Re: [sage-devel] Poll for issue G5 a specific guideline for writing docstrings

2017-05-17 Thread Kwankyu Lee
> OUTPUT: a tuple ``(a,b)`` with > > - ``a`` a foo > > - ``b`` a bar > How about this? We can avoid making up variables. (1) OUTPUT: tuple of - foo; friend of bar - bar; friend of foo or simply (2) OUTPUT: - foo; friend of bar - bar; friend of foo - -- You receive

Re: [sage-devel] Poll for issue G5 a specific guideline for writing docstrings

2017-05-17 Thread John H Palmieri
+1 to OUTPUT: lattice when possible. On Wednesday, May 17, 2017 at 8:05:21 AM UTC-7, Jeroen Demeyer wrote: > > What about > > OUTPUT: lattice > > Unlike an INPUT, an OUTPUT is not a list of things. So why format it as > a list? A list could be useful for example in > > OUTPUT: a tuple `

Re: [sage-devel] Poll for issue G5 a specific guideline for writing docstrings

2017-05-17 Thread Jeroen Demeyer
On 2017-05-17 17:09, Vincent Delecroix wrote: I like the above, however there can be more complicated output (depending on the output). An example is given by "is_cyclotomic" that returns either a boolean or an integer Of course a list makes sense in this case. I didn't say to forbid a list, j

Re: [sage-devel] Poll for issue G5 a specific guideline for writing docstrings

2017-05-17 Thread Vincent Delecroix
On 17/05/2017 17:05, Jeroen Demeyer wrote: What about OUTPUT: lattice Unlike an INPUT, an OUTPUT is not a list of things. So why format it as a list? A list could be useful for example in OUTPUT: a tuple ``(a,b)`` with - ``a`` a foo - ``b`` a bar I like the above, however there can be more

Re: [sage-devel] Poll for issue G5 a specific guideline for writing docstrings

2017-05-17 Thread Jeroen Demeyer
What about OUTPUT: lattice Unlike an INPUT, an OUTPUT is not a list of things. So why format it as a list? A list could be useful for example in OUTPUT: a tuple ``(a,b)`` with - ``a`` a foo - ``b`` a bar -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "sage-de

Re: [sage-devel] Poll for issue G5 a specific guideline for writing docstrings

2017-05-17 Thread Daniel Krenn
On 2017-05-17 16:30, Kwankyu Lee wrote: > We do a poll for adopting an official guideline for docstrings > (see https://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/23017 > ) > > G5. Write > > | > OUTPUT: > > - lattice > | > > > but do not write > > | > OUTPUT: >

[sage-devel] Poll for issue G5 a specific guideline for writing docstrings

2017-05-17 Thread Kwankyu Lee
We do a poll for adopting an official guideline for docstrings (see https://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/23017) G5. Write OUTPUT: - lattice but do not write OUTPUT: lattice The development manual says a hyphen is optional. But for consistency, we need to settle down on eithe