On Sun, 01 Apr 2018 13:47:41 -0400, Juan Nunez-Iglesias wrote: > Ralf’s comment in particular gives me pause again about my magical > proposal. Changing that behaviour could indeed be simply trading one > class of common error for another, even more annoying class.
It's worse than that: it prevents one specific use-case (the one Ralf mentioned, e.g., where you have very low signal, but correctly so). > Warnings *should* be the right answer, but the truth is that > essentially no one reads them, *and* once you’ve figured out the > issue, they are a nuisance. However perhaps we can make more of an > effort to make our warnings more “full-bodied”, including plain > english explanations and links to the relevant documentation page. I am strongly in favor of more expansive warning and error messages. > - put a big warning on the project homepage: “black images? out of > range errors? See this page!” The page would be the data types page, > to which we must add a “troubleshooting common data type errors” > section. An FAQ section in the docs, linked to from the front page? Best regards Stéfan _______________________________________________ scikit-image mailing list scikit-image@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/scikit-image
