[SciPy-dev] Scipy Tutorial (and updating it)

[Tom Grydeland]

On Tue, Dec 9, 2008 at 3:07 PM, Tom Grydeland <tom.grydeland at gmail.com> wrote:

> I've started on the numpy.fft.* family of functions now.  I've
> finished fft, ifft, fftn, ifftn, and would appreciate an indication
> whether it appears to move in the right direction or not.  If people
> are happy with the way I wrote these, I'll complete the rest of the
> family in the same style.

Thanks to Per Brodtkorb for suggestions, I think these are ready for review now.

I also did fft2 and ifft2, which became less clear than I had hoped,
as these accept (and handle) instructions for n-dimensional transforms
without complaint.  If I document fft2 as a 2-D transform it becomes
more clear, but less accurate.  Opinions, anyone?

I've gone on to rfft, irfft, fftn and irfftn, and I am struggling a
bit with these, especially with the description of the length/shape
argument.  I know perfectly well what they should tell the reader, but
I am not 100% convinced the current prose actually tells it clearly.


-- 
Tom Grydeland
  <Tom.Grydeland@(gmail.com)>