Clarify array shape vs image size in imshow() docstring #11125
Closed
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
PR Summary
The shape of a 2D array is
(nrows, ncols)
, but images are normally described by width x height(ncols, nrows)
. The docstring forimshow()
had these a bit mixed up in my opinion. This clarifies it.I'm not sure if the default is to use
(m, n)
or(n, m)
to represent the shape of a 2D array. Grepping through the project reveals roughly equal use of both. I've left it as(m, n)
in this PR, but maybe we should do another PR to make the notation consistent throughout the project.PR Checklist