[Numpy-discussion] numpy.random.poisson docs missing "Returns"

David Goldsmith d.l.goldsmith@gmail....
Sun Jun 27 13:17:53 CDT 2010

On Sun, Jun 27, 2010 at 3:44 AM, Pauli Virtanen <pav@iki.fi> wrote:

> Sat, 26 Jun 2010 17:37:22 -0700, David Goldsmith wrote:
> > On Sat, Jun 26, 2010 at 3:22 PM, <josef.pktd@gmail.com> wrote:
> [clip]
> >> Is there a chance that some changes got lost?
> >
> > (Almost) anything's possible... :-(
> There's practically no change of edits getting lost.

But there is a chance of edits not being saved (due to operator error, e.g.,
inadvertently clicking cancel): happened to me just yesterday while making
edits to gumbel; reminded me -the hard way- of another reason to make
extensive edits on one's own machine, then cut/paste them into the edit
window in the Wiki when done.

> There's a change of
> them being hidden if things are moved around in the source code, causing
> duplicate work, but that's not the case here.
> > Well, here's what happened in the particular case of numpy's pareto:
> >
> > The promotion to "Needs review" took place - interestingly - 2008-06-26
> > (yes, two years ago today), despite the lack of a Returns section; the
> > initial check-in of HOWTO_DOCUMENT.txt - which does specify that a
> > Returns section be included (when applicable) - was one week before,
> > 2008-06-19. So, it's not that surprising that this slipped through the
> > cracks.
> >
> > Pauli (or anyone): is there a way to search the Wiki, e.g., using a
> > SQL-like query, for docstrings that saw a change in status before a
> > date, or between two dates?

Thanks Pauli.  Anyway, I figured out another way: I'm using the stats page,
and checking anything that was "Needs review" or better before 2008-06-19
and up to a month after - after that, we'll just have to trust that the
review process will detect it.  FWIW, the only docs I've found so far w/
that particular error are the ones that Vincent found -you did say you found
three, right Vincent?- but I've found other problems w/ other docstrings
(some of which have since advanced past the state they were in back then,
i.e., the errors went undetected even though someone has ostensibly reviewed



> No. The review status is not versioned, so the necessary information is
> not there. The only chance would be to search for docstrings that haven't
> been edited after a certain date.
> --
> Pauli Virtanen
> _______________________________________________
> NumPy-Discussion mailing list
> NumPy-Discussion@scipy.org
> http://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion

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)
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mail.scipy.org/pipermail/numpy-discussion/attachments/20100627/3e60af46/attachment-0001.html 

More information about the NumPy-Discussion mailing list