You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
After looking a bit at docs, I find the HTML Type: presentation of a function's type much too noisy/distracting/challenging for reading. It's also a bit unusual to have the name and prototype separated - may just collapse them. Mentioning function in the signature likely is redundant, too, because this is all in a section called "Functions".
I think with a bit of wrangling we might be able to include the types of parameters into the Parameters section and make them link/clickable there instead (could also allow for some validation that the docstring params align with the signature).
Comparison examples form other docs
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
After looking a bit at docs, I find the HTML
Type:
presentation of a function's type much too noisy/distracting/challenging for reading. It's also a bit unusual to have the name and prototype separated - may just collapse them. Mentioningfunction
in the signature likely is redundant, too, because this is all in a section called "Functions".I think with a bit of wrangling we might be able to include the types of parameters into the
Parameters
section and make them link/clickable there instead (could also allow for some validation that the docstring params align with the signature).Comparison examples form other docs
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: