Minor docs fixes in displayio.Bitmap

[lesamouraipourpre]

No description provided.

[dhalbert]

Sphinx syntax is not obvious; it's not markdown, though sometimes it looks like that. You'll want to try to build to docs locally to make sure any changes will work, such as the new cross-reference you propose.

[lesamouraipourpre]

I agree that Sphinx is not obvious in what is the best way to highlight things as code and cross-reference to other documentation.

I had tested a local docs build and the changes made, the single quotes, get rid of the red links (generally interpreted as errors or missing links) that are currently on the website . I can rechange these back if you prefer but I think that __getitem__ and __setitem__ look better this way. The ulab.numpy.frombuffer would be better as a cross-referenced link but I don't think there is a valid destination in the current docs.

[dhalbert]

With your changes, these new warnings below are generated during make html:

home/halbert/repos/lesamouraipourpre/circuitpython/shared-bindings/displayio/index.rst:36: WARNING: 'any' reference target not found: ulab.numpy.frombuffer
/home/halbert/repos/lesamouraipourpre/circuitpython/shared-bindings/displayio/index.rst:66: WARNING: 'any' reference target not found: y * width + x
/home/halbert/repos/lesamouraipourpre/circuitpython/shared-bindings/displayio/index.rst:76: WARNING: 'any' reference target not found: y * width + x

We try to avoid warnings. If we changed double-backtick to single-backtick everywhere, we'd have hundreds of these.

Sphinx is trying to do a cross reference from the text in single backquotes. The RST doc explains the difference:

I agree that styling

``inline-literal``

in red may not be the best choice, but that's just the CSS style. We use double-backquotes all over the place for <code>-style markup.

[lesamouraipourpre]

Weird. I've pushed those changes but I'm not sure if they've pulled over to the PR.
lesamouraipourpre@0be610f

[dhalbert]

Yes, there's something weird with GitHub. Yours was your first PR against circuitpython, so I had to approve running the Actions, which I did bother to do yet, since I had proposed changes anyway. But then your second push did run the actions, but on only the first commit?? I think GitHub's new Actions permission thing may be buggy.

[dhalbert]

Try committing and pushing again; I think you can do git commit --allow-empty.

[jepler]

Thanks!

the only edit left is a typo fix