Skip to content

bpo-29956: Fix misleading documentation for math.exp. #951

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Merged
rhettinger merged 1 commit into from
Apr 2, 2017
Merged

bpo-29956: Fix misleading documentation for math.exp. #951

Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
1 commit
Select commit
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
4 changes: 2 additions & 2 deletions Doc/library/math.rst
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -199,8 +199,8 @@ Power and logarithmic functions

.. function:: exp(x)

Return ``e**x``.

Return e raised to the power *x*, where e = 2.718281... is the base
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

@marco-buttu marco-buttu Apr 1, 2017

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I think e should be emphasized, like in log(), log1p, etc. Maybe e = 2.718281... should have the code markup.

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member Author

@mdickinson mdickinson Apr 1, 2017

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Yes, it's not clear. The problem with marking it up is that we get back to the issue where it could be confused with math.e. I decided not to mark it up, to be consistent with the documentation for math.e.

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

@csabella csabella Apr 1, 2017

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Do you think math.expm1 needs to be changed too?

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member Author

@mdickinson mdickinson Apr 1, 2017

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

@csabella: Yes! How about

Return e raised to the power x, minus one. For small floats x, the [...]

?

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

@serhiy-storchaka serhiy-storchaka Apr 1, 2017

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

e = 2.718281... is not a code. I don't think it should have the code markup.

Emphasized *e* is used in descriptions of log() and log1p(). But it also is used in frexp(). I suggest to rename e in frexp() description for avoiding confusion.

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

@abalkin abalkin Apr 1, 2017

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

It would be best to use Sphinx's inline math construct here. Is there anything that would prevent using :math: role in Python documentation?

of natural logarithms.

.. function:: expm1(x)

Expand Down