#9976: Decorated functions/methods have generic signature in documentation
--------------------------------+-------------------------------------------
Reporter: jsrn | Owner: jsrn
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: Simon King | Merged:
Work_issues: |
--------------------------------+-------------------------------------------
Comment(by SimonKing):
I still don't know what answer I would expect from get_argspec on
functools.partial, as in the following example:
{{{
sage: def f0(a,b,c,x,y,z): print a,b,c,x,y,z
....:
sage: f = functools.partial(f0,1,2,y=3)
}}}
Now, f can not be provided with a different value for a, b and y. It is
possible to provide a value for c and x both by position and by name. A
value for z must be provided by name, it is not possible by position.
That certainly does not fit into the scope of an `ArgSpec` named tuple,
does it?
Do you agree that in the reference manual, the arguments of f should
appear exactly as the arguments of f0? I don't think that there is an easy
way to express the fact that some arguments of f can only be provided by
name. Therefore, I think it must be left to the module author to state in
the doc string which assignments were made to the arguments.
If you tell me that you do agree then I'll provide an update of my patch.
--
Ticket URL: <http://trac.sagemath.org/sage_trac/ticket/9976#comment:156>
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.
