JuliaDocs / JuliaDocs/DocStringExtensions.jl
Format for all docstrings for a particular function
Nobody has claimed this yet.
- Dominant language
- Julia
- Stars
- 126
- Forks
- 35
- PR merge metrics
- No merged PRs in 30d
Description
I would like a docstring for my many-method functions to look like:
f(x::Int, y::Float)
Does something with `x` and `y`.
defined at [blah.jl:100](link)
- - -
f(x::String)
Does something with a string.
defined at [blah.jl:120](link)
- - -
f(x::Int, y::Int, z::Int)
Does a completely different thing
defined at [elsewhere.jl:5](link)
- - -
f(b::Blah) # note: these last two don't have docstrings, but I still want them listed here.
defined at [elsewhere.jl:15](link)
- - -
f(a, b)
defined at [elsewhere.jl:30](link)
It's some combination of typedsignatures + methodlist, but not quite either of them.... Is this achievable with any of the abbreviations/combinations in DocStringExtensions?
Contributor guide
No contributing guide indexed for this repository
First steps
- Read the whole issue, then the project's contributing guide.
- Comment on the issue to say you are picking it up — it saves two people doing the same work.
- Fork the repository and make your change on a branch.
- Open a pull request that references the issue number.
Research direction
Start by reading the existing typedsignatures and methodlist abbreviations in DocStringExtensions and compare their current output with the requested format. Done would be a documented abbreviation or combination that lists all methods, includes docstrings where present, and shows definitions for methods without docstrings.
Written by the indexing model from the issue text.
Assessment
- Tech stack
- julia
- Domain
- documentation
- Issue type
- Feature
- Difficulty
- 5/5
- Estimated time
- Over a week
- Activity status
- Stale
- Clarity
- Needs clarification
- Newbie friendliness
- 25/100