[Numpy-discussion] random.uniform documentation bug?
Tue Feb 23 14:51:36 CST 2010
2010/2/23 Robert Kern <firstname.lastname@example.org>:
> It helps a little, I agree, but not as much as simply changing the
> names to something neutral like (a, b) as in the standard library. The
> necessity for a backwards compatibility hack imposes additional costs
> to making any such change. I don't think those costs are warranted by
> the semantic confusion of allowing high < low.
I agree fully. The (a, b) thing is the most elegant. And I also
agree that the overhead renders it nearly useless, when one focuses on
Sorry for making noise again with an unmature thought. It just came
into my mind and looked so cute ... :-(
More information about the NumPy-Discussion