Hi everyone,
I spent some time going through the polynomial directory and found several
locations where there were comments left suggestion potential improvements
down the road, TODOs, and a line of commented out code. I wanted to share
these here to gather a consensus on which, if any, of these tasks should be
done. If some of these should not be done, do we want to remove the
comments implying changes should be made, or kick the can down the road?
In `numpy/polynomial/_polybase.py, there is the following class method:
@staticmethod
def _repr_latex_scalar(x):
# TODO: we're stuck with disabling math formatting until we handle
# exponents in this function
return r'\text{{{}}}'.format(x)
Further down, in `_repr_latex_` there is this comprehension, where the
leading comment is no longer true, and the old conditional has been
commented out:
# filter out uninteresting coefficients
filtered_coeffs = [
(i, c)
for i, c in enumerate(self.coef)
# if not (c == 0) # handle NaN
]
If this behavior is correct, shouldn’t we remove the leading comment and
the commented out line, or at least leave an explanation as to why it is
commented out and we wish it to remain.
Further down there is also a comment in the `__div__` function implying
there may have been the intention of future modification:
def __div__(self, other):
# set to __floordiv__, /, for now.
return self.__floordiv__(other)
There is also a comment, “made more efficient by using powers of two in the
usual way” in the various `pow` functions specified below:
chebyshev.py, line 862
hermite_e.py, line 679
hermite.py, line 630
laguerre.py, line 627
legendre.py, line 661
polynomial.py, line 471
I am happy to make any or all of the enhancements, modify the
documentation, or review PRs. I appreciate advice or direction on any of
these issues.
Jeffrey Yancey
_______________________________________________
NumPy-Discussion mailing list
NumPy-Discussion@python.org
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion
