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

docs: Add headers for easier Core, Base and stdlib reference #55311

Open
wants to merge 4 commits into
base: master
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

adigitoleo
Copy link
Contributor

This adds one new section (h2) and a nested subsection (h3) to the landing page of the Julia documentation website and associated PDF file. The new section provides a quick overview of the differences between Core, Base and the standard library, as well as a list of links to standard library packages.

The list of standard library packages is thus duplicated in the website sidebar, but I don't think this is an issue because the sidebar is primarily intended for navigation, whereas this list is primarily intended to be used for referencing purposes.

Partially addresses #28712, although I don't provide short descriptions of each standard library package. I think the appropriate place for that would be in module-level docstrings of the packages themselves, which are not currently available.

This adds one new section (h2) and a nested subsection (h3) to the
landing page of the Julia documentation website and associated PDF file.
The new section provides a quick overview of the differences between
`Core`, `Base` and the standard library, as well as a list of links to
standard library packages.

The list of standard library packages is thus duplicated in the website
sidebar, but I don't think this is an issue because the sidebar is
primarily intended for navigation, whereas this list is primarily
intended to be used for referencing purposes.

Partially addresses JuliaLang#28712, although I don't provide short descriptions
of each standard library package. I think the appropriate place for that
would be in module-level docstrings of the packages themselves, which
are not currently available.
@adigitoleo
Copy link
Contributor Author

There has been interest in the linked issue in backporting this (to 1.9 or 1.10). If accepted I can cherry-pick this onto one of those release branches and open separate PRs for those.

@adigitoleo
Copy link
Contributor Author

The linked issue also contains a screenshot of how this looks in the web page. See #28712 (comment)

@ViralBShah ViralBShah added the backport 1.10 Change should be backported to the 1.10 release label Jul 30, 2024
@nsajko nsajko added the docs This change adds or pertains to documentation label Jul 30, 2024
@waldyrious
Copy link
Contributor

I've added a comment to the associated issue with a suggestion for the section heading and some notes that may be helpful to expand the info added here. In any case, this is great work already, and definitely an improvement over the current situation!

@KristofferC KristofferC mentioned this pull request Sep 12, 2024
63 tasks
@KristofferC KristofferC mentioned this pull request Oct 29, 2024
47 tasks
@KristofferC KristofferC mentioned this pull request Nov 22, 2024
45 tasks
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
backport 1.10 Change should be backported to the 1.10 release docs This change adds or pertains to documentation
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants