On 23-Dec-09, at 2:19 PM, David Goldsmith wrote: > Thanks Anne (and Dave): it may seem to you to be "a bit silly to dream > up an API without implementing anything," but I think it's useful to > get these things "on the record" so to speak, and as a person charged > with being especially concerned w/ the doc, it's particularly > important for me to hear when its specific deficiencies are > productivity blockers...
In fact, there are gufuncs in the tests that are quite instructive and would form the basis of good documentation, though not enough of them to give a complete picture of what the generalized ufunc architecture can do (I remember looking for an example of a particular supported pattern and coming up short, though I can't for the life of me remember which). The existing documentation, plus source code from the umath_tests module marked up descriptively (what all the parameters do, especially the ones which currently receive magic numbers) would probably be the way to go down the road. David _______________________________________________ NumPy-Discussion mailing list NumPy-Discussion@scipy.org http://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion
