Thanks, Josef. DG --- On Wed, 6/17/09, josef.pktd@gmail.com <josef.pktd@gmail.com> wrote:
From: josef.pktd@gmail.com <josef.pktd@gmail.com> Subject: Re: [SciPy-dev] stats confusion To: "SciPy Developers List" <scipy-dev@scipy.org> Date: Wednesday, June 17, 2009, 5:35 PM On Wed, Jun 17, 2009 at 8:08 PM, David Goldsmith<d_l_goldsmith@yahoo.com> wrote:
--- On Wed, 6/17/09, Robert Kern <robert.kern@gmail.com>
wrote:
From: Robert Kern <robert.kern@gmail.com> Subject: Re: [SciPy-dev] stats confusion To: "SciPy Developers List" <scipy-dev@scipy.org> Date: Wednesday, June 17, 2009, 3:07 PM On Wed, Jun 17, 2009 at 16:45, <josef.pktd@gmail.com> wrote:
On Wed, Jun 17, 2009 at 5:13 PM, Robert
wrote:
On Wed, Jun 17, 2009 at 16:08, David Goldsmith<d_l_goldsmith@yahoo.com> wrote:
OK, this is where I chime in: should
be clarified, or does this seem like enough of an arcane deviation from "naive" Python practice that we'll actually want to modify the code (and thus postpone modifying the doc 'til that's done)?
Clarify the documentation.
I don't see why we should need to document
Kern<robert.kern@gmail.com> the doc the usage
of positional keywords.
The generated docstrings for the distribution
in
http://docs.scipy.org/doc/scipy/reference/generated/scipy.stats.chi2.html?hi...
is pretty dense, and we don't need to load it up with a description how to use function arguments.
The docstring for the scipy.stats.distributions module could use a warning. The distributions are complicated and important enough that they deserve some tutorial-style documentation, which would be the ideal place for this information.
Good "steerage," Robert, thanks!
DG
Everybody is welcome to clean up my draft for a stats tutorial or rewrite it to make it nicer http://docs.scipy.org/scipy/docs/scipy-docs/tutorial/stats.rst/
so that it can actually be included in the published docs.
Josef _______________________________________________ Scipy-dev mailing list Scipy-dev@scipy.org http://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/scipy-dev
participants (1)
-
David Goldsmith