[AstroPy] Documentation Guidelines
bkloppenborg at gmail.com
Tue Jul 12 16:16:12 EDT 2011
Tom and others,
On 07/12/2011 12:11 PM, Thomas Robitaille wrote:
> I've added this to the options discussed so far shown at
Thank you for making this display example.
I vastly prefer the Numpy/Scipy format. The documentation is easy to
read both in the source code and in the Sphinx output. It also will be
in line with the dominant math/science package in Python so it appears a
clear first choice to me.
Commenting on the other two formats:
The "Sphinx suggested Format" does produce nicely condensed output, but
the source code and docstrings are much more difficult to read. Just to
find the parameter names you have to visually parse
:param str file_name:
file_name : str
which, in my opinion, destroys the ease-of-lookup factor.
The PyWCS format is by far my least favorite as the ouput parameter
names from Sphinx are not in bold. Can this be changed?
More information about the AstroPy