Several edits to the GDScript docs

[dalexeev]

• More consistent look of examples.
• Clarification about int / float.
• Corrected a couple of wording.

I also noticed the following problems (I have not looked for relevant issues yet):

1. Some functions return a type depending on the type of the argument(s), while others always return float:

   print(var2str(sign(1))) # 1
   print(var2str(sign(1.0))) # 1.0
   print(var2str(abs(2))) # 2
   print(var2str(abs(2.0))) # 2.0
   print(var2str(clamp(3, 4, 5))) # 4
   print(var2str(clamp(3, 4.0, 5.0))) # 4.0
   print(var2str(min(6, 6))) # 6
   print(var2str(min(6.0, 6.0))) # 6.0
   print(var2str(max(7, 7))) # 7
   print(var2str(max(7.0, 7.0))) # 7.0
   
   print(var2str(floor(8))) # 8.0
   print(var2str(floor(8.0))) # 8.0
   print(var2str(ceil(9))) #  9.0
   print(var2str(ceil(9.0))) # 9.0
   print(var2str(round(10))) # 10.0
   print(var2str(round(10.0))) # 10.0
   print(var2str(pow(11, 1))) # 11.0
   print(var2str(pow(11, 1))) # 11.0

   At the same time, the documentation indicates that the function returns float, for example float abs(s: float), although these are like two functions (int abs(s: int) and float abs(s: float)).

2. The print() function does not distinguish between "the same" int and float:

   print(1) # 1
   print(1.0) # 1

   Accordingly, the wording print(EXPR) # Prints 1 used in some examples doesn't answer what EXPR is: 1 or 1.0.

[aaronfranke]

I will give this a ✔️ because I don't see any obvious problems, and also the documentation about int/truncation/etc is good.

However, I don't necessarily approve of moving the comments to the end of the lines, the GDScript style guide doesn't have an opinion on this, and if I had to pick I'd say the old way is better since it would be more consistent with long comments that definitely belong on their own line. Anyway, it's up to @godotengine/documentation to decide which way is preferred.

[dalexeev]

I don't necessarily approve of moving the comments to the end of the lines, the GDScript style guide doesn't have an opinion on this

The fact is that the examples in the documentation are already done in different styles. I was just trying to reduce this chaos.

Examples

godot/modules/gdscript/doc_classes/@GDScript.xml

Line 119 in 339b646

a = atan(0.5) # a is 0.463648

godot/modules/gdscript/doc_classes/@GDScript.xml

Lines 253 to 254 in 339b646

	# Prints 1.543081
	print(cosh(1))

godot/modules/gdscript/doc_classes/@GDScript.xml

Lines 279 to 280 in 339b646

	# a = 59
	a = dectime(60, 10, 0.1))

godot/modules/gdscript/doc_classes/@GDScript.xml

Lines 292 to 293 in 339b646

	# r is 3.141593
	r = deg2rad(180)

godot/modules/gdscript/doc_classes/@GDScript.xml

Line 327 in 339b646

a = exp(2) # Approximately 7.39

godot/modules/gdscript/doc_classes/@GDScript.xml

Line 419 in 339b646

print(hash("a")) # Prints 177670

godot/modules/gdscript/doc_classes/@GDScript.xml

Line 779 in 339b646

pow(2, 5) # Returns 32

the old way is better since it would be more consistent with long comments that definitely belong on their own line

I left the really long comments on a separate line, for example:

godot/modules/gdscript/doc_classes/@GDScript.xml

Lines 70 to 71 in bf96056

	# c is 0.523599 or 30 degrees if converted with rad2deg(s)
	c = acos(0.866025)

Multiline examples IMO should be as compact as possible:

godot/modules/gdscript/doc_classes/@GDScript.xml

Lines 1124 to 1129 in 339b646

	# n is 0
	n = step_decimals(5)
	# n is 4
	n = step_decimals(1.0005)
	# n is 9
	n = step_decimals(0.000000005)

godot/modules/gdscript/doc_classes/@GDScript.xml

Lines 1115 to 1117 in bf96056

	n = step_decimals(5) # n is 0
	n = step_decimals(1.0005) # n is 4
	n = step_decimals(0.000000005) # n is 9

[akien-mga]

Thanks!

[akien-mga]

Cherry-picked for 3.2.4.