Skip to content

gh-110383: Clarify "non-integral" wording in pow() docs#119688

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

Jump to bottom
Merged
erlend-aasland merged 6 commits into from
Jun 7, 2024
Merged

gh-110383: Clarify "non-integral" wording in pow() docs #119688

erlend-aasland merged 6 commits into from
Jun 7, 2024

Conversation

@adiaholic
Copy link
Contributor

@adiaholicadiaholic commented May 28, 2024•
edited by bedevere-app bot
Loading

This PR is a fix for an issue listed in #110383.

Use widely used non-integer instead of non-integral.
While both terms can be used to mean the same thing, "non-integer number" is the more precise and commonly used term. "Non-integral number" might sometimes be used in a broader sense in certain mathematical contexts, but it generally carries the same meaning as "non-integer number" when referring to real numbers.

@bedevere-appbedevere-appbot added docs Documentation in the Doc dir skip news awaiting review labels May 28, 2024
@adiaholicadiaholic changed the title Pow() documentation - Use widely used non-integer instead of non-integralAdress two issues in #110383May 28, 2024
@adiaholicadiaholic changed the title Adress two issues in #110383Address two issues in #110383May 28, 2024
@adiaholicadiaholic changed the title Address two issues in #110383Address two issues from docs@python.orgMay 28, 2024
@davidlowryduda
Copy link
Contributor

davidlowryduda commented May 29, 2024

You should rename this to have the issue number in the description. For example, calling it gh-110383: Address two issues from docs@python.org would better fit the naming convention.

davidlowryduda
davidlowryduda reviewed May 29, 2024
View reviewed changes
@erlend-aaslanderlend-aasland changed the title Address two issues from docs@python.orggh-110383: Address two issues from docs@python.orgMay 29, 2024
@bedevere-appbedevere-appbot mentioned this pull request May 29, 2024
Closed
@erlend-aasland
Copy link
Contributor

erlend-aasland commented May 29, 2024

Thanks for the PR! It is preferable to fix only one issue per PR; even one-liners. This is because different changes may have different backporting needs.

erlend-aasland
erlend-aasland reviewed May 29, 2024
View reviewed changes
@adiaholicadiaholic changed the title gh-110383: Address two issues from docs@python.orggh-110383: Pow - Use widely used non-integer instead of non-integralMay 29, 2024
@erlend-aaslanderlend-aasland changed the title gh-110383: Pow - Use widely used non-integer instead of non-integralgh-110383: Clarify "non-integral" wording in pow() docsMay 30, 2024
@adiaholic
Use widely used non-integer instead of non-integral
f31e589
While both terms can be used to mean the same thing, "non-integer number" is the more precise and commonly used term. "Non-integral number" might sometimes be used in a broader sense in certain mathematical contexts, but it generally carries the same meaning as "non-integer number" when referring to real numbers.
@adiaholic
Correct documentation for signed and unsigned int in an array
d5dd0d7
@adiaholic
Revert changes in arrays.rst
7e42106
@adiaholic
Add helpful example
9419179
erlend-aasland
erlend-aasland approved these changes Jun 4, 2024
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Contributor

@erlend-aaslanderlend-aasland left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Apart from the leading whitespace in L1565 (IIRC), this looks like an improvement to me. I'll wait for @mdickinson's thumbs up before landing, though.

Thanks!

@erlend-aaslanderlend-aasland added needs backport to 3.12 only security fixes needs backport to 3.13 bugs and security fixes labels Jun 4, 2024
mdickinson
mdickinson reviewed Jun 5, 2024
View reviewed changes
@erlend-aasland
Copy link
Contributor

erlend-aasland commented Jun 6, 2024

ISTM Mark's remark has been addressed; I'll merge this later today :)

@mdickinson
Copy link
Member

mdickinson commented Jun 6, 2024

ISTM Mark's remark has been addressed

Addressed indeed! Thank you.

@erlend-aaslanderlend-aasland merged commit 6646a9d into python:mainJun 7, 2024
@miss-islington-app
Copy link

miss-islington-appbot commented Jun 7, 2024

Thanks @adiaholic for the PR, and @erlend-aasland for merging it 🌮🎉.. I'm working now to backport this PR to: 3.12, 3.13.
🐍🍒⛏🤖 I'm not a witch! I'm not a witch!

miss-islington pushed a commit to miss-islington/cpython that referenced this pull request Jun 7, 2024
@adiaholic@miss-islington
pythongh-110383: Clarify "non-integral" wording in pow() docs (python…
250ca53
…GH-119688) (cherry picked from commit 6646a9d) Co-authored-by: Aditya Borikar <adityaborikar2@gmail.com>
@bedevere-app
Copy link

bedevere-appbot commented Jun 7, 2024

GH-120206 is a backport of this pull request to the 3.13 branch.

@bedevere-appbedevere-appbot removed the needs backport to 3.13 bugs and security fixes label Jun 7, 2024
miss-islington pushed a commit to miss-islington/cpython that referenced this pull request Jun 7, 2024
@adiaholic@miss-islington
pythongh-110383: Clarify "non-integral" wording in pow() docs (python…
ed49580
…GH-119688) (cherry picked from commit 6646a9d) Co-authored-by: Aditya Borikar <adityaborikar2@gmail.com>
@bedevere-app
Copy link

bedevere-appbot commented Jun 7, 2024

GH-120207 is a backport of this pull request to the 3.12 branch.

@bedevere-appbedevere-appbot removed the needs backport to 3.12 only security fixes label Jun 7, 2024
@erlend-aasland
Copy link
Contributor

erlend-aasland commented Jun 7, 2024

A big thanks to everyone involved :)

erlend-aasland pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Jun 7, 2024
@miss-islington@adiaholic
[3.12]gh-110383: Clarify "non-integral" wording in pow() docs (GH-11…
501cd99
…9688) (#120207) (cherry picked from commit 6646a9d) Co-authored-by: Aditya Borikar <adityaborikar2@gmail.com>
erlend-aasland pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Jun 7, 2024
@miss-islington@adiaholic
[3.13]gh-110383: Clarify "non-integral" wording in pow() docs (GH-11…
ffa7d82
…9688) (#120206) (cherry picked from commit 6646a9d) Co-authored-by: Aditya Borikar <adityaborikar2@gmail.com>
noahbkim pushed a commit to hudson-trading/cpython that referenced this pull request Jul 11, 2024
@adiaholic@noahbkim
pythongh-110383: Clarify "non-integral" wording in pow() docs (python…
7f9bf8f
…#119688)
estyxx pushed a commit to estyxx/cpython that referenced this pull request Jul 17, 2024
@adiaholic@estyxx
pythongh-110383: Clarify "non-integral" wording in pow() docs (python…
1242c53
…#119688)
Sign up for freeto join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Reviewers

@erlend-aaslanderlend-aaslanderlend-aasland approved these changes

+2 more reviewers

@davidlowrydudadavidlowrydudadavidlowryduda left review comments

@mdickinsonmdickinsonmdickinson approved these changes

Reviewers whose approvals may not affect merge requirements

Assignees

No one assigned

Labels

docsDocumentation in the Doc dirskip news

Projects

None yet

Milestone

No milestone

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants

@adiaholic@davidlowryduda@erlend-aasland@mdickinson