Enhanced One-liner Docstrings and Additional Documentation #960
Conversation
|
Hey @Roger-luo, I've submitted a PR addressing the enhancement of one-liner docstrings. Please review it and let me know if it aligns with your expectations. If there are any discrepancies or further adjustments needed, feel free to point them out. Your feedback will help me understand the project's standards better, guiding my future PRs. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This is really good PR, but I notice you write docstring for class too. The docstring for class with method appear in the definition path of the builder does not need to be complicated (it's fine to be a one-liner for them). However, the methods appear in the builder path will need some examples as they will show up in the hint
|
@Roger-luo please merge this PR. I have made the necessary changes |
|
LGTM. According to #960, since this PR was made before the hackathon, I don't think unitary funds will count as a bounty in the system, and I'm sorry that I also wasn't aware of this, but I do really appreciate the effort here. I'm looking forward to your future PRs! |
This pull request aims to improve the readability and usefulness of one-liner docstrings across the codebase. Additionally, it introduces new docstrings where they were missing or insufficient. These changes enhance the documentation quality, making the code more accessible and understandable.