[SciPy-dev] Scipy Tutorial (and updating it)
Thu Dec 11 16:28:40 CST 2008
On Tue, Dec 9, 2008 at 3:07 PM, Tom Grydeland <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> I've started on the numpy.fft.* family of functions now. I've
> finished fft, ifft, fftn, ifftn, and would appreciate an indication
> whether it appears to move in the right direction or not. If people
> are happy with the way I wrote these, I'll complete the rest of the
> family in the same style.
Thanks to Per Brodtkorb for suggestions, I think these are ready for review now.
I also did fft2 and ifft2, which became less clear than I had hoped,
as these accept (and handle) instructions for n-dimensional transforms
without complaint. If I document fft2 as a 2-D transform it becomes
more clear, but less accurate. Opinions, anyone?
I've gone on to rfft, irfft, fftn and irfftn, and I am struggling a
bit with these, especially with the description of the length/shape
argument. I know perfectly well what they should tell the reader, but
I am not 100% convinced the current prose actually tells it clearly.
More information about the Scipy-dev