Message176634
Ezio told me my previous comment was hard to understand. For the record, what I meant was that if you have a statement like, "If *allow_nan* is ``True``, then .... Otherwise, ...," then this can be read to mean that something like 1 for *allow_nan* would be covered by the otherwise clause (because otherwise means "or else").
Changing "If *allow_nan* is ``True``" to "equals ``True``" would be one way to address this while still stating the preferred value. But as I told Ezio on IRC, I would be okay with whatever you come up with. |
|
Date |
User |
Action |
Args |
2012-11-29 07:50:07 | chris.jerdonek | set | recipients:
+ chris.jerdonek, rhettinger, bob.ippolito, mark.dickinson, ggenellina, techtonik, ezio.melotti, eric.araujo, r.david.murray, flox, BreamoreBoy, amirouche, serhiy.storchaka |
2012-11-29 07:50:07 | chris.jerdonek | set | messageid: <1354175407.77.0.484290018688.issue4945@psf.upfronthosting.co.za> |
2012-11-29 07:50:07 | chris.jerdonek | link | issue4945 messages |
2012-11-29 07:50:07 | chris.jerdonek | create | |
|