[SciPy-User] is it worth working on ndimage documentation?

Emmanuelle Gouillart emmanuelle.gouillart@normalesup....
Wed Jan 13 01:56:19 CST 2010

Thanks for your answer, David! 

On Tue, Jan 12, 2010 at 05:25:41PM -0500, David Warde-Farley wrote:
> Hi Emmanuelle,

> I think it certainly does. If scikits.image does ever supersede  
> ndimage (and I don't think it will - scikits.image is mainly focused  
> on 2D images whereas I think ndimage is used for lots of 3D and 4D  
> voxel images too?), it will likely take on functions from ndimage as  
> well... in fact I think there is a ticket somewhere that contains  
> parts of ndimage rewritten in Cython by the CellProfiler people (I  
> don't have time to dig through my email to find it).

> Needless to say I think there is enough current use of ndimage that  
> it's not going anywhere any time soon.

> David

> On 12-Jan-10, at 5:02 PM, Emmanuelle Gouillart wrote:

> > 	Hello,

> > 	as I'm using quite frequently some functions in scipy.ndimage
> > (mostly mathematical morphology operations), I was considering  
> > working on
> > their docstrings on the doc wiki. Docstrings indeed don't conform to  
> > the
> > documentation standard and are often quite terse.

> > 	However, I would like to know beforehand whether ndimage has a
> > future in scipy, or whether if will be replaced at some point by the
> > scikit image? So, it is worth improving the docstrings in ndimage?

> > 	Cheers,

> > 	Emmanuelle

> > _______________________________________________
> > SciPy-User mailing list
> > SciPy-User@scipy.org
> > http://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/scipy-user

> _______________________________________________
> SciPy-User mailing list
> SciPy-User@scipy.org
> http://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/scipy-user

More information about the SciPy-User mailing list