> In the mean time, I wonder why you would even need to do a type checking here? > As far as I know, Python strongly encourages duck typing. Why not remove the > type checking altogether and just let the exception "bubble up" when the duck > cannot quack (i.e., when the score function output cannot be used by the > respective caller)?
As Andy said, it is to give helpful error messages to the users, and also not to have him waste hours of computation before crashing (you know: "If it walks like a duck, and quacks like a duck, it's probably gonna throw exceptions at runtime" :} ). However, obeying with the principle of maximum flexibility which underlies duck typing, I agree that the challenge is to find the good compromise and not over-specify our requirements in the type checking. Cheers, Gaël ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Managing the Performance of Cloud-Based Applications Take advantage of what the Cloud has to offer - Avoid Common Pitfalls. Read the Whitepaper. http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=121051231&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk _______________________________________________ Scikit-learn-general mailing list Scikit-learn-general@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/scikit-learn-general
