Closed amtoine closed 2 years ago
I think a more compact signature would be better along with a couple of lines explaing the code if necassary. docstring-style imo is way too verbose and fogs up the code a bit. Also, in some cases, it'll be better to rename the function to be self-explanatory instead of adding 4 lines in the comments explaining what it does.
I think a more compact signature would be better along with a couple of lines explaing the code if necassary. docstring-style imo is way too verbose and fogs up the code a bit.
i can propose something in a PR if that's ok with you :blush:
Also, in some cases, it'll be better to rename the function to be self-explanatory instead of adding 4 lines in the comments explaining what it does.
yep agree on that :ok_hand:
Describe your request
Before moving on to the 3 opened
priority:high
issues, i wanted to make the code base slightly easier to work with, at least according to me :yum:Right now, some of the functions and files of
bsp-layout
are missing documentation.I would like to add:
Briefly explain its use-case
The docstrings and the signatures should be discussed here.
Docstrings:
Signatures: do we use someting like
or something more spread across the docstring like in the docstring example above?