On Oct 5, 4:23 am, Mike Hansen <mhan...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 5, 2009 at 3:32 AM, Fernando Perez <fperez....@gmail.com> wrote:
> > But sage doesn't use the :param: style for parameters, does it? It
> > uses all-caps for informal section delimiting and regular bullet lists
> > (with dashes) for parameters (this is from the 'factor' docstring):
>
> > INPUT:
>
> > - ``n`` - an nonzero integer
>
> > - ``proof`` - bool or None (default: None)
>
> > I make the precision because I interpreted the OP's question as asking
> > about a project that would be using all the :param: & friends
> > machinery, not just avoiding post-processing (like numpydoc).
>
> Yep, this is what I was talking about since the previous format just
> used a LaTeX \begin{itemize} and so it autoconverted to the above when
> we switched over to Sphinx. It'd be better to have something more
> standard, but the work just needs to be done.
I browsed a bit in Sage's doc and so far only found the style
mentioned by Fernando (INPUT ..). Do I get you right that you plan to
convert these to :param:... markup in the future? Finally, from a long
term perspective, I just wonder what would be the best way to format
docstrings. :param: and friends are good for Sphinx but until now I've
not seen them in the wild occurring in docstings.
@Fernando: Do you know if integrating the numpy doc extension into
Sphinx is in discussion or already in progress?
Cheers,
Oben
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"sphinx-dev" group.
To post to this group, send email to sphinx-dev@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
sphinx-dev+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/sphinx-dev?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
