docs: lead with the third option, and correct a false claim about Base - #4
Merged
Conversation
Two things, both about what this package says rather than what it does.
The README opened on "every public name is documented or declared", which is
the half Julia and Aqua already cover: `Docs.undocumented_names` has been public
API in Base since 1.11, and `Aqua.test_undocumented_names` ships it as a test.
Opening there invites the only reaction it deserves. It now opens on the part
neither can express — the third answer — and says plainly why the declaration
cannot live in Aqua: a mark is written in `src/`, and Aqua is a test-only
dependency.
The second is a correction. A comment in `audit.jl` and another in the tests
claimed `Docs.hasdoc` is not public Base API. It is — `public`, and exported
from `Base.Docs`. The claim was wrong and is replaced with the real reason the
per-name form is used: `Docs.undocumented_names` reports a re-exported name's
missing docstring as though it were this module's to fix, and `audit` has to
keep `foreign` apart from a genuine gap. Verified:
names(Down) = [:Down, :own_undoc, :undoc_up, :up]
Docs.undocumented_names(Down) = [:Down, :own_undoc, :undoc_up]
audit(Down).unaccounted = [:own_undoc]
audit(Down).foreign = [:undoc_up, :up]
Drops the README's measured table: five packages' counts age the moment any of
them gains a docstring, and nothing checks it.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
|
Comments on pull requests will not trigger Registrator, as it is disabled. Please try commenting on a commit or issue. |
Contributor
|
📚 Docs preview: https://codes.sota-shimozono.com/ExperimentalAPI.jl/previews/PR4/ (updates on each push to this PR) |
Codecov Report✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests. 📢 Thoughts on this report? Let us know! |
sotashimozono
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Sep 3, 2026
The package is not registered — General has no `Versions.toml` for it and the repository has no tags — so 0.1.1 was never released and nothing depends on it. The bump came from #4, a documentation-only change made before any release existed. Safe in a way a rollback usually is not: with nothing in the registry there is no version whose content this inverts. AutoRegister and VersionCheck are both disabled here, so this triggers no registration; the open General PR still says v0.1.1 and is untouched.
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
First release candidate. Two changes, both to what the package says.
The headline was the weakest claim available
The README opened on "every public name is documented or declared" — which is the half the
ecosystem already covers.
Docs.undocumented_nameshas been public API in Base since 1.11, andAqua.test_undocumented_namesships it as a test. Opening there invites exactly one reaction.It now opens on the part neither can express — the third option — and states plainly why the
declaration cannot live in Aqua: a mark is written in
src/, and Aqua is a test-only dependency.It can own the check; it cannot own the declaration.
A claim about Base that was simply wrong
A comment in
src/audit.jland another intest/test_audit.jlasserted thatDocs.hasdocisnot public Base API. It is —
public, and exported fromBase.Docs. Corrected, and replacedwith the actual reason the per-name form is used here:
Docs.undocumented_namesreports a re-exported name's missing docstring as though it were thismodule's to fix.
audithas to keepforeignapart from a genuine gap, which the set formcannot do.
Also
Drops the README's measured five-package table. Those counts age the moment any of those
packages gains a docstring, and nothing checks them.
Version
0.1.0→0.1.1. No API change; docs and comments only.Merging this is the first registration:
AutoRegisterposts@JuliaRegistrator registeroncethe version moves on
main.