docs: add docstrings for EvaluationRunResult

[masci]

Related Issues

• fixes EvaluationRunResult.score_result() is not documented in API reference #7829

Proposed Changes:

• Add docstrings for EvaluationRunResult
• Move the abstract class to a dedicated module

How did you test it?

Notes for the reviewer

Checklist

• I have read the contributors guidelines and the code of conduct
• I have updated the related issue with new insights and changes
• I added unit tests and updated the docstrings
• I've used one of the conventional commit types for my PR title: fix:, feat:, build:, chore:, ci:, docs:, style:, refactor:, perf:, test:.
• I documented my code
• I ran pre-commit hooks and fixed any issue

[coveralls]

Pull Request Test Coverage Report for Build 9563422604

Details

• 0 of 0 changed or added relevant lines in 0 files are covered.
• 5 unchanged lines in 1 file lost coverage.
• Overall coverage increased (+0.005%) to 89.751%

---

Files with Coverage Reduction	New Missed Lines	%
evaluation/eval_run_result.py	5	91.53%

Totals
Change from base Build 9561171587:	0.005%
Covered Lines:	6927
Relevant Lines:	7718

---

💛 - Coveralls

[davidsbatista]

nice 👍🏽

in my opinion, this is the approach to organizing abstractions - we could think about using it on every bit of code that has abstractions

[masci]

Slightly unrelated, but we should refrain from introducing abstractions, like in this case. I would have just gone with EvaluationRunResult and added an abstraction later if and when needed, possibly with a protocol, not an abstract class. In that case, we wouldn't have had this PR :)

[davidsbatista]

I agree that the abstractions here was too much and we can always add them later if needed.

[davidsbatista]

@masci : thanks for removing the noqa: D102 👍🏽 - probably there are other places where we need to do the same

[davidsbatista]

LGTM - thanks @masci