Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Fix docstring of src/sage/rings/lazy_series.py #35254

Merged
merged 6 commits into from
Apr 1, 2023

Conversation

DavidAyotte
Copy link
Member

📚 Description

While browsing the documentation, I noticed some minor typesetting issues in src/sage/rings/lazy_series.py. This PR aims to fix this.

📝 Checklist

  • I have made sure that the title is self-explanatory and the description concisely explains the PR.
  • I have linked an issue or discussion.
  • I have created tests covering the changes.
  • I have updated the documentation accordingly.

⌛ Dependencies

Copy link
Collaborator

@mantepse mantepse left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

excellent, thank you!

@@ -584,7 +584,7 @@ def map_coefficients(self, f):

def truncate(self, d):
r"""
Return this series with its terms of degree >= ``d`` truncated.
Return this series with its terms of degree `\geq` ``d`` truncated.
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I think it would be clearer to write: Return the series obtained by removing all terms of degree at least ``d``.

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I agree! I'll change it.

@mantepse
Copy link
Collaborator

Thank you!

Copy link
Contributor

@dcoudert dcoudert left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Much better now. Thanks.

@codecov-commenter
Copy link

Codecov Report

Patch coverage: 97.95% and project coverage change: +0.01 🎉

Comparison is base (52a81cb) 88.57% compared to head (93a58ea) 88.59%.

❗ Current head 93a58ea differs from pull request most recent head 48bb425. Consider uploading reports for the commit 48bb425 to get more accurate results

Additional details and impacted files
@@             Coverage Diff             @@
##           develop   #35254      +/-   ##
===========================================
+ Coverage    88.57%   88.59%   +0.01%     
===========================================
  Files         2140     2140              
  Lines       397273   397415     +142     
===========================================
+ Hits        351891   352078     +187     
+ Misses       45382    45337      -45     
Impacted Files Coverage Δ
src/sage/rings/lazy_series.py 92.43% <ø> (ø)
src/sage/schemes/elliptic_curves/ell_generic.py 93.11% <66.66%> (-0.12%) ⬇️
src/sage/interfaces/tachyon.py 87.93% <90.00%> (+0.43%) ⬆️
src/sage/schemes/elliptic_curves/gal_reps.py 82.23% <90.00%> (+0.04%) ⬆️
src/sage/quadratic_forms/quadratic_form.py 90.26% <95.65%> (+0.16%) ⬆️
src/sage/modular/quasimodform/element.py 99.20% <100.00%> (+0.06%) ⬆️
src/sage/rings/qqbar.py 95.30% <100.00%> (+<0.01%) ⬆️
src/sage/schemes/affine/affine_morphism.py 90.33% <100.00%> (ø)
src/sage/schemes/elliptic_curves/BSD.py 43.75% <100.00%> (+0.21%) ⬆️
src/sage/schemes/elliptic_curves/cardinality.py 87.54% <100.00%> (+0.93%) ⬆️
... and 41 more

... and 30 files with indirect coverage changes

Help us with your feedback. Take ten seconds to tell us how you rate us. Have a feature suggestion? Share it here.

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Do you have feedback about the report comment? Let us know in this issue.

@DavidAyotte
Copy link
Member Author

Fixes #34610

Copy link
Collaborator

@mantepse mantepse left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

thank you!

@github-actions
Copy link

Documentation preview for this PR is ready! 🎉
Built with commit: 48bb425

@vbraun vbraun merged commit ad7ce44 into sagemath:develop Apr 1, 2023
vbraun pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Apr 1, 2023
    
<!-- ^^^^^
Please provide a concise, informative and self-explanatory title.
Don't put issue numbers in there, do this in the PR body below.
For example, instead of "Fixes #1234" use "Introduce new method to
calculate 1+1"
-->
### 📚 Description

This address the arity problem noted in #35261. It also removes a `TODO`
in a `revert()` implementation by making the behavior the same across
different implementations. Warnings are added for the user for the
assumptions made by the code.

### 📝 Checklist

<!-- Put an `x` in all the boxes that apply. -->
<!-- If your change requires a documentation PR, please link it
appropriately -->
<!-- If you're unsure about any of these, don't hesitate to ask. We're
here to help! -->

- [x] I have made sure that the title is self-explanatory and the
description concisely explains the PR.
- [x] I have linked an issue or discussion.
- [x] I have created tests covering the changes.
- [x] I have updated the documentation accordingly.

### ⌛ Dependencies
<!-- List all open pull requests that this PR logically depends on -->

- #35127 Avoiding a long test.
- #35254 Avoiding merge conflicts.
- #35291 Making sure these changes work together.
- #35265 For some slight simplification of the new stream's
`__getitem__`.
    
URL: #35293
Reported by: Travis Scrimshaw
Reviewer(s): Martin Rubey, Travis Scrimshaw
@mkoeppe mkoeppe added this to the sage-10.0 milestone Apr 1, 2023
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

6 participants