Skip to content

docstring improvements #804

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

Merged
merged 6 commits into from
Dec 17, 2022
Merged

Conversation

sawyerbfuller
Copy link
Contributor

@sawyerbfuller sawyerbfuller commented Nov 30, 2022

Improvements needed when looking at the html function reference

  • add NonlinearIOSystem to system creation section, interconnect to interconnection section
  • remove evalfr and freqresp (they still live in matlab module). Replace them with __call__ methods and frequency_response respectively. The former ends up being a bit verbose, I'm open to other ideas for how to present this.
  • updates lyap and care descriptions to be consistent with other functions
  • misc other formatting and consistency issues in various functions

…istent with other functions, fix formatting in a few other functions. add references to NonlinearIOSystem and __call__ and remove evalfr
@coveralls
Copy link

coveralls commented Nov 30, 2022

Coverage Status

Coverage increased (+0.007%) to 94.838% when pulling 16457d7 on sawyerbfuller:update-docs into 8c764d0 on python-control:main.

@sawyerbfuller
Copy link
Contributor Author

old:
image

image

new:
image

image

Copy link
Member

@murrayrm murrayrm left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Good catches on the documentation. I think we should comply with the numpydoc style guide, which involves renaming "Additional Parameters" to "Other Parameters" and leaving them after the "Returns" section.

control/dtime.py Outdated
Comment on lines 97 to 101
Returns
-------
sysd : linsys
Discrete time system, with sampling rate Ts

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Per the numpydoc style guide, the "Other Parameters" section should come after the "Returns" section. When processed using numpydoc (eg, for readthedocs), these parameters will get lumped with all other parameters in a single section. But when they are displayed in an interactive session, they are shown in the order listed (so you see the most common parameters, then what the function returns, then other parameters).

For an example, see ct.input_output_response. If you look at the docstring in an interactive session (eg, ?ct.input_output_response in iPython) then you see the the documentation for solve_ivp_method (a rarely used parameter) after the "Returns" section:

Compute the output response of a system to a given input.

    Simulate a dynamical system with a given input and return its output
    and state values.

    Parameters
    ----------
    sys : InputOutputSystem
        Input/output system to simulate.

    T : array-like
        Time steps at which the input is defined; values must be evenly spaced.

    U : array-like, list, or number, optional
        Input array giving input at each time `T` (default = 0).  If a list
        is specified, each element in the list will be treated as a portion
        of the input and broadcast (if necessary) to match the time vector.

    X0 : array-like, list, or number, optional
        Initial condition (default = 0).  If a list is given, each element
        in the list will be flattened and stacked into the initial
        condition.  If a smaller number of elements are given that the
        number of states in the system, the initial condition will be padded
        with zeros.

    return_x : bool, optional
        If True, return the state vector when assigning to a tuple (default =
        False).  See :func:`forced_response` for more details.
        If True, return the values of the state at each time (default = False).

    squeeze : bool, optional
        If True and if the system has a single output, return the system
        output as a 1D array rather than a 2D array.  If False, return the
        system output as a 2D array even if the system is SISO.  Default value
        set by config.defaults['control.squeeze_time_response'].

    Returns
    -------
    results : TimeResponseData
        Time response represented as a :class:`TimeResponseData` object
        containing the following properties:

        * time (array): Time values of the output.

        * outputs (array): Response of the system.  If the system is SISO and
          `squeeze` is not True, the array is 1D (indexed by time).  If the
          system is not SISO or `squeeze` is False, the array is 2D (indexed
          by output and time).

        * states (array): Time evolution of the state vector, represented as
          a 2D array indexed by state and time.

        * inputs (array): Input(s) to the system, indexed by input and time.

        The return value of the system can also be accessed by assigning the
        function to a tuple of length 2 (time, output) or of length 3 (time,
        output, state) if ``return_x`` is ``True``.  If the input/output
        system signals are named, these names will be used as labels for the
        time response.

    Other parameters
    ----------------
    solve_ivp_method : str, optional
        Set the method used by :func:`scipy.integrate.solve_ivp`.  Defaults
        to 'RK45'.
    solve_ivp_kwargs : dict, optional
        Pass additional keywords to :func:`scipy.integrate.solve_ivp`.

    Raises
    ------
    TypeError
        If the system is not an input/output system.
    ValueError
        If time step does not match sampling time (for discrete time systems).

    Notes
    -----
    1. If a smaller number of initial conditions are given than the number of
       states in the system, the initial conditions will be padded with
       zeros.  This is often useful for interconnected control systems where
       the process dynamics are the first system and all other components
       start with zero initial condition since this can be specified as
       [xsys_0, 0].  A warning is issued if the initial conditions are padded
       and and the final listed initial state is not zero.

But if you look at the documentation on readthedocs, you see all of the parameters gathered together:

Screen Shot 2022-12-11 at 9 01 28 AM

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Thanks. I had noticed that there were a few places where the docstrings in the library listed "additional Parameters" and sphinx was not handling it right. So I took it out. And since making this commit I discovered that sphinx was looking for "other parameters." I'll look around for any more instances of "additional parameters" and change them back to "other parameters"

doc/control.rst Outdated
Comment on lines 83 to 84
TransferFunction.__call__
StateSpace.__call__
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I agree this format is a bit long and cumbersome. Would it make sense to have this show up as something more like sys(x[, squeeze]) or something like that. This can be done by writing the desired signature as the first line of the docstring, as described here.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Good idea. I tried to rename the call string for TransferFunction.__call__ in the docstring as suggested in numpydoc but no luck:

image

Will see if I can find any examples in numpy doc itself I can use

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Ok looked around in numpy and scipy and found scipy.interpolate.interp1d, which is a class that has a __call__ method. But it is not linked in a function reference like this, so it did not provide a way to change how the call signature is shown. Perhaps there is a way to tell sphinx to manually change its call signature, but I coudln't find it.

Unless anybody else has other ideas about how to refer to this, I would propose to leave it as it is in this PR and plan to update later if somebody figures something out.

doc/control.rst Outdated
h2syn
hinfsyn
lqr
dlqr
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I understand why this might go here, but doesn't it make more sense to list alphabetically?

Alternatively, we could list this as lqe, dlqe, since they go together?

Note that if you pass a LTI object to lqr (and lqe), the function will check the timebase to determine whether to use the continuous time or discrete time version of the function.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

re-alphebetized them in recent commit.

Copy link
Member

@murrayrm murrayrm left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

LGTM

@@ -84,6 +84,7 @@
from ..rlocus import rlocus
from ..dtime import c2d
from ..sisotool import sisotool
from ..stochsys import *
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Can we make these explicit imports please?

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I think the two functions that we want (since they are present in MATLAB) are lqe and dlqe. The other functions are unique to python-control.

@murrayrm murrayrm merged commit b4cd96b into python-control:main Dec 17, 2022
@murrayrm murrayrm mentioned this pull request Dec 17, 2022
@murrayrm murrayrm added this to the 0.9.3 milestone Dec 24, 2022
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

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants