One other comment (sorry I'm late chiming in): in general, for something like "sequence of ints," usually what is really intended as viable input is "array-like of int-likes," and indeed, in the process of confirming this for various functions, I have found bugs where what was intended was in fact not supported. So, though it's more work, i.e., will take more time, the ideal scenario, IMO, when you're dealing w/ something like that, is to confirm that the function does indeed presently support the full gamut of viable inputs, note any strange behavior, post to the list if you're uncertain if it's a bug, or just file a bug ticket if you are sure. And in the past, when this has come up, I've been instructed to document the intended behavior, not the present buggy behavior (which just reinforces the need to file a bug report).
DG On Sat, Oct 24, 2009 at 4:30 PM, Christopher Burns <[email protected]>wrote: > Just committed a change to 'backticks'. > > ;) > > On Sat, Oct 24, 2009 at 4:17 PM, Ralf Gommers > <[email protected]> wrote: > > That section looks much better now. Except for the word "back-tics" :) > > > > Thanks, > > Ralf > _______________________________________________ > NumPy-Discussion mailing list > [email protected] > http://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion >
_______________________________________________ NumPy-Discussion mailing list [email protected] http://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion
