-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 53
PR: Transform function and method signatures to rst #352
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
Changes from 1 commit
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Jump to
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
Original file line number | Diff line number | Diff line change |
---|---|---|
@@ -1,62 +1,59 @@ | ||
(function-and-method-signatures)= | ||
.. _function-and-method-signatures: | ||
|
||
# Function and method signatures | ||
Function and method signatures | ||
============================== | ||
|
||
Function signatures in this standard adhere to the following: | ||
|
||
1. Positional parameters must be | ||
[positional-only](https://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0570/) parameters. | ||
1. Positional parameters must be `positional-only <https://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0570/>`_ parameters. | ||
Positional-only parameters have no externally-usable name. When a function | ||
accepting positional-only parameters is called, positional arguments are | ||
mapped to these parameters based solely on their order. | ||
|
||
_Rationale: existing libraries have incompatible conventions, and using names | ||
of positional parameters is not normal/recommended practice._ | ||
*Rationale: existing libraries have incompatible conventions, and using names | ||
of positional parameters is not normal/recommended practice.* | ||
|
||
```{note} | ||
.. note:: | ||
|
||
Positional-only parameters are only available in Python >= 3.8. Libraries | ||
still supporting 3.7 or 3.6 may consider making the API standard-compliant | ||
namespace >= 3.8. Alternatively, they can add guidance to their users in the | ||
documentation to use the functions as if they were positional-only. | ||
``` | ||
documentation to use the functions as if they were positional-only. | ||
|
||
2. Optional parameters must be | ||
[keyword-only](https://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-3102/) arguments. | ||
2. Optional parameters must be `keyword-only <https://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-3102/>`_ arguments. | ||
|
||
_Rationale: this leads to more readable code, and it makes it easier to | ||
*Rationale: this leads to more readable code, and it makes it easier to | ||
evolve an API over time by adding keywords without having to worry about | ||
keyword order._ | ||
keyword order.* | ||
|
||
3. For functions that have a single positional array parameter, that parameter | ||
is called `x`. For functions that have multiple array parameters, those | ||
parameters are called `xi` with `i = 1, 2, ...` (i.e., `x1`, `x2`). | ||
is called ``x``. For functions that have multiple array parameters, those | ||
parameters are called ``xi`` with ``i = 1, 2, ...`` (i.e., ``x1``, ``x2``). | ||
|
||
4. Type annotations are left out of the signatures themselves for readability; however, | ||
they are added to individual parameter descriptions. For code which aims to | ||
adhere to the standard, adding type annotations is strongly recommended. | ||
|
||
A function signature and description will look like: | ||
|
||
``` | ||
funcname(x1, x2, /, *, key1=-1, key2=None) | ||
:: | ||
|
||
Parameters | ||
funcname(x1, x2, /, *, key1=-1, key2=None) -> out: | ||
Parameters | ||
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. What is the purpose of this code block? Is it supposed to be to show an example of what the documentation in the spec looks like? If so, can we put this dummy function in the code and pull it in with autodoc? Though I honestly don't understand the point of having it at all if that's why it's there. If it's supposed to be to show what a valid function signature looks like, why not make this fully valid Python? There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. I think is just to explain how function and method signatures are in the spec, this is the current example that is in the spec. What do you think about this @kgryte? There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. Since this is already there, we can merge this without addressing it. But I do find this a bit confusing. |
||
|
||
x1 : array | ||
description | ||
x2 : array | ||
description | ||
key1 : int | ||
description | ||
key2 : Optional[str] | ||
description | ||
x1 : array | ||
description | ||
x2 : array | ||
description | ||
key1 : int | ||
description | ||
key2 : Optional[str] | ||
description | ||
|
||
Returns | ||
Returns | ||
|
||
out : array | ||
description | ||
``` | ||
out : array | ||
description | ||
|
||
Method signatures will follow the same conventions modulo the addition of | ||
`self`. | ||
|
||
Method signatures will follow the same conventions modulo the addition of ``self``. |
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.