[Numpy-discussion] [SciPy-dev] Doc-day

Charles R Harris charlesr.harris@gmail....
Sat Dec 29 22:52:08 CST 2007


On Dec 29, 2007 7:59 PM, Fernando Perez <fperez.net@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Dec 29, 2007 6:51 PM, Charles R Harris <charlesr.harris@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > If not, we should
> > definitely decide on the structure of the docstrings and stick to it.
>
> +100
>

I have raised the topic of documentation formats on the list several times,
and the discussions have always petered out. So I made a decision, posted
what *worked* with epydoc, and also generated a significant amount of
documentation. Now that is tossed out with hardly a mention. I would like to
propose that anyone who submits a new documentation standard also
submit code to parse the result, compare it to the existing
practice, discuss why it is an improvement, and generate documentation to
show how it works. I did all of those things, I expect nothing less from
others if we are going to reinvent the wheel. And the end result should be
available as soon the the formatting changes are made, not at some
indefinite point in the future.

Chuck
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://projects.scipy.org/pipermail/numpy-discussion/attachments/20071229/9a986309/attachment.html 


More information about the Numpy-discussion mailing list