Improve doctest coverage of misc/fpickle.pyx

[saraedum]

I introduced some functions without doctests in #11716. This ticket tries to add the missing doctests to the these and other functions in that file.

This is part of doctest meta-ticket #12024.

Depends on #11819

Component: doctest coverage

Keywords: sd35

Work Issues: author needs to check the rebase

Author: Julian Rüth

Branch/Commit: u/saraedum/ticket/12192 @ c6ae8c9

Reviewer: Travis Scrimshaw

Issue created by migration from https://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/12192

[saraedum]

Author: Julian Rueth

[saraedum]

comment:1

With the patch, -coverage gives:
SCORE devel/sage/sage/misc/fpickle.pyx: 100% (9 of 9)

[saraedum]

Attachment: trac_12192.patch.gz

added docstrings

[saraedum]

comment:2

I also moved call_pickled_function to where it belongs imho.

[saraedum]

Changed keywords from none to sd35

[tscrim]

Reviewer: Travis Scrimshaw

[tscrim]

comment:5

A few things:

• Add fpickle documentation by modifying misc.rst.

• Remove the second colon : from pickle_code().

• Use automatic trac linking :trac:`11716`.

• Use ``None`` in code format in the documentation (only place I see this not used it in unpickleMethod() inputs)

Thanks.

[saraedum]

Branch: u/saraedum/ticket/12192

[nbruin]

comment:10

See #11845. Pickling involving python code objects are problematic, because python code objects do not give the same portability guarantees that proper pickling requires. It can still be very useful, though, and the code on that ticket is a bit more robust in the face of closures etc. Perhaps evaluate how much of #11845 we want and merge these two tickets?

---

New commits:

1208e1d	Trac 12192: add docstrings to functions in misc/fpickle.pyx. cleaned up some implementations.
62aaf9a	Fixed docstring in misc/fpickle.py (adressed reviewer comments).

[nbruin]

Commit: 62aaf9a

[saraedum]

comment:11

Replying to @nbruin:

See #11845. Pickling involving python code objects are problematic, because python code objects do not give the same portability guarantees that proper pickling requires. It can still be very useful, though, and the code on that ticket is a bit more robust in the face of closures etc. Perhaps evaluate how much of #11845 we want and merge these two tickets?

Sorry, to be honest I don't understand. This just adds doctests to existing code. How are these related?

[rwst]

Work Issues: rebase

[sagetrac-git]

Branch pushed to git repo; I updated commit sha1. New commits:

c6ae8c9

Merge branch 'develop' into t/12192/ticket/12192

[sagetrac-git]

Changed commit from 62aaf9a to c6ae8c9

[saraedum]

Changed work issues from rebase to author needs to check the rebase

[saraedum]

Changed author from Julian Rueth to Julian Rüth