#5911: [with draft, needs critics] greatly improve the documentation one gets
from
Graph?
--------------------------+-------------------------------------------------
Reporter: was | Owner: rlm
Type: enhancement | Status: new
Priority: major | Milestone: sage-4.1.1
Component: graph theory | Keywords:
Reviewer: | Author:
Merged: |
--------------------------+-------------------------------------------------
Comment(by rlm):
Nathann,
This looks pretty good. Can you change the examples a bit, though? For
example, a lot of the docstrings about creating graphs from graph6 strings
include test cases where an error is triggered. As long as these failures
are somewhere in the documentation, they're tested. Maybe the docs here
should focus more on how to properly work with them. Also, you should get
this into the appropriate place in `graph.py` and post it as an actual
patch, so that e.g. we can post modifications and more people can pitch in
to help. Finally, I believe that a few code blocks at the beginning need
the `::` and indentation, e.g.:
{{{
If you want to see what they look like, begin this way :
sage: g=graphs.PetersenGraph()
sage: g.plot()
or
sage: g=graphs.ChvatalGraph()
sage: g.plot()
}}}
--
Ticket URL: <http://trac.sagemath.org/sage_trac/ticket/5911#comment:4>
Sage <http://sagemath.org/>
Sage: Creating a Viable Open Source Alternative to Magma, Maple, Mathematica,
and MATLAB
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"sage-trac" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
[email protected]
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/sage-trac?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
