docs: limits on integer and number option types

JustaSqu1d commented 3 months ago

Summary

Many people seem to use SlashCommandOptionType.integer or similar for IDs. This change serves to clarify its limitations.

The superscripts seem to have extra spacing because of monospaces, but this looks fine-ish on the documentation.

Looking for feedback about whether the ID notes for SlashCommandOptionType.number are necessary or can be removed.

I'm not sure how to remove ambiguity with this change and with Option.max_value and Option.min_value since those can be used to change the range of accepted values.

Information

[x] This PR fixes an issue.
[ ] This PR adds something new (e.g. new method or parameters).
[ ] This PR is a breaking change (e.g. methods or parameters removed/renamed).
[x] This PR is not a code change (e.g. documentation, README, typehinting, examples, ...).

Checklist

[x] I have searched the open pull requests for duplicates.
[x] If code changes were made then they have been tested.
- [x] I have updated the documentation to reflect the changes.
[x] If type: ignore comments were used, a comment is also left explaining why.
[ ] I have updated the changelog to include these changes.

plun1331 commented 3 months ago

Should probably just replace the docs for that instead of making a note

Dorukyum commented 3 months ago

Does specifying the limits as exponents of 2 actually help with anything?

JustaSqu1d commented 3 months ago

Does specifying the limits as exponents of 2 actually help with anything?

Would you rather have 9.0071992547*10^15? Or am I misunderstanding the question?

Dorukyum commented 3 months ago

Does specifying the limits as exponents of 2 actually help with anything?

Would you rather have 9.0071992547*10^15? Or am I misunderstanding the question?

You did get that right and I did mean that, but now I think we should specify both, like "9007199254740992 (2^53)".

Pycord-Development / pycord