You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
Currently much of the dsage docstrings are written using reST syntax which apparently Sage does not use. It should be rewritten to be more like the other Sage docstrings. An alternative is for new Sage documentation to be written in something like reST which would allow much easier API doc generation through something like epydoc.
Currently much of the dsage docstrings are written using reST syntax
which apparently Sage does not use. It should be rewritten to be more
like the other Sage docstrings.
An alternative is for new Sage
documentation to be written in something like reST which would
allow much easier API doc generation through something like epydoc.
Some comments:
Sage is MATH SOFTWARE, and as such reST is not what we want -- Latex very much is what we want. For math, Latex is by far the best choice. We're definitely not changing the docstring format in the rest of Sage (not an option).
DSage -- except for the examples -- is not specifically math software. For dsage, latex is potentially just a nuisance.
Just keep those points in mind when thinking about this issue.
Currently much of the dsage docstrings are written using reST syntax which apparently Sage does not use. It should be rewritten to be more like the other Sage docstrings. An alternative is for new Sage documentation to be written in something like reST which would allow much easier API doc generation through something like epydoc.
Component: dsage
Issue created by migration from https://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/2319
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: