[Doc-SIG] The docs, reloaded
ndbecker2 at gmail.com
Mon May 21 01:11:12 CEST 2007
Georg Brandl wrote:
> Scott Dial schrieb:
>> Neal Becker wrote:
>>> Sounds very interesting. I just have one concern/question. I hope that
>>> while moving away from latex, we are not precluding the ability to write
>>> math as part of the documentation. What would be my choices for add
>>> to the documentation? Hopefully using latex, since there really isn't
>>> AFAIK any other competitor for this.
>> Where in the current documentation is there any math notation /at all/?
>> In all my reading of it, I have not run across anything that appeared
>> like it was being used. Besides that question, is the full power of
>> LaTeX math notation really necessary here? I somehow doubt anything more
>> than simple expressions of runtime performance and container behaviors
>> are appropriate for any documentation we have.
> There is exactly one instance of LaTeX math in the whole docs, it's in the
> description of audioop, AFAIR, an contains a sum over square roots...
> So, that's not really a concern of mine ;)
There is an effort as part of numpy to come up with a new system using
docstrings. It seems to me it would be unfortunate if these two efforts
were not coordinated.
More information about the Doc-SIG