Replace recommonmark with MyST, fix all Sphinx issues #72
Conversation
|
This is all just rendering/formatting fixes, so I'll merge it straight away. |
| @@ -7,6 +7,8 @@ A conforming implementation of the array API standard must provide and support t | |||
| - Positional parameters must be [positional-only](https://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0570/) parameters. Positional-only parameters have no externally-usable name. When a function accepting positional-only parameters is called, positional arguments are mapped to these parameters based solely on their order. | |||
| - Optional parameters must be [keyword-only](https://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-3102/) arguments. | |||
|
|
|||
| ## Objects in API | |||
|
|
|||
| <!-- NOTE: please keep the functions in alphabetical order --> | |||
|
|
|||
| ### <a name="arange" href="#arange">#</a> arange(start, /, *, stop=None, step=1, dtype=None) | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Some headers like this were modified and others were not. Was this just an omission?
It would also be helpful if all the function stub headers had some way to identify them for my regex that extracts them. I think a simple thing would be to add a cross reference target for each one, like
(function-arange)=
### arange(start, /, *, stop=None, step=1, dtype=None)
or
(constant-pi)=
### pi
The cross reference targets would be useful to have anyway.. I can make a PR adding this if you agree (it shouldn't affect the final rendering).
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actually, I think this would affect the anchor names (they would be like #function-arange instead of #arange). Is this acceptable, or should I use some other way to mark function definitions?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Some headers like this were modified and others were not. Was this just an omission?
I just fixed the ones that were used as references. There are zero Sphinx warnings, and we should keep it this way. Long-term this needs a bigger overhaul, using signatures as h3 headings doesn't work all that well. That's why I didn't bother updating everything.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actually, I think this would affect the anchor names (they would be like #function-arange instead of #arange). Is this acceptable, or should I use some other way to mark function definitions?
Anchor names are a bit of a pain now, could be useful to unify. I like your proposed scheme.
No description provided.