[Numpy-discussion] parameter types for documentation

[David Goldsmith]

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 <cburns at berkeley.edu>wrote:

> Just committed a change to 'backticks'.
>
> ;)
>
> On Sat, Oct 24, 2009 at 4:17 PM, Ralf Gommers
> <ralf.gommers at googlemail.com> wrote:
> > That section looks much better now. Except for the word "back-tics" :)
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Ralf
> _______________________________________________
> NumPy-Discussion mailing list
> NumPy-Discussion at scipy.org
> http://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/numpy-discussion/attachments/20091024/b1f556e2/attachment.html>