Improve Parse and Format docs#1727
Merged
Merged
Conversation
Merged
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
1 participant
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Introduction
Finishes the work started by @tbug in the PR linked above that was never updated to reflect the proposed changes and address the comments of the reviewers.
Also adds some text to address a few concerns raised in issue #668.
Fixes #1671, closes #1040.
Motivation
These methods are a bit confusing and it's not easy for a newcomer to know that they are complementary and which one does the opposite operation of the other. The issue tracker has a few questions related with this.
Proposed solution
A simple link to the opposite operation inside the docs of both Parse and Format.
Also adds a new Tutorials section to the main documentation where the only available guide right now is the Parse and Format document.
Current PR Issues
Doesn't really address all the concerns of issue #668, since that requires a lot more work and some changes.