#10527: Implementation of quiver mutation type
-----------------------------------------------+----------------------------
       Reporter:  stumpc5                      |         Owner:  sage-combinat
           Type:  enhancement                  |        Status:  needs_review 
       Priority:  major                        |     Milestone:  sage-5.0     
      Component:  combinatorics                |    Resolution:               
       Keywords:  quiver mutation type days38  |   Work issues:               
Report Upstream:  N/A                          |     Reviewers:  Hugh Thomas  
        Authors:  Christian Stump              |     Merged in:               
   Dependencies:  #10349                       |      Stopgaps:               
-----------------------------------------------+----------------------------

Comment (by stumpc5):

 Replying to [comment:41 hthomas]:
 > In the patch as it existed before I started messing about with it, there
 were three things that all had the same docstring: QuiverMutationType,
 QuiverMutationTypeFactory, and the whole document.  The same text occurred
 twice in the patch, once for the whole document and once for QMTF, with
 QMT getting assigned the docstring for the entire file.
 >
 > I think the docstring for the whole file should be different from the
 docstring for QMT.  One is only going to see that docstring if one is
 reading the whole file in the reference manual (right?) so the
 documentation for QMTF/QMT will be right there.  Therefore, I think it
 makes sense to have the docstring for the whole file be shorter.
 >
 > I think the docstring for QMT and QMTF don't really have to be
 duplicated, either -- QMTF could just say "see QMT for the detailed
 documentation" since it's QMT that people are likely to be looking up.
 >
 > However, I guess I don't know how to make a docstring for something like
 QMT, which isn't defined via a def or a class.

 I just looked again how this is handled for Cartan types, and there as
 well, I don't find the docstring behaviour very satisfying. I post your
 question on sage-combinat-devel, so we can discuss that in public.

-- 
Ticket URL: <http://trac.sagemath.org/sage_trac/ticket/10527#comment:44>
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.

Reply via email to