#8799: Bring doctests for mwrank.pyx up to 100% (from 3%)
-----------------------------------------------+----------------------------
Reporter: cremona | Owner: mvngu
Type: defect | Status: needs_review
Priority: major | Milestone: sage-5.0
Component: documentation | Keywords: mwrank
Author: John Cremona | Upstream: N/A
Reviewer: Minh Van Nguyen, Leif Leonhardy | Merged:
Work_issues: |
-----------------------------------------------+----------------------------
Old description:
> Improve documentation for this:
> {{{
> sage/libs/mwrank/mwrank.pyx: 3% (1 of 30)
> }}}
>
> Apply in this order:
>
> 1. [http://trac.sagemath.org/sage_trac/attachment/ticket/8799/trac_8799
> -mwrank-doctest.patch trac_8799-mwrank-doctest.patch]
> 1. [http://trac.sagemath.org/sage_trac/attachment/ticket/8799/trac_8799
> -reviewer-total.patch trac_8799-reviewer-total.patch]
New description:
Improve documentation for this:
{{{
sage/libs/mwrank/mwrank.pyx: 3% (1 of 30)
}}}
'''Apply in this order:'''
1. [http://trac.sagemath.org/sage_trac/attachment/ticket/8799/trac_8799
-mwrank-doctest.patch trac_8799-mwrank-doctest.patch]
1. [http://trac.sagemath.org/sage_trac/attachment/ticket/8799/trac_8799
-reviewer-total.patch trac_8799-reviewer-total.patch]
--
Comment(by mvngu):
Replying to [comment:16 leif]:
> Minh, you vote in favour of math-typeset numbers? (I don't like e.g.
{{{`L`-functions}}} either...)
I'm not particularly picky about this issue. What you proposed in your
patches are OK by me. I have folded all our reviewer patches into one
cumulative patch. Even your second reviewer patch has been folded into
[http://trac.sagemath.org/sage_trac/attachment/ticket/8799/trac_8799
-reviewer-total.patch trac_8799-reviewer-total.patch].
[[BR]][[BR]]
> Shouldn't we replace
{{{
- foo (bool) -- ...
- bar (int, default 12) -- ...
}}}
> by
{{{
- foo (:class:`bool`) -- ...
- bar (:class:`int`, default 12) -- ...
}}}
> too?
That is OK by me. But I would prefer something like "boolean", "integer",
"real number", etc. Something as "meaningful" as possible, without
recourse to type information. We now need someone to review the technical
(mathematical) aspect of John's patch, and a sign off on my review patch.
I'm OK with your patches. That is, someone other than myself need to look
over the cumulative reviewer patch.
--
Ticket URL: <http://trac.sagemath.org/sage_trac/ticket/8799#comment:17>
Sage <http://www.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.
