Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Fix docstrings referring to N_particles #310

Closed
vyasr opened this issue Jun 13, 2019 · 2 comments
Closed

Fix docstrings referring to N_particles #310

vyasr opened this issue Jun 13, 2019 · 2 comments
Milestone

Comments

@vyasr
Copy link
Collaborator

vyasr commented Jun 13, 2019

The docs currently have a random mix of terminology for the number of points. This issue is especially convoluted because ref_points need not coincide with points.

We should standardize the terminology around this and update all docstrings in freud to match. This is related to #179, and also somewhat to #180.

@bdice bdice added this to the v2.0 milestone Aug 27, 2019
@vyasr
Copy link
Collaborator Author

vyasr commented Sep 27, 2019

I'm actually not 100% sure what to do with this. We've updated the majority of the APIs, and in particular removing the num_particles properties from most things has made this much easier. However, I'm not sure if we should update all the docstrings; some methods really are about particles. For example, does it make sense to change things in environment like BondOrder or LocalDescriptors to just discuss points in the docstrings? I'm not sure what the answer is, would like to discuss a bit more before deciding.

@bdice bdice modified the milestones: v2.0 beta, v2.0 final Oct 4, 2019
@bdice
Copy link
Member

bdice commented Oct 14, 2019

Docstrings are pretty good now. Closing as unnecessary.

@bdice bdice closed this as completed Oct 14, 2019
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants