On Sep 7, 2010, at 12:41 PM, Sebastian Haase wrote: > On Tue, Sep 7, 2010 at 8:10 PM, Ondrej Certik <[email protected]> wrote: >> On Tue, Sep 7, 2010 at 8:42 AM, Aaron S. Meurer <[email protected]> wrote: >>> I never knew about that. It appears to be quite old (SymPy 0.6.4 or 0.6.3 >>> or something). Basically, anything in the GoogleCode svn is old and >>> shouldn't be used, except for history purposes. >>> >>> Ondrej, did you ever plan on continuing to use pydoctor? >> >> No, we should remove it. If you have a minute, please do so. :)
I would, except I have no idea how… (i.e., I don't know how to use SVN) >> >> Ondrej >> > I was just saying, that what I found there was much better than > nothing. And, if it gets generated automatically from all source code > doc strings, it might be a feasible addition to the sphinx > documentation (until that's complete)... > > My 2 euro cents. > - Sebastian You can also get all docstrings by browsing the source at http://github.com/sympy/sympy (or http://github.com/sympy/sympy/tree/sympy-0.6.7 for the latest release). It won't be the easiest way to do it, but it will show you everything, and in the format that the person who wrote it originally meant/saw (i.e., in equal-width font with no fancy rst conversions). Also, seeing the source next to the docstring can be very enlightening in many cases :) But really, we should just complete the Sphinx docstrings. It isn't that hard to do, and could probably take just a few hours to complete (OK, not really, because of stupid Sphinx issues like the one described in comment 7 of issue 1949). Aaron Meurer -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "sympy" 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/sympy?hl=en.
