Uh oh!
There was an error while loading.Please reload this page.
- Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork32.1k
gh-101118: correct function signatures in the math module docs#101120
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to ourterms of service andprivacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub?Sign in to your account
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading.Please reload this page.
Conversation
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others.Learn more.
Right now we haven't decided yet what to do with positional only args in the docs.
Some maintainers add them, some later remove them, some prefer not to touch it.
This is just for the context for this change :)
There was a decision not to add these to the docs because lay readers mostly find them confusing, because it makes the docs harder to read, and there are no known usability issues with the docs as they are now. So exceptions have been made for functions likes |
skirpichev commentedJan 18, 2023 • edited
Loading Uh oh!
There was an error while loading.Please reload this page.
edited
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading.Please reload this page.
Well, the inspect module does very clear distinction: >>>deffoo(x):pass# like e.g. math.ceil shown in docs...>>>defbar(x,/):pass...>>>inspect.signature(foo)<Signature (x)>>>>inspect.signature(bar)<Signature (x,/)>>>>foo(x=1)>>>bar(x=1)# that's how math,ceil behave in the realityTraceback (mostrecentcalllast):File"<stdin>",line1,in<module>TypeError:bar()gotsomepositional-onlyargumentspassedaskeywordarguments:'x'
The os module seems to be one using "/". I doubt that the Sorry for the nitpick, anyway. |
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading.Please reload this page.