I agree with this.  I'm used to Wikipedia, where See Also, and then
References are at the very end.

And I think there's a consensus to make it just a suggestion, and not
a requirement. I'll fix the wording on the wiki page to this effect.

Aaron Meurer

On Tue, Jan 10, 2012 at 12:31 AM, Alexey U. Gudchenko <[email protected]> wrote:
> 04.01.2012 03:19, Aaron Meurer пишет:
>> On Tue, Jan 3, 2012 at 1:10 PM, miham <[email protected]> wrote:
>>> Lately there has been some efforts to standardize docstrings in SymPy.
>>> The effort has been pretty successful (more info: [1]), but some
>>> questions remain open, so I thought it might be worth asking what the
>>> community thinks. Here are the questions:
>>>
>>> 1. Should the summary be on the same line as the opening quotes ("""),
>>> or on the next line?
>>
>> I don't like this, but I don't think we should require either way
>> (docstrings should be consistant within the same module, but that's
>> it).  Personally, the off center just makes things look bad, and
>> anyway, you lose three characters for your "one-line" summary if you
>> do this.
>>
>> vim is pretty extensible, and I've found the extension language to be
>> very easy to use.  It's probably possible to extend the folding to
>> always show the first line with some plugin or maybe even a few lines
>> in your .vimrc.
>>
>>> 2. Should there be a blank line after every section header?
>>
>> I agree.  This greatly improves readability.
>>
>>> 3. Should the order of sections be predefined or left to the
>>> discretion of the developers.
>>
>> I don't care about this.  We already apparently have to require that
>> only specific words be header for the numpy doc extension to work
>> (though I think this can be fixed).
>>
>> I would try to stray away from having too many fixed requirement for
>> the formatting of docstrings, as I think it's better to leave it up to
>> the writer to use his best judgement for what he wants to say. Also,
>> not all docstrings are equal because not all functions are equal. For
>> example, some docstrings just document what the function/class is
>> (most things in the functions module are like this).  Others have a
>> some kind of discussion about various things (see e.g., the simplify()
>> docstring). Of course, we should require that each docstring be
>> formatted in a way that works well with Sphinx.
>>
>> Aaron Meurer
>>
>
>
> Regarding the order.
> Taking into account that this question is raised in pull request 938,
> taking into acount that the section order of SciPy/NumPy [2] is not a
> single etalone, (e.g. Sage's section order has 'Examples' upper, and
> 'References' below.)
> And that I totally agreed with Aaron's arguments, I vote to have *not* a
> strict section order. Only as recommendation or as an example.
>
> P.S.
>
> And about the example of order, now in [1] it is like
>
> Short summary
> Deprecation warning
> Extended summary
> Parameters
> Returns
> Other parameters
> Raises
> See Also
> Notes
> References
> Examples
>
>
> For myself only, I tend to put "Examples" upper, and "References" below.
> And "See Also" after the examples. I try to explain it, that I split it
> in my mind as:
>
>    # Text description
>    Short summary
>    Deprecation warning
>    Extended summary
>
>    # Technical information
>    Parameters
>    Returns
>    Other parameters
>    Raises
>
>    # Use cases: look here, to see, try it or to see the other things.
>    Examples
>    See Also
>
>    # Additional text info.
>    # Read it after the above things are read, so it is clear
>    # what are the notes about.
>    # And only if you interested in it.
>    Notes
>
>    # Go away to the library only,
>    # when the above text is not sufficient.
>    References
>
> [1] https://github.com/sympy/sympy/wiki/Writing-documentation
> [2] https://github.com/numpy/numpy/blob/master/doc/HOWTO_DOCUMENT.rst.txt
> [3] http://vim.wikia.com/wiki/Folding
>
> [4]
> http://www.sagemath.org/doc/developer/conventions.html#docstring-markup-with-rest-and-sphinx
>
>>>
>>> Here are my preferences:
>>>
>>> 1. I would put the summary on the same line as the opening quotes. I
>>> use vim folding [3], so when i open a python file, i see only function/
>>> class definitions and the first line of docstrings (because they are
>>> the first line of the new indentation level). Thus i can get quick
>>> overview of a file.
>>> 2. I would put a blank line after every section header, because it
>>> makes it more readable.
>>> 3. I think that predefined section order is a good thing, because the
>>> consistency makes information easier to find (you know where to look
>>> for it). SciPy/NumPy section order [2] could be used.
>>>
>>> Luckily none of these conventions would make developer's work any
>>> harder. Quite the contrary - it is easier to do the right thing if you
>>> know what the right thing is.
>>>
>>> [1] https://github.com/sympy/sympy/wiki/Writing-documentation
>>> [2] https://github.com/numpy/numpy/blob/master/doc/HOWTO_DOCUMENT.rst.txt
>>> [3] http://vim.wikia.com/wiki/Folding
>>>
>>> --
>>> 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.
>>>
>>
>
>
> --
> Alexey U.
>
> --
> 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.
>

-- 
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.

Reply via email to