Currently we don't require documentation for __cinit__, __dealloc__ and __new__. Are there any other functions we want to add to that list? I could see an argument for _add_ and other arithmetic functions too. David
On Sat, Dec 19, 2009 at 1:41 PM, David Roe <r...@math.harvard.edu> wrote: > > > I think that requiring them for every single function is excessive, >> > for example many functions don't take any parameters but self, or >> > don't return output. >> >> OK, good point. How about requiring INPUT if there are any inputs >> beyond self, and requiring OUTPUT if there are any outputs? >> > > This is what the patch at 7716 currently does (which I've updated to > reflect some comments; it still needs a reviewer). Based on Robert's > comments, I would also suggest changing the coverage scripts to not require > input or output descriptions for functions that begin and end with > underscores. I'll post a patch on 7716 to that effect shortly. > > >> > Also, what about arithmetic functions like >> > __neg__ and _mul_. (Specifically, I yesterday I was adding a bunch of >> > doctests to monsky-washnitzer, and the thought of adding (in my mind >> > superfluous) INPUT and OUTPUT blocks to these was not encouraging. >> > (I'm not just thinking about file size, developer time and vertical >> > screen real estate are valuable as well.) >> > > Robert, are there any other kinds of functions that you can think of where > we don't need descriptions of the input/output? > David > > -- To post to this group, send an email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to sage-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel URL: http://www.sagemath.org
