docs: remove autosummary-generated API stubs

[priyam0k]

Summary of Changes

• Deletes the 36 .rst stub files under docs/library/generated/.
• Adds docs/library/generated/ to .gitignore, mirroring the existing docs/modules/generated/ entry one line above.

These files are emitted by sphinx.ext.autosummary on every docs build (autosummary_generate = True in docs/conf.py, driven by the eight :toctree: generated/ directives in docs/library/api.md), so committing them is redundant and the committed copies drift out of sync with what Sphinx actually produces.

Docs-only; no runtime, config, or public API changes. Rendered HTML site is unchanged — the stubs are regenerated automatically on jb build ..

Related GitHub Issue(s)

• Closes [DOCS] remove deprecated stub files #846
• Refs parent [DOCS] Eliminate docs warnings #841
• Companion to merged docs: add README documenting docs build sources and outputs #848 (which explicitly called out this follow-up: "The companion cleanup for the redundant generated stubs is in [DOCS] remove deprecated stub files #846.")
• As documented in docs: add README documenting docs build sources and outputs #848's docs/README.md, the contributor flow for adding a new API symbol is to edit docs/library/api.md + the package docstring — never to hand-write a .rst stub.

Additional Context for Reviewers

• Verified docs/library/generated/*.rst is re-emitted by the build after deletion and is now ignored by git.

• The .gitignore addition is a single line placed directly under the existing docs/modules/generated/ entry for consistency.

• No notebooks, conf, or _toc.yml references point at the deleted files; all references go through library/api.md's autosummary toctrees.

• I passed tests locally for both code (uv run pytest) and documentation changes (uv run jb build docs --builder=custom --custom-builder=doctest)

---

Note

Low Risk
Documentation and git hygiene only; API HTML is unchanged and stubs are recreated on jb build.

Overview
Stops tracking Sphinx autosummary stub files under docs/library/generated/ and adds that directory to .gitignore, alongside the existing docs/modules/generated/ entry.

The removed .rst files are regenerated on every docs build from library/api.md; keeping them in git was redundant and let committed copies drift from what Sphinx produces. No runtime or public API changes—contributors still document symbols via api.md and docstrings.

^{Reviewed by Cursor Bugbot for commit 5c4c18a. Bugbot is set up for automated code reviews on this repo. Configure here.}

[codecov]

Codecov Report

✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests.
✅ Project coverage is 87.04%. Comparing base (4ce0141) to head (5c4c18a).

Additional details and impacted files

@@              Coverage Diff              @@
##           experimental     #879   +/-   ##
=============================================
  Coverage         87.04%   87.04%           
=============================================
  Files                86       86           
  Lines              4986     4986           
  Branches            646      646           
=============================================
  Hits               4340     4340           
  Misses              456      456           
  Partials            190      190           

Flag	Coverage Δ
unittests	87.04% <ø> (ø)

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:

• ❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.

[henrydingliu]

@priyam0k thanks for submitting. could you please update the experimental branch to main and then merge this commit to experimental first? we are trying to make sure any potentially breaking doc changes get a visual review. just in case if we actually deleted something that's being used, i'm not sure missing stub files would generate a test or doc build failure vs just warnings (which we have a lot of currently).

[priyam0k]

Sounds good. I don't have write access to casact:experimental, so could a maintainer bring it up to date with main first? Once that's done I'll retarget this PR to experimental and resolve any conflicts on my end.

[henrydingliu]

Sounds good. I don't have write access to casact:experimental, so could a maintainer bring it up to date with main first? Once that's done I'll retarget this PR to experimental and resolve any conflicts on my end.

done

[henrydingliu]

Experimental built successfully after the merge. I have reviewed the updated experimental version and found all pages accounted for.

@priyam0k thank you! you are more than welcome to either wait for experimental to be periodically merged into main with other doc changes, submit a PR for experimental, or resubmit a PR from your original branch directly.

[priyam0k]

Thanks for building, reviewing, and merging it into experimental — really appreciate you taking the time to verify all the API pages render. Glad it's in. Happy to help with any follow-up if anything comes up when experimental flows into main.