-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 1.1k
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
Allow lists of default values in parameter documentation for Numpy
#7149
Conversation
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 think we're hitting the limit of what regex are good for, but as you spent 9 months to birth it let's put a diaper on the little re_param_line
and try to keep it alive and clean now 😄
Pull Request Test Coverage Report for Build 2638482339
💛 - Coveralls |
It's also that some of these regexes are really quite bad. Using both f-strings and regular expressions from different classes and in different recursive patterns is awful to work with. You can't easily copy them to |
Outch should have waited for the primer, before approving. |
They are actually good! Just turns out we're not fully supporting Numpy just yet. But the number of messages or missing parameters is going down! See the difference between the first two. I'll make an issue about remaining issues. |
Hmm right, we have most message with actually a more accurate message with one param that do not warn anymore. This is why we need the better primer diff, I need to do it from scratch again though 😄 |
doc/whatsnew/<current release.rst>
.Type of Changes
Description
Closes #4035.
I really don't want to talk about the number of hours it took me to get this regex right. The fact that I assigned this to myself in October is a small indication...