On Sat, Jun 26, 2010 at 4:22 PM, <josef.p...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Sat, Jun 26, 2010 at 6:11 PM, David Goldsmith > <d.l.goldsm...@gmail.com> wrote: >> On Sat, Jun 26, 2010 at 3:03 PM, <josef.p...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> >>> On Sat, Jun 26, 2010 at 5:56 PM, David Goldsmith >>> <d.l.goldsm...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> > Something is systematically wrong if there are this many problems in the >>> > numpy.stats docstrings: numpy is supposed to be (was) almost completely >>> > ready for review; please focus on scipy unless/until the reason why >>> > there >>> > are now so many problems in numpy.stats can be determined (I suspect the >>> > numpy.stats code has been made to call the scipy.stats.distributions >>> > module, >>> > and all those docstrings have been marked "Unimportant" - meaning do not >>> > edit - either permanently, in the case of the instances, or temporarily >>> > in >>> > the case of the base classes from which the instances are created). >>> > >>> > Bottom line: if it doesn't start w/ scipy, leave it alone (for now). >>> >>> It's missing in several functions and incorrect docstrings have to be >>> corrected. Look at the log of e.g. pareto in the editor, the returns >>> have never been added, unless you find any missing revisions that are >>> not in the doc editor. >>> >>> Josef >> >> OK, I see it was promoted to "Needs review" very early in the first Marathon >> - before the Standard had been finalized? God help us: how many other numpy >> docstrings are improperly at "Needs review" because of this? Scheisse, >> numpy may not be as close to Ready For Review as we thought... > > Is there a chance that some changes got lost? > > I thought I had edited random.pareto to note that it is actually Lomax > or Pareto II. But I'm not completely sure I actually did it, and not > just intended to do it. I don't see any record in the doc editor, so > maybe I never did edit it.
Also several are missing examples but this is easy (copy past) with the tests I just added. Vincent > > Josef > > >> >> DG >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> NumPy-Discussion mailing list >> NumPy-Discussion@scipy.org >> http://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion >> >> > _______________________________________________ > NumPy-Discussion mailing list > NumPy-Discussion@scipy.org > http://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion > _______________________________________________ NumPy-Discussion mailing list NumPy-Discussion@scipy.org http://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion