[Numpy-discussion] random.uniform documentation bug?

Friedrich Romstedt friedrichromstedt@gmail....
Tue Feb 23 14:26:04 CST 2010

> Except for someone calling uniform(low, high, size).
Ah, sorry, I didn't know about that. In that case, everything I wrote
is superfluous and I apologise for a non-helping comment.

But, one could incorporate SIZE simply in the calling convention.

> In any case, why
> would you make this change? It doesn't seem to solve any problem or
> clear up any semantics. "start" and "stop" imply a stop > start
> relationship, too, albeit not as strongly.
Hmm, I thought that start is where the thing starts, and stop where it
stops, so it's in "virtual time" stop > start, but it can travel
downwards.  I thought it would help making the semantics more clear.
But I see it depends on interpretation.  With "low" and "high", my
interpretation is on the contrary impossible.  The ugly doubling was
just intended for compatibility, resulting in a note "for backward
compatibility reasons, you can also pass ..." or something like that.

> If someone wants to pass in
> a high < low, let them.
It's possible, of course.


More information about the NumPy-Discussion mailing list