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 some multiline platonic solids plot documentation #10922

Closed
kcrisman opened this issue Mar 12, 2011 · 11 comments
Closed

Fix some multiline platonic solids plot documentation #10922

kcrisman opened this issue Mar 12, 2011 · 11 comments

Comments

@kcrisman
Copy link
Member

Some platonic solids in plot/plot3d/platonic.py do not evaluate correctly in the live documentation in the notebook, because they are spread over multiple lines. Things like

sage: dodecahedron(color='orange', opacity=0.8) + \
      sphere(size=0.5, color='black')

become split into the input cell and output cell.

I'm not sure if this is really a notebook bug or a parsing bug when the live documentation is made. An easy way to fix it is to change the line breaks but that would likely lead to less readability.

CC: @robertwb @sagetrac-mvngu

Component: documentation

Author: Frédéric Chapoton

Branch/Commit: c8ebabb

Reviewer: Nathann Cohen

Issue created by migration from https://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/10922

@a-andre
Copy link

a-andre commented Aug 18, 2014

comment:1

Could you improve the problem description. The problem is not clear to me.

@kcrisman

This comment has been minimized.

@kcrisman
Copy link
Member Author

comment:2

It took me a while to reconstruct this! Thanks for the reminder.

@kcrisman
Copy link
Member Author

Attachment: Screen Shot 2014-08-22 at 1.58.14 PM.png

Picture of problem

@fchapoton
Copy link
Contributor

Author: Frédéric Chapoton

@fchapoton
Copy link
Contributor

Branch: u/chapoton/10922

@fchapoton
Copy link
Contributor

Commit: c8ebabb

@fchapoton
Copy link
Contributor

New commits:

c8ebabbtrac #10922 clean-up of doc of platonic solids

@nathanncohen
Copy link
Mannequin

nathanncohen mannequin commented Aug 2, 2015

comment:4

Good to go!

About RR(1)->RR.one(). I assume that you do this because it is how it is 'advised' as it is apparently faster (I have no first-hand experience on these matters), but I still find RR(1) better for the doc since it is more user-friendly.

Well. Matters of taste.

Thanks for this branch,

Nathann

@nathanncohen
Copy link
Mannequin

nathanncohen mannequin commented Aug 2, 2015

Reviewer: Nathann Cohen

@fchapoton fchapoton added this to the sage-6.9 milestone Aug 14, 2015
@vbraun
Copy link
Member

vbraun commented Aug 14, 2015

Changed branch from u/chapoton/10922 to c8ebabb

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

4 participants