Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

API docs for scico.solver #109

Closed
4 tasks done
bwohlberg opened this issue Nov 21, 2021 · 4 comments · Fixed by #125
Closed
4 tasks done

API docs for scico.solver #109

bwohlberg opened this issue Nov 21, 2021 · 4 comments · Fixed by #125
Assignees
Labels
documentation Improvements or additions to documentation

Comments

@bwohlberg
Copy link
Collaborator

bwohlberg commented Nov 21, 2021

Some issues related to the API docs for the scico.solver module:

  • There is still a .. todo: in the module header docstring.
  • There are two instances of TODO comments in the code (see Address TODO comments in code #96).
  • Docstrings for scipy.optimize.minimize and scipy.optimize.minimize_scalar are explicitly included. Is there a good reason for doing this instead of adopting the strategy followed for scico.numpy (i.e. automatically attach the docstrings when running sphinx)?
  • The split and join functions should be made private
@bwohlberg bwohlberg added the documentation Improvements or additions to documentation label Nov 21, 2021
@lukepfister
Copy link
Contributor

Re: 3rd point, go ahead and do it automatically. Be sure to leave the part describing the differences! eg the part “This function differs from scipy.optimize.minimize in three ways…”

@lukepfister
Copy link
Contributor

Would also suggest making the split/join functions private, or moving them to a utils module.

@bwohlberg
Copy link
Collaborator Author

Automatic inclusion of the docs from scipy.optimize is greatly complicated by the inclusion of only part of the docstring. One could make it work, but it would be pretty fragile. I'm strongly leaning towards just removing the explicit copy (which is a maintenance nightmare) and relying on the cross-reference to the full docs.

@bwohlberg
Copy link
Collaborator Author

Some tasks pushed to #123 and #124.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
documentation Improvements or additions to documentation
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

2 participants