grpc: add docs for generic stream interfaces

[janardhanvissa]

Partially addresses #1894

RELEASE NOTES: None

[codecov]

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 81.79%. Comparing base (ec9dff7) to head (6649fa6).
Report is 54 commits behind head on master.

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##           master    #7470      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   81.56%   81.79%   +0.23%     
==========================================
  Files         354      361       +7     
  Lines       27076    27825     +749     
==========================================
+ Hits        22085    22760     +675     
- Misses       3802     3860      +58     
- Partials     1189     1205      +16     

Files with missing lines	Coverage Δ
stream_interfaces.go	91.30% <ø> (ø)

... and 99 files with indirect coverage changes

[janardhanvissa]

@purnesh42H Removed the comments for parent interfaces and pushed the changes.

[purnesh42H]

LGTM

[purnesh42H]

@janardhanvissa can you please update the description that it partially addresses #1894 ? Also, add RELEASE NOTES to description. See other commits for reference

[janardhanvissa]

@purnesh42H Partially in the sense do I need to add comments for RouteChat() function under examples/route_guide/server/server.go file?

[janardhanvissa]

@purnesh42H Please review the Release note added in the PR.

[purnesh42H]

@dfawley the documentation looks good to me. We can address the other follow up parts separately

[dfawley]

Generally this feels a bit too verbose. Documentation shouldn't be redundant. Users reading this documentation know how to read the function signatures. They want to know what the things represent, how to use them, and what kinds of errors can occur. E.g. "can be called repeatedly" is great but "It takes a pointer ... of type Res" is obvious by reading the function signature. Please apply that feedback throughout and I will re-review (I stopped reviewing after the second interface).

[janardhanvissa]

@dfawley Updated the description as per the comments made. Please let me know if any updates are required for this.

[janardhanvissa]

@arvindbr8 I have updated the docstring comments as per the comments addressed and pushed the changes. Please review it.

[purnesh42H]

@dfawley is this good to go?

[dfawley]

I will push a commit that has some edits soon, rather than going back and forth in comments.

[dfawley]

I think this looks good now. Please review my edits first, however.

stale