On Tue, Jan 19, 2016 at 10:42 AM, Robert Kern <robert.k...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 19, 2016 at 5:40 PM, Charles R Harris < > charlesr.har...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > On Tue, Jan 19, 2016 at 10:36 AM, Robert Kern <robert.k...@gmail.com> > wrote: > >> > >> On Tue, Jan 19, 2016 at 5:27 PM, Charles R Harris < > charlesr.har...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> > > >> > >> > On Tue, Jan 19, 2016 at 9:23 AM, Chris Barker - NOAA Federal < > chris.bar...@noaa.gov> wrote: > >> >> > >> >> What does the standard lib do for rand range? I see that randint Is > closed on both ends, so order doesn't matter, though if it raises for b<a, > then that's a precedent we could follow. > >> > > >> > randint is not closed on the high end. The now deprecated > random_integers is the function that does that. > >> > > >> > For floats, it's good to have various interval options. For instance, > in generating numbers that will be inverted or have their log taken it is > good to avoid zero. However, the names 'low' and 'high' are misleading... > >> > >> They are correctly leading the users to the manner in which the author > intended the function to be used. The *implementation* is misleading by > allowing users to do things contrary to the documented intent. ;-) > >> > >> With floating point and general intervals, there is not really a good > way to guarantee that the generated results avoid the "open" end of the > specified interval or even stay *within* that interval. This function is > definitely not intended to be used as `uniform(closed_end, open_end)`. > > > > Well, it is possible to make that happen if one is careful or directly > sets the bits in ieee types... > > For the unit interval, certainly. For general bounds, I am not so sure. > Point taken. Chuck
_______________________________________________ NumPy-Discussion mailing list NumPy-Discussion@scipy.org https://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion
