diff options
author | 2018-06-14 07:46:09 -0700 | |
---|---|---|
committer | 2018-06-14 07:48:31 -0700 | |
commit | a7c1b0347bda30c300ae55ad060b6cb965ded831 (patch) | |
tree | b05810672b16b5d1f56fb7941180212979503270 | |
parent | ae26e861cae2817290f52594a731988299ebe7a6 (diff) |
Standardize the type notation for docstrings that require describing a type.
PiperOrigin-RevId: 200555363
-rw-r--r-- | tensorflow/contrib/autograph/STYLE_GUIDE.md | 16 |
1 files changed, 13 insertions, 3 deletions
diff --git a/tensorflow/contrib/autograph/STYLE_GUIDE.md b/tensorflow/contrib/autograph/STYLE_GUIDE.md index 866e5f583a..7e6b0cc27d 100644 --- a/tensorflow/contrib/autograph/STYLE_GUIDE.md +++ b/tensorflow/contrib/autograph/STYLE_GUIDE.md @@ -20,7 +20,17 @@ Naming conventions: Below are AutoGraph-specific conventions. In the event of conflict, it supercedes all previous conventions. -1. __Citations in Docstrings.__ Write a `#### References` subsection at the +1. __Types in docstrings.__ Use [PEP 484][https://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0484/] + notation to describe the type for args, return values and attributes. + + Example: + + ``` + Args: + foo: Dict[str, List[int]], a dictionary of sorts + ``` + +2. __Citations in Docstrings.__ Write a `#### References` subsection at the bottom of any docstring with citations. Use ICLR’s bibliography style to write references; for example, order entries by the first author's last name. Add a link to the paper if the publication is open source (ideally, @@ -60,12 +70,12 @@ it supercedes all previous conventions. https://arxiv.org/abs/1803.04386 ``` -2. Avoid LaTeX in docstrings. +3. Avoid LaTeX in docstrings. * It is not rendered in many (if not most) editors and can be hard to read for both LaTeX experts and non-experts. -3. Write docstring and comment math using ASCII friendly notation; python using +4. Write docstring and comment math using ASCII friendly notation; python using operators. E.g., `x**2` better than `x^2`, `x[i, j]` better than `x_{i,j}`, `sum{ f(x[i]) : i=1...n }` better than `\sum_{i=1}^n f(x_i)` `int{sin(x) dx: x in [0, 2 pi]}` better than `\int_0^{2\pi} sin(x) dx`. |