|
|
|
|
|
|
by catlover76
989 days ago
|
|
|
Doesn't seem to provide examples of before and after (?) I think the most important documentation is the why a particular piece of code is written the way it is; if weird choices made, why they were made, etc. I'm not sure how a tool can determine that if such info is not already in git commit messages. |
|
|
The "before" and "after" scenarios are demonstrated in the video attached in the README. Adding screenshots would provide a more limited perspective, and we're unsure if they would be useful.
Indeed, taking it to another level would involve understanding why a particular piece of code is written the way it is. People could learn different ways of thinking from the developer, rather than just understanding what the code does. We hadn't considered this perspective, but it could be interesting to explore in a near future. Thinking out loud: to achieve the above without relying on commit information you could modify the GPT template responsible for generating docstrings. You could ask GPT to include developer techniques or analyze "uncommon" logic in the docstrings if applicable, and add them in the documentation.