[SciPy-dev] Namespaces in documentation
Stéfan van der Walt
Tue Jun 3 18:44:33 CDT 2008
Thanks for your feedback, everyone. I have updated the documentation
standard to reflect the way we'll be using the shorthand forms from
Bruce: I have added a section to the numpy main docstring to address
Joe: N1 is not a concern, since we still explicitly import modules
like fft. As for N2: we encourage that users use ``np`` both in
interactive and scripting modes.
Fernando: thank you for the profile. I refer to it in the main docstring.
Robert: sorry for annoying you, but it's over now.
We've sorted out the problem that kept us from editing for the past
two days: all systems go!
2008/6/3 Fernando Perez <email@example.com>:
> On Tue, Jun 3, 2008 at 11:40 AM, Robert Kern <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
>> Stéfan, Pauli,
>> Make a decision on what you want. Stick with it. Don't let it be
>> brought up for discussion. This is pointless bikeshedding that doesn't
>> help improve the documentation effort in the slightest.
>> Everybody else, please just drop it. If you feel like worked up enough
>> to write more emails, *write a docstring instead*.
> For the record, I've just added to the trunk of ipython a 'numpy'
> profile that exposes np, the 'scipy' one now exposes np/sp, and the
> -pylab option exposes np/plt (but *not* scipy, since many matplotlib
> users do not have/want scipy all the time). I'm sorry I did it
> without voting, but I'm fed up with this discussion.
> People who use ipython are free to benefit from this
> convention/standard/edict or free to ignore it. The changes should be
> visible a bit later today when I push my private tree upstream.
> ps - The unqualified names are also always available
> (numpy/scipy/pylab/pyplot are always imported anyway).
More information about the Scipy-dev