Skip to content

Navigation Menu

Sign in
Appearance settings

Search code, repositories, users, issues, pull requests...

Provide feedback

We read every piece of feedback, and take your input very seriously.

Saved searches

Use saved searches to filter your results more quickly

Sign up
Appearance settings

Better magic_underscore explanation in docstrings #1925

Open
Assignees
Labels
P3backlog documentationwritten for humans featuresomething new
Milestone
@nicolaskruchten

Description

I'd love to have a better answer for this kind of thing: https://stackoverflow.com/questions/58990657/python-how-do-i-find-inspect-what-kind-of-arguments-a-function-accepts

Some thoughts:

  • The constructors of all the graph_objects that accept **kwargs should include an entry for this in the docstring.
  • Wherever we accept another graph_object (e.g. marker in go.Scatter) the docstring could mention that you can also to marker_whatever?
  • Wherever we accept **kwargs, the docstring for that item should contain some self-contained explanation of what magic-underscores are and a link to the relevant docs. Minimally something like "for any other arguement x in this function which accepts a graph_object, you may use x_y where y is a valid property of the corresponding graph_object."
  • For generic methods like update/add etc we should mention the name of the relevant graph_object whose properties are accepted, so that they show up in the Sphinx doc and provide a trail that users can follow. E.g. in https://plot.ly/python-api-reference/generated/plotly.graph_objects.Figure.html#plotly.graph_objects.Figure.update_xaxes we should mention in patch and kwargs that the relevant attributes are to be found in plotly.graph_objects.layout.Xaxis etc.

@emmanuelle thoughts?

Metadata

Metadata

Labels

P3backlog documentationwritten for humans featuresomething new

Type

No type

Projects

No projects

Relationships

None yet

Development

No branches or pull requests

Issue actions

    AltStyle によって変換されたページ (->オリジナル) /