Check todo in docs #71
Conversation
|
The conflict is most likely because both Brendt and I removed the todo snippet. Should be an easy fix. |
|
This addresses #15, right? Any other issues as well? |
|
It completely resolves all of them so that they can all be closed when this PR is merged? |
| - ``install_conda.sh``: install ``miniconda`` | ||
| (needed if conda is not already installed on your system). | ||
| - ``conda_env.sh``: install a ``conda`` environment | ||
| with all SCICO dependencies. For GPU installation, see ``conda_env.sh -h``. | ||
|
|
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The instructions may change per discussion with @Michael-T-McCann
There was a problem hiding this comment.
These should be replace with the pip instructions.
|
"For Developers" and "Installing Dependencies" are currently showing up as top level headings (in the left side navigation bar). I don't think they warrant that and suggest removing them. |
|
Clicking on "important classes" in the left side navigation bar takes you to a slightly odd/useless page, unlike any of the other links there. |
docs/source/contributing.rst
Outdated
| :: | ||
| :: | ||
|
|
||
| git checkout -b name-of-change |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Don't we have further guidelines on branch names somewhere?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Yep! Thank you for spotting that, I will update it with the guideline.
docs/source/style.rst
Outdated
|
|
||
| Unicode variable names are allowed for internal usage (e.g. for Greek characters for mathematical symbols), but not as part of the public interface for functions or methods. | ||
|
|
||
|
|
||
| Naming | ||
| ------ | ||
|
|
||
| Naming conventions for the different programming components are as follows: | ||
| Naming conventions adhering to the `Google naming conventions <https://google.github.io/styleguide/pyguide.html#3164-guidelines-derived-from-guidos-recommendations>`_ for the different programming components are as follows: |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
While I appreciate the effort it took to work these docs links into the text, I found them a bit cumbersome to read. It also raises the question: "Do we follow all of the, .e.g., google string conventions, or only the ones we mention specifically?".
I propose a more formulaic approach to these sections:
"Strings
We follow the Google string conventions. Notably, prefer to use Python f-strings, rather than .format or % syntax. For example, ..."
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I like this suggestion, but it would be good to keep the links.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Agreed, that was my intention but it wasn't clear from my example.
Codecov Report
@@ Coverage Diff @@
## main #71 +/- ##
=======================================
Coverage 89.12% 89.12%
=======================================
Files 43 43
Lines 2978 2978
=======================================
Hits 2654 2654
Misses 324 324
Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.
Continue to review full report at Codecov.
|
|
There are two things that need fixing:
If someone can help with those two things I would appreciate it cause I am not sure what's the issue. |
|
@Michael-T-McCann : Looks good to me now, but it wouldn't hurt for you to take another look over it to confirm that your suggested changes as as intended. |
Working on these now. |
…tall guide, and other minor inconsistencies.
Michael-T-McCann
force-pushed
the
FernandoDavis/check_TODO_in_docs
branch
from
79f8372
to
ab45b70
Compare
This PR addresses the todos in the contributing, style, and operators sections of the documentation. Makes the install a fork tutorial instead, adds references to style guides used, and creates docstrings for marked wrapper methods.
It is still a draft waiting for some edits in the installation section.