Skip to content
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.

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

Adding documentation for result set #660

Merged
merged 8 commits into from
Jul 19, 2016
Merged

Adding documentation for result set #660

merged 8 commits into from
Jul 19, 2016

Conversation

drvinceknight
Copy link
Member

Closes #652.

The extra details (looking at a the first item in a list whilst the whole list is skipped) for some of the doctests are just so that an error would be caught if the result set changed. Can't test the whole list because of floating points (rounding didn't seem to do the trick).

@marcharper
Copy link
Member

marcharper commented Jul 16, 2016

Maybe consider using pprint to layout the lists of lists nicely. Otherwise it looks good to me!

@drvinceknight
Copy link
Member Author

Good shout. Will do that.

each repetition::

>>> pprint.pprint(results.payoffs)
[[[3.0, 3.0, 3.0, 3.0, 3.0, 3.0],
Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

This will actually need to be changed once @Nikoleta-v3 #635 goes in. Ideally that should go first and then it'll be straightforward to fix this.

Basically: we're currently counting self interactions twice for certain things. This has been fixed in #635.

@drvinceknight
Copy link
Member Author

Working on this now that #635 is in.

@@ -12,7 +12,7 @@ probability::


We can view the results in a similar way as for described in
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Minor typo here. "as for" should be "as"

@drvinceknight
Copy link
Member Author

Thanks @meatballs, have fixed 👍

@drvinceknight
Copy link
Member Author

Maybe consider using pprint to layout the lists of lists nicely. Otherwise it looks good to me!

I think you've both ok'd this so going to merge. Hope that's ok.

@drvinceknight drvinceknight merged commit d80465f into master Jul 19, 2016
@drvinceknight drvinceknight deleted the 652 branch July 19, 2016 08:18
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

3 participants