Refactor the reference section of the docs #4311
Conversation
| ====== | ||
| Django | ||
| ====== |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I could be talked into keeping "Hypothesis for Django". I lean pretty minimalist in general (in life, designs, wording, etc), but I realize I can go too far sometimes.
| @@ -1,19 +1,8 @@ | |||
| ==================== | |||
| Reproducing failures | |||
| ==================== | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
My heading ordering is single =, single -, single ~ (and if you need to go beyond that you're probably doomed anyway). I try to avoid double headers for anything, but I think I might be the odd one out here, because e.g. the python rst guide recommends double headers for chapters. In defense of single headers, the python docs have way more structure than we do!
| Misc | ||
| ---- | ||
|
|
||
| .. autofunction:: hypothesis.strategies.builds | ||
| .. autofunction:: hypothesis.strategies.functions | ||
| .. autofunction:: hypothesis.strategies.slices | ||
|
|
||
| .. autofunction:: hypothesis.strategies.sampled_from | ||
| .. autofunction:: hypothesis.strategies.permutations | ||
|
|
There was a problem hiding this comment.
categorization is hard...would be happy to hear advice on how to categorize the strategies (either these misc ones, or any of the other ones too)
| ab_c = (a + b) + c | ||
| a_bc = a + (b + c) | ||
| difference = abs(ab_c - a_bc) | ||
| target(difference) # Without this, the test almost always passes |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
As fas as I can tell, target makes little difference here. Around 40% discover rate with or without it.
Still a large pr but there's no sane way to split most of this without causing more work for me, thanks to all the inter-references. I could split the redirect extension off is probably the biggest thing
There's a minor amount of added or removed content here, but most of it is moving around existing stuff into their own page