8000 DOC Ensures that empirical_covariance passes numpydoc validation by genvalen · Pull Request #21439 · scikit-learn/scikit-learn · GitHub
[go: up one dir, main page]

Skip to content

DOC Ensures that empirical_covariance passes numpydoc validation #21439

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

Merged
merged 4 commits into from
Oct 24, 2021

Conversation

genvalen
Copy link
Contributor
@genvalen genvalen commented Oct 24, 2021

Reference Issues/PRs

Addresses #21350
#DataUmbrella

What does this implement/fix? Explain your changes.

This PR ensures sklearn.covariance._empirical_covariance.empirical_covariance is compatible with numpydoc:

  • Remove sklearn.covariance._empirical_covariance.empirical_covariance from DOCSTRING_IGNORE_LIST.
  • Verify that all tests are passing.
  • Add backticks to bool values.

Any other comments?

@glemaitre glemaitre merged commit d9e24f4 into scikit-learn:main Oct 24, 2021
@glemaitre
Copy link
Member

Thanks @genvalen

@genvalen genvalen deleted the numpydoc_empirical_covariance branch October 26, 2021 05:24
ogrisel pushed a commit to ogrisel/scikit-learn that referenced this pull request Oct 28, 2021
samronsin pushed a commit to samronsin/scikit-learn that referenced this pull request Nov 30, 2021
glemaitre added a commit to glemaitre/scikit-learn that referenced this pull request Dec 24, 2021
…kit-learn#21439)

Co-authored-by: Guillaume Lemaitre <g.lemaitre58@gmail.com>
glemaitre added a commit that referenced this pull request Dec 25, 2021
)

Co-authored-by: Guillaume Lemaitre <g.lemaitre58@gmail.com>
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.

3 participants
0