symbol.expr,
-...              (symbol.xor_expr,
-...               (symbol.and_expr,
-...                (symbol.shift_expr,
-...                 (symbol.arith_expr,
-...                  (symbol.term,
-...                   (symbol.factor,
-...                    (symbol.power,
-...                     (symbol.atom,
-...                      (token.STRING, ['docstring'])
-...                      )))))))))))))))),
-...      (token.NEWLINE, '')
-...      ))
+import symbol
+import token
+
+DOCSTRING_STMT_PATTERN = (
+    symbol.stmt,
+    (symbol.simple_stmt,
+     (symbol.small_stmt,
+      (symbol.expr_stmt,
+       (symbol.testlist,
+        (symbol.test,
+         (symbol.and_test,
+          (symbol.not_test,
+           (symbol.comparison,
+            (symbol.expr,
+             (symbol.xor_expr,
+              (symbol.and_expr,
+               (symbol.shift_expr,
+                (symbol.arith_expr,
+                 (symbol.term,
+                  (symbol.factor,
+                   (symbol.power,
+                    (symbol.atom,
+                     (token.STRING, ['docstring'])
+                     )))))))))))))))),
+     (token.NEWLINE, '')
+     ))
 \end{verbatim}
 
 Using the \code{match()} function with this pattern, extracting the
@@ -453,6 +493,160 @@
 matching function could be used to overcome this limitation, but this
 is sufficient for the example.
 
+Given the ability to determine whether a statement might be a
+docstring and extract the actual string from the statement, some work
+needs to be performed to walk the parse tree for an entire module and
+extract information about the names defined in each context of the
+module and associate any docstrings with the names.  The code to
+perform this work is not complicated, but bears some explanation.
+
+The public interface to the classes is straightforward and should
+probably be somewhat more flexible.  Each ``major'' block of the
+module is described by an object providing several methods for inquiry
+and a constructor which accepts at least the subtree of the complete
+parse tree which it represents.  The \code{ModuleInfo} constructor
+accepts an optional \code{\var{name}} parameter since it cannot
+otherwise determine the name of the module.
+
+The public classes include \code{ClassInfo}, \code{FunctionInfo},
+and \code{ModuleInfo}.  All objects provide the
+methods \code{get_name()}, \code{get_docstring()},
+\code{get_class_names()}, and \code{get_class_info()}.  The
+\code{ClassInfo} objects support \code{get_method_names()} and
+\code{get_method_info()} while the other classes provide
+\code{get_function_names()} and \code{get_function_info()}.
+
+Within each of the forms of code block that the public classes
+represent, most of the required information is in the same form and is
+access in the same way, with classes having the distinction that
+functions defined at the top level are referred to as ``methods.''
+Since the difference in nomenclature reflects a real semantic
+distinction from functions defined outside of a class, our
+implementation needs to maintain the same measure of distinction.
+Hence, most of the functionality of the public classes can be
+implemented in a common base class, \code{SuiteInfoBase}, with the
+accessors for function and method information provided elsewhere.
+Note that there is only one class which represents function and method
+information; this mirrors the use of the \code{def} statement to
+define both types of functions.
+
+Most of the accessor functions are declared in \code{SuiteInfoBase}
+and do not need to be overriden by subclasses.  More importantly, the
+extraction of most information from a parse tree is handled through a
+method called by the \code{SuiteInfoBase} constructor.  The example
+code for most of the classes is clear when read alongside the formal
+grammar, but the method which recursively creates new information
+objects requires further examination.  Here is the relevant part of
+the \code{SuiteInfoBase} definition from \file{example.py}:
+
+\begin{verbatim}
+class SuiteInfoBase:
+    _docstring = ''
+    _name = ''
+
+    def __init__(self, tree = None):
+        self._class_info = {}
+        self._function_info = {}
+        if tree:
+            self._extract_info(tree)
+
+    def _extract_info(self, tree):
+        # extract docstring
+        if len(tree) == 2:
+            found, vars = match(DOCSTRING_STMT_PATTERN[1], tree[1])
+        else:
+            found, vars = match(DOCSTRING_STMT_PATTERN, tree[3])
+        if found:
+            self._docstring = eval(vars['docstring'])
+        # discover inner definitions
+        for node in tree[1:]:
+            found, vars = match(COMPOUND_STMT_PATTERN, node)
+            if found:
+                cstmt = vars['compound']
+                if cstmt[0] == symbol.funcdef:
+                    name = cstmt[2][1]
+                    self._function_info[name] = FunctionInfo(cstmt)
+                elif cstmt[0] == symbol.classdef:
+                    name = cstmt[2][1]
+                    self._class_info[name] = ClassInfo(cstmt)
+\end{verbatim}
+
+After initializing some internal state, the constructor calls the
+\code{_extract_info()} method.  This method performs the bulk of the
+information extraction which takes place in the entire example.  The
+extraction has two distinct phases: the location of the docstring for
+the parse tree passed in, and the discovery of additional definitions
+within the code block represented by the parse tree.
+
+The initial \code{if} test determines whether the nested suite is of
+the ``short form'' or the ``long form.''  The short form is used when
+the code block is on the same line as the definition of the code
+block, as in
+
+\begin{verbatim}
+def square(x): "Square an argument."; return x ** 2
+\end{verbatim}
+
+while the long form uses an indented block and allows nested
+definitions:
+
+\begin{verbatim}
+def make_power(exp):
+    "Make a function that raises an argument to the exponent `exp'."
+    def raiser(x, y=exp):
+        return x ** y
+    return raiser
+\end{verbatim}
+
+When the short form is used, the code block may contain a docstring as
+the first, and possibly only, \code{small_stmt} element.  The
+extraction of such a docstring is slightly different and requires only
+a portion of the complete pattern used in the more common case.  As
+given in the code, the docstring will only be found if there is only
+one \code{small_stmt} node in the \code{simple_stmt} node.  Since most
+functions and methods which use the short form do not provide
+docstring, this may be considered sufficient.  The extraction of the
+docstring proceeds using the \code{match()} function as described
+above, and the value of the docstring is stored as an attribute of the
+\code{SuiteInfoBase} object.
+
+After docstring extraction, the operates a simple definition discovery
+algorithm on the \code{stmt} nodes of the \code{suite} node.  The
+special case of the short form is not tested; since there are no
+\code{stmt} nodes in the short form, the algorithm will silently skip
+the single \code{simple_stmt} node and correctly not discover any
+nested definitions.
+
+Each statement in the code block bing examined is categorized as being
+a class definition, function definition (including methods), or
+something else.  For the definition statements, the name of the
+element being defined is extracted and representation object
+appropriate to the definition is created with the defining subtree
+passed as an argument to the constructor.  The repesentation objects
+are stored in instance variables and may be retrieved by name using
+the appropriate accessor methods.
+
+The public classes provide any accessors required which are more
+specific than those provided by the \code{SuiteInfoBase} class, but
+the real extraction algorithm remains common to all forms of code
+blocks.  A high-level function can be used to extract the complete set
+of information from a source file:
+
+\begin{verbatim}
+def get_docs(fileName):
+    source = open(fileName).read()
+    import os
+    basename = os.path.basename(os.path.splitext(fileName)[0])
+    import parser
+    ast = parser.suite(source)
+    tup = parser.ast2tuple(ast)
+    return ModuleInfo(tup, basename)
+\end{verbatim}
+
+This provides an easy-to-use interface to the documentation of a
+module.  If information is required which is not extracted by the code
+of this example, the code may be extended at clearly defined points to
+provide additional capabilities.
 
 
 %%
diff --git a/Doc/libparser.tex b/Doc/libparser.tex
index 4398177..2264c89 100644
--- a/Doc/libparser.tex
+++ b/Doc/libparser.tex
@@ -236,19 +236,25 @@
 \subsection{AST Objects}
 
 AST objects (returned by \code{expr()}, \code{suite()}, and
-\code{tuple2ast()}, described above) have no methods of their own.
+\code{sequence2ast()}, described above) have no methods of their own.
 Some of the functions defined which accept an AST object as their
 first argument may change to object methods in the future.
 
 Ordered and equality comparisons are supported between AST objects.
 
 
-\subsection{Example}
+\subsection{Examples}
 
 The parser modules allows operations to be performed on the parse tree
 of Python source code before the bytecode is generated, and provides
 for inspection of the parse tree for information gathering purposes as
-well.  While many useful operations may take place between parsing and
+well.  Two examples are presented.  The simple example demonstrates
+emulation of the \code{compile()} built-in function and the complex
+example shows the use of a parse tree for information discovery.
+
+\subsubsection{Emulation of {\tt compile()}}
+
+While many useful operations may take place between parsing and
 bytecode generation, the simplest operation is to do nothing.  For
 this purpose, using the \code{parser} module to produce an
 intermediate data structure is equivelent to the code
@@ -273,6 +279,25 @@
 10
 \end{verbatim}
 
+An application which needs both AST and code objects can package this
+code into readily available functions:
+
+\begin{verbatim}
+import parser
+
+def load_suite(source_string):
+    ast = parser.suite(source_string)
+    code = parser.compileast(ast)
+    return ast, code
+
+def load_expression(source_string):
+    ast = parser.expr(source_string)
+    code = parser.compileast(ast)
+    return ast, code
+\end{verbatim}
+
+\subsubsection{Information Discovery}
+
 Some applications can benfit from access to the parse tree itself, and
 can take advantage of the intermediate data structure provided by the
 \code{parser} module.  The remainder of this section of examples will
@@ -293,6 +318,16 @@
 which are not part of the Python installation are located in the
 \file{Demo/parser} directory of the distribution.
 
+The dynamic nature of Python allows the programmer a great deal of
+flexibility, but most modules need only a limited measure of this when
+defining classes, functions, and methods.  In this example, the only
+definitions that will be considered are those which are defined in the
+top level of their context, e.g., a function defined by a \code{def}
+statement at column zero of a module, but not a function defined
+within a branch of an \code{if} ... \code{else} construct, thought
+there are some good reasons for doing so in some situations.  Nesting
+of definitions will be handled by the code developed in the example.
+
 To construct the upper-level extraction methods, we need to know what
 the parse tree structure looks like and how much of it we actually
 need to be concerned about.  Python uses a moderately deep parse tree,
@@ -300,7 +335,8 @@
 read and understand the formal grammar used by Python.  This is
 specified in the file \file{Grammar/Grammar} in the distribution.
 Consider the simplest case of interest when searching for docstrings:
-a module consisting of a docstring and nothing else:
+a module consisting of a docstring and nothing else.  (See file
+\file{docstring.py}.)
 
 \begin{verbatim}
 """Some documentation.
@@ -376,7 +412,7 @@
 rather than list form, allowing a simple variable representation to be
 \code{['variable\_name']}.  A simple recursive function can implement
 the pattern matching, returning a boolean and a dictionary of variable
-name to value mappings.
+name to value mappings.  (See file \file{example.py}.)
 
 \begin{verbatim}
 from types import ListType, TupleType
@@ -399,32 +435,36 @@
 \end{verbatim}
 
 Using this simple recursive pattern matching function and the symbolic
-node types, the pattern for the candidate docstring subtrees becomes:
+node types, the pattern for the candidate docstring subtrees becomes
+fairly readable.  (See file \file{example.py}.)
 
 \begin{verbatim}
->>> DOCSTRING_STMT_PATTERN = (
-...     symbol.stmt,
-...     (symbol.simple_stmt,
-...      (symbol.small_stmt,
-...       (symbol.expr_stmt,
-...        (symbol.testlist,
-...         (symbol.test,
-...          (symbol.and_test,
-...           (symbol.not_test,
-...            (symbol.comparison,
-...             (symbol.expr,
-...              (symbol.xor_expr,
-...               (symbol.and_expr,
-...                (symbol.shift_expr,
-...                 (symbol.arith_expr,
-...                  (symbol.term,
-...                   (symbol.factor,
-...                    (symbol.power,
-...                     (symbol.atom,
-...                      (token.STRING, ['docstring'])
-...                      )))))))))))))))),
-...      (token.NEWLINE, '')
-...      ))
+import symbol
+import token
+
+DOCSTRING_STMT_PATTERN = (
+    symbol.stmt,
+    (symbol.simple_stmt,
+     (symbol.small_stmt,
+      (symbol.expr_stmt,
+       (symbol.testlist,
+        (symbol.test,
+         (symbol.and_test,
+          (symbol.not_test,
+           (symbol.comparison,
+            (symbol.expr,
+             (symbol.xor_expr,
+              (symbol.and_expr,
+               (symbol.shift_expr,
+                (symbol.arith_expr,
+                 (symbol.term,
+                  (symbol.factor,
+                   (symbol.power,
+                    (symbol.atom,
+                     (token.STRING, ['docstring'])
+                     )))))))))))))))),
+     (token.NEWLINE, '')
+     ))
 \end{verbatim}
 
 Using the \code{match()} function with this pattern, extracting the
@@ -453,6 +493,160 @@
 matching function could be used to overcome this limitation, but this
 is sufficient for the example.
 
+Given the ability to determine whether a statement might be a
+docstring and extract the actual string from the statement, some work
+needs to be performed to walk the parse tree for an entire module and
+extract information about the names defined in each context of the
+module and associate any docstrings with the names.  The code to
+perform this work is not complicated, but bears some explanation.
+
+The public interface to the classes is straightforward and should
+probably be somewhat more flexible.  Each ``major'' block of the
+module is described by an object providing several methods for inquiry
+and a constructor which accepts at least the subtree of the complete
+parse tree which it represents.  The \code{ModuleInfo} constructor
+accepts an optional \code{\var{name}} parameter since it cannot
+otherwise determine the name of the module.
+
+The public classes include \code{ClassInfo}, \code{FunctionInfo},
+and \code{ModuleInfo}.  All objects provide the
+methods \code{get_name()}, \code{get_docstring()},
+\code{get_class_names()}, and \code{get_class_info()}.  The
+\code{ClassInfo} objects support \code{get_method_names()} and
+\code{get_method_info()} while the other classes provide
+\code{get_function_names()} and \code{get_function_info()}.
+
+Within each of the forms of code block that the public classes
+represent, most of the required information is in the same form and is
+access in the same way, with classes having the distinction that
+functions defined at the top level are referred to as ``methods.''
+Since the difference in nomenclature reflects a real semantic
+distinction from functions defined outside of a class, our
+implementation needs to maintain the same measure of distinction.
+Hence, most of the functionality of the public classes can be
+implemented in a common base class, \code{SuiteInfoBase}, with the
+accessors for function and method information provided elsewhere.
+Note that there is only one class which represents function and method
+information; this mirrors the use of the \code{def} statement to
+define both types of functions.
+
+Most of the accessor functions are declared in \code{SuiteInfoBase}
+and do not need to be overriden by subclasses.  More importantly, the
+extraction of most information from a parse tree is handled through a
+method called by the \code{SuiteInfoBase} constructor.  The example
+code for most of the classes is clear when read alongside the formal
+grammar, but the method which recursively creates new information
+objects requires further examination.  Here is the relevant part of
+the \code{SuiteInfoBase} definition from \file{example.py}:
+
+\begin{verbatim}
+class SuiteInfoBase:
+    _docstring = ''
+    _name = ''
+
+    def __init__(self, tree = None):
+        self._class_info = {}
+        self._function_info = {}
+        if tree:
+            self._extract_info(tree)
+
+    def _extract_info(self, tree):
+        # extract docstring
+        if len(tree) == 2:
+            found, vars = match(DOCSTRING_STMT_PATTERN[1], tree[1])
+        else:
+            found, vars = match(DOCSTRING_STMT_PATTERN, tree[3])
+        if found:
+            self._docstring = eval(vars['docstring'])
+        # discover inner definitions
+        for node in tree[1:]:
+            found, vars = match(COMPOUND_STMT_PATTERN, node)
+            if found:
+                cstmt = vars['compound']
+                if cstmt[0] == symbol.funcdef:
+                    name = cstmt[2][1]
+                    self._function_info[name] = FunctionInfo(cstmt)
+                elif cstmt[0] == symbol.classdef:
+                    name = cstmt[2][1]
+                    self._class_info[name] = ClassInfo(cstmt)
+\end{verbatim}
+
+After initializing some internal state, the constructor calls the
+\code{_extract_info()} method.  This method performs the bulk of the
+information extraction which takes place in the entire example.  The
+extraction has two distinct phases: the location of the docstring for
+the parse tree passed in, and the discovery of additional definitions
+within the code block represented by the parse tree.
+
+The initial \code{if} test determines whether the nested suite is of
+the ``short form'' or the ``long form.''  The short form is used when
+the code block is on the same line as the definition of the code
+block, as in
+
+\begin{verbatim}
+def square(x): "Square an argument."; return x ** 2
+\end{verbatim}
+
+while the long form uses an indented block and allows nested
+definitions:
+
+\begin{verbatim}
+def make_power(exp):
+    "Make a function that raises an argument to the exponent `exp'."
+    def raiser(x, y=exp):
+        return x ** y
+    return raiser
+\end{verbatim}
+
+When the short form is used, the code block may contain a docstring as
+the first, and possibly only, \code{small_stmt} element.  The
+extraction of such a docstring is slightly different and requires only
+a portion of the complete pattern used in the more common case.  As
+given in the code, the docstring will only be found if there is only
+one \code{small_stmt} node in the \code{simple_stmt} node.  Since most
+functions and methods which use the short form do not provide
+docstring, this may be considered sufficient.  The extraction of the
+docstring proceeds using the \code{match()} function as described
+above, and the value of the docstring is stored as an attribute of the
+\code{SuiteInfoBase} object.
+
+After docstring extraction, the operates a simple definition discovery
+algorithm on the \code{stmt} nodes of the \code{suite} node.  The
+special case of the short form is not tested; since there are no
+\code{stmt} nodes in the short form, the algorithm will silently skip
+the single \code{simple_stmt} node and correctly not discover any
+nested definitions.
+
+Each statement in the code block bing examined is categorized as being
+a class definition, function definition (including methods), or
+something else.  For the definition statements, the name of the
+element being defined is extracted and representation object
+appropriate to the definition is created with the defining subtree
+passed as an argument to the constructor.  The repesentation objects
+are stored in instance variables and may be retrieved by name using
+the appropriate accessor methods.
+
+The public classes provide any accessors required which are more
+specific than those provided by the \code{SuiteInfoBase} class, but
+the real extraction algorithm remains common to all forms of code
+blocks.  A high-level function can be used to extract the complete set
+of information from a source file:
+
+\begin{verbatim}
+def get_docs(fileName):
+    source = open(fileName).read()
+    import os
+    basename = os.path.basename(os.path.splitext(fileName)[0])
+    import parser
+    ast = parser.suite(source)
+    tup = parser.ast2tuple(ast)
+    return ModuleInfo(tup, basename)
+\end{verbatim}
+
+This provides an easy-to-use interface to the documentation of a
+module.  If information is required which is not extracted by the code
+of this example, the code may be extended at clearly defined points to
+provide additional capabilities.
 
 
 %%