get_moon: Document observer-dependent location #12683
Merged
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Add doc comment to get_moon(), like the one for get_body(), baased on conversation at https://community.openastronomy.org/t/distance-to-moon-inconsistent-results/217
adrn
approved these changes
Jan 9, 2022
|
Thanks! |
meeseeksmachine
pushed a commit
to meeseeksmachine/astropy
that referenced
this pull request
Jan 9, 2022
pllim
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Jan 10, 2022
…683-on-v5.0.x Backport PR #12683 on branch v5.0.x (get_moon: Document observer-dependent location)
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Add doc comment to get_moon(), like the one for get_body(), based on conversation at
https://community.openastronomy.org/t/distance-to-moon-inconsistent-results/217
Description
This pull request essentially copies a comment in get_body() into
get_moon(), since it is relevant there also.
It addresses a confusion highlighted by the conversation at
https://community.openastronomy.org/t/distance-to-moon-inconsistent-results/217
Note: it may be the case that some other routines in solar_system.py could use
the same comment, but I didn't check very carefully.