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

DOC: Fix some broken links #24485

Merged
merged 2 commits into from
Aug 22, 2023
Merged

DOC: Fix some broken links #24485

merged 2 commits into from
Aug 22, 2023

Conversation

F3eQnxN3RriK
Copy link
Contributor

No description provided.

@@ -1935,7 +1935,7 @@ class chararray(ndarray):
`dtype` `object_`, `bytes_` or `str_`, and use the free functions
in the `numpy.char` module for fast vectorized string operations.

Versus a regular NumPy array of type `str` or `unicode`, this
Versus a regular NumPy array of type `str_` or `unicode_`, this
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Hmm, str_ and unicode_ are aliases in Python 3. I think this documentation is outdated.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

"or `unicode_`" should be removed?

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

chararray is slated for removal in NumPy2.0. I think copying the text from above will suffice for now, and cross-references are optional since they are used two lines above.

Suggested change
Versus a regular NumPy array of type `str_` or `unicode_`, this
Versus a NumPy array of dtype `bytes_` or ``str_`, this

@charris
Copy link
Member

charris commented Aug 22, 2023

The test failures are not relevant. I'm not sure what to do about str_ and unicode_.

@charris charris merged commit 7a37bb1 into numpy:main Aug 22, 2023
57 checks passed
@charris
Copy link
Member

charris commented Aug 22, 2023

Thanks @F3eQnxN3RriK .

@F3eQnxN3RriK F3eQnxN3RriK deleted the doc-patch-2 branch August 22, 2023 22:29
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