Skip to content

Convert the specification files to rst format #283

Closed

Description

@steff456

The main goal is to make the specification files more machine readable and enable sphinx extensions like latex to convert into a pdf. This issue will track the changes by markdown file,

API Specification

Design topics

Extensions

Activity

  1. self-assigned this
    on Oct 12, 2021
  2. xloem commented on Oct 23, 2021

    @xloem

    idea:
    specification held as python source with documented function stubs

    • easy to machine-read via import
    • sphinx already understands the format
    • might open possible implementation avenues such as inheritance or a reference implementation
  3. rgommers commented on Oct 25, 2021

    @rgommers
    Member

    specification held as python source with documented function stubs

    Thanks for the suggestion @xloem. That is one of the options @steff456 is testing, it would indeed be a significant improvement over the .md files.

  4. xloem commented on Oct 25, 2021

    @xloem

    I ended up hacking some quick py file generation at https://github.com/xloem/arrays to work with the spec in the repl help(). I was thinking of making a base class for something that plugged in api implementation fudges based on name matching with existing libraries

  5. rgommers commented on Oct 25, 2021

    @rgommers
    Member

    Thanks for sharing @xloem. That may be useful as an intermediate step; I'm hoping we end up with a more normal spec though which uses the numpydoc docstring format. So instead of:

    Parameters
    **********
    
    *   **start**: *Union[ int, float ]*
    

    it should look like:

    Parameters
    ----------
    start: Union[int, float]
    
  6. xloem commented on Oct 25, 2021

    @xloem

    The source of the sphinx builder that outputs rst probably reveals what document elements might output that format, but if it's a one-way change a search+replace tool might be simpler.

  7. added this to the v2022 milestone on Nov 4, 2021
  8. kgryte commented on Feb 7, 2022

    @kgryte
    Contributor

    @steff456 Now that this tracking issue is complete, can we close this out?

  9. modified the milestones: v2022, v2021 on Feb 7, 2022
  10. steff456 commented on Feb 7, 2022

    @steff456
    MemberAuthor

    I'm closing this issue given that all the specification is now in rst 🎉🎉🎉

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Metadata

Metadata

Assignees

Labels

MaintenanceBug fix, typo fix, or general maintenance.

Type

No type

Projects

No projects

    Milestone

    Relationships

    None yet

    Development

    No branches or pull requests

    Issue actions