JuliaDocs / JuliaDocs/DocStringExtensions.jl
Should `TYPEDSIGNATURES` include types for keyword arguments?
Nobody has claimed this yet.
- Dominant language
- Julia
- Stars
- 126
- Forks
- 35
- PR merge metrics
- No merged PRs in 30d
Description
I find it very helpful to include $(TYPEDSIGNATURES) at the top of my function docstring template. I'm wondering why type annotations are included in positional arguments but not keyword arguments? I would have expected/preferred to have type annotations appear in the docstring everywhere that they appear in the actual function signature. That's how it was in the initial proposal in https://github.com/JuliaDocs/DocStringExtensions.jl/issues/20, and I haven't been able to find any further discussion on the topic.
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
The issue names TYPEDSIGNATURES but no implementation file or test. Start by locating its implementation and existing tests, then compare how positional and keyword arguments are rendered. Done means keyword-argument type annotations appear in the generated docstring signature, with tests covering the updated behavior.
Written by the indexing model from the issue text.
Assessment
- Tech stack
- julia
- Domain
- documentation
- Issue type
- Feature
- Difficulty
- 3/5
- Estimated time
- 1-2 days
- Activity status
- Stale
- Clarity
- Mostly clear
- Newbie friendliness
- 43/100