[DOC] Added blank lines to properly render FourierFeatures docstring, sp_list (#5932)
#5984
Conversation
tiloye
requested review from
achieveordie,
benHeid,
fkiraly and
yarnabrina
as code owners
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Thanks!
Btw, some docstrings use single-apostrophe (grave) by error instead of double-apostrope (double-grave) to render code snippets. If you encounter these, it would also be great to replace them.
The confusion is due to markdown havin single-grave for code snippets, but rst has double-grave.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
FYI, this is failing since the changes do not adhere to code formatting, specifically, "no trailing whitespaces".
See here how to set up local code formatting checks:
https://www.sktime.net/en/stable/developer_guide/coding_standards.html
I had an issue with git saying my local branch had diverged from the remote branch when i tried to push a change. I thought updating the branch and using git pull (with --rebase) was going to fix the issue. It fixed the issue, but it resulted in these 17 changes. I don't have a good knowledge of git, so I currently don't know what you mean by update to the most recent I'm thinking of deleting the branch and restarting the process. Hope that won't be a problem? |
That should work. FYI, rebase often leads to issues like this (FYI @benHeid, @astrogilda due to recent discussions on rebase vs merge), I recommend merge from |
fkiraly
changed the title
FourierFeatures docstring, sp_list (#5932)
The fraction looks smaller. I'll change back to t/sp. |
|
The documentation seems to be properly rendered now. However, I am not sure if the spaces between the bullet points (in the docstring) still adhere to the recommended docstring formatting guidelines. I amended my previous commit and force pushed to the remote branch. Hope that won't be a problem during merge? |
fkiraly
added
the
module:transformations
The invalid use of single-grave in docstrings has been fixed to correctly render code snippets in API Reference Documentation #### Reference Issues/PRs This PR relates to these comments #5932 (comment) > code snippets do not render correctly (use single apostrophe instead of double) #5984 (review) > Btw, some docstrings use single-apostrophe (grave) by error instead of double-apostrope (double-grave) to render code snippets. If you encounter these, it would also be great to replace them. > > The confusion is due to markdown havin single-grave for code snippets, but rst has double-grave. #### What does this implement/fix? Explain your changes. - In this PR, I have fixed the invalid use of single-grave at all places in the code. - This step is necessary as it enables the code snippets to render properly in the API Reference Documentation. - Although there are some valid uses of single-grave in the docstring (math expressions) that I have not changed. - Here is the [Script on Google Colab](https://colab.research.google.com/drive/1McgC3cI-O40XYuQ0mUuRScVFcWt8puMp?usp=sharing) that I used to auto-fix the docstrings #### Does your contribution introduce a new dependency? If yes, which one? No #### What should a reviewer concentrate their feedback on? - There are minor changes (just addition of single-grave) but at many lines in many files - Some lines exceeded the character link so I split them into 2 following the PEP 8 guidelines #### Did you add any tests for the change? No, Although I am planning to add one with some guidance
Reference Issues/PRs
Fixes #5932
What does this implement/fix? Explain your changes.
I added blank lines and line blocks to properly create the sp_list description, as required by the reStructuredText syntax.
Does your contribution introduce a new dependency? If yes, which one?
No
What should a reviewer concentrate their feedback on?
Did you add any tests for the change?
No
Any other comments?
No
PR checklist
For all contributions