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

Sptensor clarification #137

Merged
merged 2 commits into from
Jun 8, 2023
Merged

Conversation

ntjohnson1
Copy link
Collaborator

This is simpler solution to the confusion here #113 basically from_data does no validation but that is not explicit in the doc string so add the clarification. More broadly I know you discussed trying to unify our constructors so the user doesn't necessarily need to think about it. It is a little verbose that the standard way to construct with validation is from_aggregator.

Also while I was checking the generated doc I saw the warning that we've never actually linked in our bibtex
doc. We can probably provide a nicer sentence/cleanup but I figured it would be good to at least generate the set of references to original algorithms on our read the docs. It might be worth getting a fresh set of eyes from @DeepBlockDeepak on the read the docs to see what might make the documentation friendlier (probably overlaps with the tutorials and other efforts)

@ntjohnson1 ntjohnson1 requested a review from dmdunla June 8, 2023 13:45
@ntjohnson1 ntjohnson1 marked this pull request as ready for review June 8, 2023 13:45
@dmdunla dmdunla merged commit 7e95047 into sandialabs:main Jun 8, 2023
@ntjohnson1 ntjohnson1 deleted the sptensor_clarification branch June 9, 2023 13:13
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants