Consolidate docstrings in generators.rs #1397
Conversation
db9b2a4 to
2caa71d
Compare
Pull Request Test Coverage Report for Build 13937689195Details
💛 - Coveralls |
|
I will review this more carefully either tomorrow or on Monday, but one of the things that I just remembered: we are missing the Karate Club generator in this file! https://github.com/Qiskit/rustworkx/blob/main/docs/source/api/generators.rst We documented it in the release notes: https://www.rustworkx.org/dev/release_notes.html#relnotes-0-16-0. If you add a line to that file it will include it in the docs. Thanks again for starting this initiative! Our docstrings are improving a lot. All users will appreciate these changes |
2caa71d to
745f251
Compare
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Two things:
- Our docstrings are partially correct. I don't think we enforce that it is a list, any sequence works. Moreover, for generators we don't know the type of node/edge objects so it is
Any. Here is the "source" of truth: https://github.com/Qiskit/rustworkx/blob/main/rustworkx/generators/__init__.pyi - In #1280 I indented the docstring wrong. It was never getting built so it never got caught. But now that it is included CI is failing to build the docs 🤦
|
And again, thanks for highlighting this. I don't think we'd have caught the discrepancy between the type annotations and the docstring. https://pyo3.rs/v0.23.5/conversions/tables.html is the reference that any |
84f846c to
f35fb4a
Compare
* Consolidate docstrings in generators.rs * Try to fix identation in generators.rs --------- Co-authored-by: Ivan Carvalho <8753214+IvanIsCoding@users.noreply.github.com>
Another bunch of docstrings reviewed.