On Thursday, November 6, 2014 3:11:54 PM UTC-6, Michele Zaffalon wrote: > > On Thu, Nov 6, 2014 at 7:28 PM, Patrick O'Leary <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> On Thursday, November 6, 2014 6:28:24 AM UTC-6, Michele Zaffalon wrote: >>> >>> I am probably not the first one to notice that the return values from >>> the functions of the standard library are not documented. There is no >>> ambiguity in the cases in which the function returns no or one argument. >>> But there is for cases such as gcdx >>> <http://docs.julialang.org/en/latest/stdlib/base/?highlight=gcd#Base.gcdx> >>> which >>> returns three values. >>> Will the documentation be done at some point? Has no agreement be >>> reached on how to document it? >>> >> >> Broken math formatting notwithstanding, I'm not sure what the confusion >> is: the three return value are the gcd, and the Bézout coefficients `u` and >> `v`. >> > > Oops, I should learn to read. >
No problem--I should probably keep a personal "should have RTFM" counter on my desk for the number of times I've said that myself... > If you think there's a better way to show that, please propose a change! >> It's really easy to make documentation contributions; head to the file in >> GitHub (you'll find your example in base.rst: >> https://github.com/JuliaLang/julia/blob/master/doc/stdlib/base.rst), >> click the pencil button (next to Raw/Blame/History at the top of the >> formatted view of the file) and make your proposed edits. GitHub will fork >> the repository for you, and when you're done it will help you with the pull >> request. >> > > Thank you for the instructions. > michele > Sure thing. I'd encourage you to help to clarify things where things need clarifying--documentation is certainly not perfect, and documentation fixes are very much appreciated! Patrick
