On 27 May 2011 21:10, Anders Logg <[email protected]> wrote: > On Fri, May 27, 2011 at 09:05:10PM +0200, Kristian Ølgaard wrote: >> On 27 May 2011 20:52, Anders Logg <[email protected]> wrote: >> > On Fri, May 27, 2011 at 08:40:44PM +0200, Marie E. Rognes wrote: >> >> On 05/27/2011 08:27 PM, Johan Hake wrote: >> >> >On Friday May 27 2011 11:21:33 Kristian Ølgaard wrote: >> >> >>On 27 May 2011 20:09, Marie E. Rognes<[email protected]> wrote: >> >> >>>On 05/27/2011 08:05 PM, Kristian Ølgaard wrote: >> >> >>>>On 27 May 2011 18:55, Marie E. Rognes<[email protected]> wrote: >> >> >>>>>On 05/27/2011 06:21 PM, Johan Hake wrote: >> >> >>>>>>Nice! >> >> >>>>>> >> >> >>>>>>Will any of the below targets superseed the generatation of >> >> >>>>>>docstrings >> >> >>>>>>in >> >> >>>>>>the >> >> >>>>>> >> >> >>>>>> dolfin/swig/generate.py >> >> >>>>>> >> >> >>>>>>script? >> >> >>>>> >> >> >>>>>Hahaha. I had no idea that dolfin/swig/generate.py generates >> >> >>>>>docstrings, so >> >> >>>>>probably yes! or no. >> >> >>>>> >> >> >>>>>Why don't you give me a quick run-down of what the idea with the >> >> >>>>>generation >> >> >>>>>of docstrings is, and then I'll fix. >> >> >>>> >> >> >>>>The generate.py script creates the docstrings which is included by >> >> >>>>Swig when creating the cpp.py module. >> >> >>>>These docstrings are then extracted, using autodoc, in the .rst files >> >> >>>>that we're generating from the dolfin module (what you have been >> >> >>>>working on lately). >> >> >>>> >> >> >>>:-) >> >> >>> >> >> >>>Bottomline, the autodoc operates on the "installed" module, and the >> >> >>>generated docstrings are thus included. >> >> >> >> >> >>Yes, and we need to run generate.py first to get the docstrings in >> >> >>cpp.py correct. >> >> >>Because once created, we can't modify it (at runtime) unless we do a >> >> >>search& replace but then we might as well run generate.py. >> >> > >> >> >So it sounds like we should still run generate.py seperately from what >> >> >you >> >> >have been adding. >> >> > >> >> >Would it be an idea to add the running of generate.py as a build target? >> >> >Then >> >> >everything can be managed from the build directory. >> >> > >> >> >> >> Completely independently of the documentation: Yes, that would be great. >> > >> > Once the smoke clears, we really need to write down all the steps to >> > generate the documentation. It's getting complicated... :-) >> >> I think that moving the docs to the projects is a step in the right >> direction. >> >> > generate.py should probably be moved and located together with the >> > other scripts. >> >> Maybe, it's really a part of the Swig step, but as I recall it it's >> expensive to run so we probably don't want to run it every time the >> Python module is created since that is already expensive. > > Isn't it so that the Python module is only generated when necessary > (when the header files have changed). Then it would be natural to > always generated the docstrings at the same time since they may be > wrong. Furthermore, I think the extraction of docstrings is a > relatively small cost compared to compiling the gigantic file > generated by SWIG.
That makes sense, if the interface changes the docs could/should also change. So it should be run as part of the Swig step? Kristian > -- > Anders > _______________________________________________ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~dolfin Post to : [email protected] Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~dolfin More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
