search

lbfm-rwth / GaussParallel

https://lbfm-rwth.github.io/GaussParallel/
GNU General Public License v2.0
2 stars 5 forks source link

Write documentation #249

Closed emmakatherina closed 3 years ago

emmakatherina commented 5 years ago

Fixes issue #245.

There are many bad formulations. Feel free to read through the documentation and fix them! Afterwards please merge.

codecov-io commented 5 years ago

Codecov Report

Merging #249 into master will decrease coverage by 0.18%. The diff coverage is 100%.

Impacted file tree graph

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##           master     #249      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   90.57%   90.39%   -0.19%     
==========================================
  Files          17       20       +3     
  Lines        2070     2082      +12     
==========================================
+ Hits         1875     1882       +7     
- Misses        195      200       +5
Impacted Files Coverage Δ
gap/utils.g 93.97% <ø> (ø) :arrow_up:
gap/main.gd 87.5% <ø> (ø) :arrow_up:
gap/echelon-form.gd 100% <100%> (ø)
init.g 76.66% <100%> (ø) :arrow_up:
gap/RREF.gd 100% <100%> (ø)
gap/echelon-form.g 100% <100%> (ø) :arrow_up:
gap/upstream.gd 100% <100%> (ø)
gap/RREF.g 100% <100%> (ø) :arrow_up:
gap/upstream.g 100% <100%> (ø) :arrow_up:
PackageInfo.g 95.06% <0%> (-1.28%) :arrow_down:
... and 4 more

Continue to review full report at Codecov.

Legend - Click here to learn more Δ = absolute <relative> (impact), ø = not affected, ? = missing data Powered by Codecov. Last update 79182c5...81c1166. Read the comment docs.

ssiccha commented 5 years ago

I'll try to have a closer look tomorrow. Two things off the top of my head.

@Returns a record is enough.

The formulation @Returns a record that contains information of an echelonized version of mat does not add much information. It is imprecise and thus may be more confusing than helpful. Especially since directly afterwards you specify what your record has to look like. This has to be changed in several places.

Reorder and rename the sections

The High-Level Functions should come first. Ideally someone who only wants to use the package should not have to look into the Low-Level Functions section at all. Put these two sections into different chapters. Put the Low-Level Functions even after the chapter Examples. The new names and order I suggest are:

ssiccha commented 5 years ago

A good documentation to compare ourselves with would be e.g. the documentation of the CAP package, available here

ssiccha commented 3 years ago

Superseded by #253