#9976: Decorated functions/methods have generic signature in documentation
--------------------------------+-------------------------------------------
Reporter: jsrn | Owner: mvngu
Type: enhancement | Status: needs_review
Priority: major | Milestone: sage-4.7
Component: documentation | Keywords: sphinx, documentation, cython
inspection
Author: jsrn, Simon King | Upstream: N/A
Reviewer: | Merged:
Work_issues: |
--------------------------------+-------------------------------------------
Comment(by SimonKing):
Replying to [comment:67 jsrn]:
> > Did you check whether it works with my latest patches? With them,
`sage_getargspec` works on `groebner_basis()`.
>
> I was being unclear before; what I meant to say was that a decorator
should usually just use sage_wraps and then not worry any more about all
this inheriting of __doc__, etc. However, another route is to do it
manually as cached_method does.
>
> However, it doesn't seem to work for me. I still get some warnings (in
sage.rings.padics.padic_ZZ_pX_CA_element,
sage.rings.padics.padic_capped_relative_element,
sage.rings.polynomial.multi_polynomial_ring_generic), and then a latex
error like the ones you described earlier. I wasn't supposed to apply your
11115 patch, was I?
There is no patch posted at #11115, yet.
Concerning the warnings: Did you also apply [attachment
9976_doc_fixes.patch]? That should fix it. Or at least, it did so for me.
And does the argument list for groebner_basis look fine now?
--
Ticket URL: <http://trac.sagemath.org/sage_trac/ticket/9976#comment:68>
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.
