-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 7.9k
DOC: small-doc-improvements1 #11161
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
DOC: small-doc-improvements1 #11161
Conversation
As of numpydoc (section on Returns) simple types or For most of the cases given here, I'd actually rather not provide a name because that has no additional meaning. So my preferred choice would be to get that fixed in numpydoc. If you really want to work around this within matplotlib, use a name conforming with the variable naming convention, e.g.
(for me preferrably the first one since the name does not convey any additional semantics and short is less distracting). |
This and #11160 are partially doing the same thing. |
What does the letter |
9657378
to
f702e65
Compare
Just shortening to the first letter:
You don't have to be very verbose here if you would just repeat the type. Note: This is just my personal preference. There are no objective rules how to to it. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Accepting as a temporary workaround for numpy/numpydoc#72. Once the issue in numpydoc gets resolved, we should go back to leaving out unmeaningful names for return values and just specify the type.
I'm much more in favor of actual words or names being used. Otherwise people could spend a good amount of time searching for what Something is really strange about the checks. Previously I got an error from some image test failing in appveyor/ci; now I got test coverage being diminished. This wouldn't have anything to do with this PR though, would it? |
@@ -2148,7 +2151,9 @@ def barh(self, y, width, height=0.8, left=None, *, align="center", | |||
|
|||
- scalar: symmetric +/- values for all bars | |||
- shape(N,): symmetric +/- values for each bar | |||
- shape(2,N): separate + and - values for each bar | |||
- shape(2,N): Separate - and + values for each bar. First row |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I don't think this sentence will be very clear to new users. Could you add an Example numpydoc section with a short example example demonstrating the clarification?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I added a link to this example.
618c8bc
to
95da955
Compare
95da955
to
c28a063
Compare
Backport PR #11161 on branch v2.2.x
PR Summary
Only changes those, which are already updated in Review documentation of Axes plotting methods #10148 not to interfere with @timhoffm 's work over there.
PR Checklist