[SciPy-Dev] Clarification: is the Extended Summary section optional?
Wed Jun 2 18:03:36 CDT 2010
You may have my keyboard!
Seriously, though, I just registered a username on the wiki (weathergod) and
I would like to help out with documentation.
On Wed, Jun 2, 2010 at 1:47 PM, David Goldsmith <firstname.lastname@example.org>wrote:
> I'm working on the docstrings - is any one else?
> 2010/6/2 Stéfan van der Walt <email@example.com>
> On 2 June 2010 11:35, David Goldsmith <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
>> >> I'm encountering many SciPy docstrings
>> > I'm not talking about NumPy docstrings; I'm not looking at/touching
>> > docstrings; I'm only going after low-hangingl SciPy fruit.
>> I think Ralf's point was that we have more important things to do than
>> nitpick around whether some functions should have extended sections or
>> not. Let's get cracking on the many docstrings that are not even
>> close to done.
>> SciPy-Dev mailing list
> Mathematician: noun, someone who disavows certainty when their uncertainty
> set is non-empty, even if that set has measure zero.
> Hope: noun, that delusive spirit which escaped Pandora's jar and, with her
> lies, prevents mankind from committing a general suicide. (As interpreted
> by Robert Graves)
> SciPy-Dev mailing list
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the SciPy-Dev