I think the documentation stuff is a bit off topic here. We can
improve documentation and have SymPEPs. In fact, if improving
documentation requires a large concerted effort, that could itself be
a SymPEP. However, I will note that on this front:

- We are participating in Google Season of Docs (GSoD, not to be
confused with GSoC), which is a program that pays technical writers to
work on open source documentation. The GSoD results will be announced
in a couple of weeks, so watch this space.

- I agree that we should have a concerted effort to improve
documentation. A documentation sprint is one way. Getting funding to
improve things is another.

- We have a documentation style guide, which was developed as part of
last year's GSoD. However, only a small subset of SymPy actually
conforms to the guide
https://docs.sympy.org/latest/documentation-style-guide.html.

Aaron Meurer

On Thu, Aug 6, 2020 at 1:48 PM Nikhil Maan <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>
>
> On Thursday, August 6, 2020 at 9:39:43 PM UTC+5:30 [email protected] wrote:
>>
>> A nice thing for a GSoD student to do would be to organize a documentation 
>> sprint.
>
>
> This sounds like a great idea.
>
> I also like the idea of SymPy Enhancement Proposals. Another project that I 
> think might benefit SymPEPs is Naman Gera's work on adding control systems to 
> SymPy. It will be a great place for folks who would like to help 
> with/continue this work in the future to find the motivations and other 
> details about the decision choices and future plans.
>
> Looking at PEP-1 and seeing a large portion of the discussion in the thread 
> is regarding what kind of work should have a SymPEP and what they should 
> include, I think a good starting point for SymPEP-1 will be to describe what 
> are SymPEPs, why we are planning to add them, what kind of changes should 
> have a SymPEP, etc. Also, I like the sound of SymEP and SymPEP. +1 to calling 
> them SymPEP or SymEP instead of SEP.
>
> Regards,
> Nikhil Maan
>
>>
>> Jason
>> moorepants.info
>> +01 530-601-9791
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Aug 6, 2020 at 5:32 PM Matthew Brett <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> On Thu, Aug 6, 2020 at 4:10 PM David Bailey <[email protected]> wrote:
>>> >
>>> > On 06/08/2020 00:47, Nicolas Guarin wrote:
>>> >
>>> > I agree that this would be good for the project but maybe it would be a 
>>> > good idea to polish the documentation a bit. Some of the pages in the 
>>> > wiki are somewhat outdated and they are on the first results in a web 
>>> > search.
>>> >
>>> > Assuming you are talking about the user level documentation,  I very much 
>>> > agree.
>>> >
>>> > If you look up even the simplest function - e.g. Sin[] - in Mathematica, 
>>> > you get a simple explanation, some examples showing that it can be used 
>>> > with real numbers, and that it 'knows' about special arguments such as 
>>> > Pi/3.
>>> >
>>> > It shows you the power series about zero and a plot of the function. It 
>>> > also shows some properties of the function such as Sin[x] = -Sin[-x] etc 
>>> > etc.
>>> >
>>> > It also shows that Sin can be applied to complex arguments, or even to 
>>> > matrices, and that it can be applied to a high precision floating point 
>>> > number to deliver a high precision result.
>>> >
>>> > That same level of detail is provided for every function - right up to 
>>> > complicated functions like MeijerG. Remember that for functions such as 
>>> > that, the documentation is even more important because there are 
>>> > different conventions as to the order,sign, etc of the arguments.
>>> >
>>> > This might appear like overkill, but it means that wherever you start you 
>>> > will realise a Mathemaica function is far more than just a numerical 
>>> > function. This is also true for SymPy, but the information is harder to 
>>> > find. It is also easy to cut/paste from the documentation into your own 
>>> > code.
>>> >
>>> > Of course, the documentation is massively redundant, but I imagine that 
>>> > the documentation for each function or operation would not be written 
>>> > from scratch, but pulled from some kind of database of information.
>>> >
>>> > Obviously the SymPy documentation can't jump to the Mathematica standard 
>>> > overnight, but maybe a student could put together some sort of framework 
>>> > from which such documentation of the standard maths functions could be 
>>> > generated, and start the process off - then others could contribute 
>>> > information that would fit into the same scheme.
>>> >
>>> > I think that such documentation would make SymPy very much more 
>>> > user-friendly.
>>>
>>> Just to say - that the Scipy Documentation Project took Numpy from
>>> fairly woeful documentation, to very good documentation, in a few
>>> months, and with a fairly small budget:
>>>
>>> http://conference.scipy.org/proceedings/SciPy2008/paper_5/
>>> https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/6879046
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>>
>>> Matthew
>>>
>>> --
>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
>>> "sympy" group.
>>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an 
>>> email to [email protected].
>>>
>>> To view this discussion on the web visit 
>>> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/sympy/CAH6Pt5q%3DN_Vb0Z_yM2w8nBKwFFJu8UPBO3_A0c1UeWhAKDBX%3Dg%40mail.gmail.com.
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
> "sympy" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an 
> email to [email protected].
> To view this discussion on the web visit 
> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/sympy/b977b777-52de-43af-81c9-445662ffef9bn%40googlegroups.com.

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"sympy" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to [email protected].
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/sympy/CAKgW%3D6JkF1TDtukEcHJZdOPn9oG0z_BrbJ55dKNX8J9nfSSVMg%40mail.gmail.com.

Reply via email to